And to put that in perspective; as great as Lovers is (and it is great), it’s still his weakest film of the decade.
Everyone needs to watch Vacas, Tierra and The Red Squirrel. This man needs to be put back to the top of the 90s pile, with Egoyan, Kaurismaki, Kiarostami etc. It’s ridiculous that his reputation is as low as it is. Yet everyone I know who’s seen his films seems to think of him as highly as I do.
I don’t think that’s how it works Tuna. We don’t just put down filmographies of directors. We submit individual titles that aren’t on the database via the proper form and then in this thread so that everyone knows.
I don’t think Lebowski is cult in the same way that underground/midnight films are cult. Stuff like El Topo, Eraserhead, Pink Flamingos etc.
But it certainly is a cult film due to the phenomenon Jake described; the really passionate fanbase. So it has more in common with cult films like Rocky Horror and other bigger films that aren’t underground in any way but have really loyal fans that dress up etc.
I was just trying to make a distinction between different types of cult films. I think fully fledged cult films shouldn’t be known by the average guy in the street (a la Lebowski, Rocky Horror). It should be stuff like Bad Boy Bubby, AIP films, Waters, Jess Franco or even Repo Man, which is still nowhere near as popular as Rocky/Lebowski. But at the same time, Lebowksi, or any film that inspires fans to dress up etc, should probably be considered cult in that it has a cultish fan base.
Herzog would tell you the exact same thing. Peabody is right, you need to know a lot of people to get a film made (and I’m not talking about studio/industry connections). But you don’t necessarily need to go to film school to make friends and connections who may at some point help write/act/produce/shoot/edit etc for you.
And you can’t do a graduate degree before an undergraduate one.
If you want to be a professional cameraman/soundman/art director or whatever, working for a union then go to film school. If you want to be a creative (ie writer/director) then it’s harder to recommend film school for that. Practical experience of directing your own plays and filming shorts would be far more valuable and tens of thousands of dollars cheaper.
Herzog would tell you the exact same thing. Peabody is right, you need to know a lot of people to get a film made (and I’m not talking about studio/industry connections). But you don’t necessarily need to go to film school to make friends and connections who may at some point help write/act/produce/shoot/edit etc for you.
And you can’t do a graduate degree before an undergraduate one.
If you want to be a professional cameraman/soundman/art director or whatever, working for a union then go to film school. If you want to be a creative (ie writer/director) then it’s harder to recommend film school for that. Practical experience of directing your own plays and filming shorts would be far more valuable and tens of thousands of dollars cheaper.
Oh and Peabody, Bill Douglas went to film school, so your answer doesn’t really make any sense when applied to him.
It would be interesting to draw up a list of who we think are some of the best contemporary filmmakers and see which went to film school and which didn’t.
I suspect most did, but it’d be fascinating to know who did and who didn’t.
David Bordwell isn’t a critic or a reviewer. He’s an academic, which is a whole other thing and a different style of writing altogether.
I personally find the distinction between critic and reviewer a bit petty, but I understand where it comes from. I personally like Ebert but I know he’s no Manny Farber.
I specifically mentioned ‘contemporary’ directors because when most of those directors were learning their craft (Hitchcock, Welles, Ozu, Ford, Sturges) the only country in the world that even had a film school was Russia. So to keep it relevant to the debate we really need to be looking at directors who are active and making films NOW, otherwise it doesn’t have any relevance.
Some other ‘important’ directors that went to film school; Michael Mann, Alex Cox, George Lucas, Spike Lee, Jim Jarmusch, Oliver Stone. It’s also important to point out that even the directors who didn’t go to film school, still more often than not went to university to do something humanities or arts based. Lots of people have moved from fine art, photography, theatre etc to become film directors.
I find it completely mind-boggling that Breathless is still his most critically acclaimed film when 90% of what he’s made since is more satisfying (to me at least), more ambitious and more fully realised.
I do however, still think 400 Blows is Truffaut’s masterpiece, but his career was nowhere near as long or productive as Godard’s.
(Temporary) Film database submission mechanism over 3 years ago
Went the Day Well? (1942) Dir. Alberto Cavalcanti.
