Patapon, I never said I preferred Depp to Cariou. Depp did seem to skew a bit young for the role, but I don’t see the apathetic quality you mention — he was sitting there scheming about how to accomplish his revenge, pretty much the way Len Cariou did. And I much prefer Depp and Cariou’s take on the role to George Hearn’s, who just screamed his way through the role, both live and in that unfortunate video.
BIG FISH was pretty forgettable, by and large, except for the scenes involving Jessica Lange and Albert Finney. Their palpable chemistry is one of the most moving things in Burton’s filmography. A shame the film got lost in silliness.
Oops, George Hearn is who I was comparing to Depp, not Cariou (ive never seen him perform the role).
Really? Hearn is such a powerful figure