Go to Comment
Films playing in Factories / Working Class over 3 years ago
Yes, a great fiilm about an upper class girl ‘slumming it’ south of the river and working in a factory. Very underrated.
Go to Comment
Criminally Underrated Films over 3 years ago
And to put that in perspective; as great as Lovers is (and it is great), it’s still his weakest film of the decade.
Everyone needs to watch Vacas, Tierra and The Red Squirrel. This man needs to be put back to the top of the 90s pile, with Egoyan, Kaurismaki, Kiarostami etc. It’s ridiculous that his reputation is as low as it is. Yet everyone I know who’s seen his films seems to think of him as highly as I do.
Go to Comment
(Temporary) Film database submission mechanism over 3 years ago
I don’t think that’s how it works Tuna. We don’t just put down filmographies of directors. We submit individual titles that aren’t on the database via the proper form and then in this thread so that everyone knows.
Go to Comment
cult? how does a film become a cult movie? And what is the best cult film?? over 3 years ago
I don’t think Lebowski is cult in the same way that underground/midnight films are cult. Stuff like El Topo, Eraserhead, Pink Flamingos etc.
But it certainly is a cult film due to the phenomenon Jake described; the really passionate fanbase. So it has more in common with cult films like Rocky Horror and other bigger films that aren’t underground in any way but have really loyal fans that dress up etc.
Go to Comment
(Temporary) Film database submission mechanism over 3 years ago
Millions Like Us (1943) Dir. Sidney Gilliat and Frank Launder.
Go to Comment
cult? how does a film become a cult movie? And what is the best cult film?? over 3 years ago
@sI89
I was just trying to make a distinction between different types of cult films. I think fully fledged cult films shouldn’t be known by the average guy in the street (a la Lebowski, Rocky Horror). It should be stuff like Bad Boy Bubby, AIP films, Waters, Jess Franco or even Repo Man, which is still nowhere near as popular as Rocky/Lebowski. But at the same time, Lebowksi, or any film that inspires fans to dress up etc, should probably be considered cult in that it has a cultish fan base.
Go to Comment
(Temporary) Film database submission mechanism over 3 years ago
The Gentle Sex (1943) Dir. Leslie Howard.
Sorry about the size of this image. I’m useless when it comes to all that stuff.
Go to Comment
(Temporary) Film database submission mechanism over 3 years ago
Piccadilly (1929) Dir. E.A. Dupont.
Go to Comment
(Temporary) Film database submission mechanism over 3 years ago
Everyday (1929) Dir. Hans Richter.
I could only find a very small still. This is the downside of not having a dvd collection, you can’t just make your own screenshots.
Go to Comment
(Temporary) Film database submission mechanism over 3 years ago
Red Ensign (1934) Dir. Michael Powell.
Go to Comment
(Temporary) Film database submission mechanism over 3 years ago
The Phantom Light (1935) Dir. Michael Powell.
Go to Comment
FILM SCHOOL: UNDERGRADUATE? GRADUATE? NOT AT ALL? over 3 years ago
I agree with everything Jesse said.
Herzog would tell you the exact same thing. Peabody is right, you need to know a lot of people to get a film made (and I’m not talking about studio/industry connections). But you don’t necessarily need to go to film school to make friends and connections who may at some point help write/act/produce/shoot/edit etc for you.
And you can’t do a graduate degree before an undergraduate one.
If you want to be a professional cameraman/soundman/art director or whatever, working for a union then go to film school. If you want to be a creative (ie writer/director) then it’s harder to recommend film school for that. Practical experience of directing your own plays and filming shorts would be far more valuable and tens of thousands of dollars cheaper.
Go to Comment
FILM SCHOOL: UNDERGRADUATE? GRADUATE? NOT AT ALL? over 3 years ago
I agree with everything Jesse said.
Herzog would tell you the exact same thing. Peabody is right, you need to know a lot of people to get a film made (and I’m not talking about studio/industry connections). But you don’t necessarily need to go to film school to make friends and connections who may at some point help write/act/produce/shoot/edit etc for you.
And you can’t do a graduate degree before an undergraduate one.
If you want to be a professional cameraman/soundman/art director or whatever, working for a union then go to film school. If you want to be a creative (ie writer/director) then it’s harder to recommend film school for that. Practical experience of directing your own plays and filming shorts would be far more valuable and tens of thousands of dollars cheaper.
Oh and Peabody, Bill Douglas went to film school, so your answer doesn’t really make any sense when applied to him.
Go to Comment
DOES AN AUTEUR MAKE ONLY ONE GREAT MASTERPIECE... over 3 years ago
Hell no.
Go to Comment
Ozu at BFI over 3 years ago
lol
That was actually pretty funny.
Go to Comment
FILM SCHOOL: UNDERGRADUATE? GRADUATE? NOT AT ALL? over 3 years ago
It would be interesting to draw up a list of who we think are some of the best contemporary filmmakers and see which went to film school and which didn’t.
I suspect most did, but it’d be fascinating to know who did and who didn’t.
Go to Comment
FILM SCHOOL: UNDERGRADUATE? GRADUATE? NOT AT ALL? over 3 years ago
dp
Go to Comment
film critics over 3 years ago
David Bordwell isn’t a critic or a reviewer. He’s an academic, which is a whole other thing and a different style of writing altogether.
I personally find the distinction between critic and reviewer a bit petty, but I understand where it comes from. I personally like Ebert but I know he’s no Manny Farber.
Go to Comment
film critics over 3 years ago
damn tp
Go to Comment
film critics over 3 years ago
Oops, just realised that you weren’t saying DB was a critic rather than a reviewer and that he’s written an article on the differences. Sorry.
Go to Comment
film critics over 3 years ago
Yeah, I did a quick search and couldn’t find anything about him killing a film critic.
Go to Comment
FILM SCHOOL: UNDERGRADUATE? GRADUATE? NOT AT ALL? over 3 years ago
@ Bryan
I specifically mentioned ‘contemporary’ directors because when most of those directors were learning their craft (Hitchcock, Welles, Ozu, Ford, Sturges) the only country in the world that even had a film school was Russia. So to keep it relevant to the debate we really need to be looking at directors who are active and making films NOW, otherwise it doesn’t have any relevance.
Some other ‘important’ directors that went to film school; Michael Mann, Alex Cox, George Lucas, Spike Lee, Jim Jarmusch, Oliver Stone. It’s also important to point out that even the directors who didn’t go to film school, still more often than not went to university to do something humanities or arts based. Lots of people have moved from fine art, photography, theatre etc to become film directors.
Go to Comment
DOES AN AUTEUR MAKE ONLY ONE GREAT MASTERPIECE... over 3 years ago
Ambersons, Kane, F For Fake.
I really couldn’t choose, so I won’t.
Begone indeed.
Go to Comment
(Temporary) Film database submission mechanism over 3 years ago
Coal Face (1935) Dir. Alberto Cavalcanti.
Go to Comment
DOES AN AUTEUR MAKE ONLY ONE GREAT MASTERPIECE... over 3 years ago
Completely agree re Godard.
I find it completely mind-boggling that Breathless is still his most critically acclaimed film when 90% of what he’s made since is more satisfying (to me at least), more ambitious and more fully realised.
I do however, still think 400 Blows is Truffaut’s masterpiece, but his career was nowhere near as long or productive as Godard’s.
Go to Comment
DOES AN AUTEUR MAKE ONLY ONE GREAT MASTERPIECE... over 3 years ago
Haven’t seen Stolen Kisses. But Jules and Jim and The Wild Child could easily compete. And maybe Shoot the Piano Player too.
Go to Comment
DOES AN AUTEUR MAKE ONLY ONE GREAT MASTERPIECE... over 3 years ago
The only feature that Tarkovsky made that wasn’t a masterpiece was Nostalgia.
But that could be because I saw a less than great copy.
Go to Comment
DOES AN AUTEUR MAKE ONLY ONE GREAT MASTERPIECE... over 3 years ago
I don’t really understand how anyone can dislike Andrei Rublev.
I saw it at a time when I’d seen nothing really challenging or truly artful and I found it accessible and gobsmackingly awe inducing.
Go to Comment
DOES AN AUTEUR MAKE ONLY ONE GREAT MASTERPIECE... over 3 years ago
Funnily enough Ed Wood IS Tim Burton’s masterpiece.
Or at least his only great film, which amounts to the same thing.
Go to Comment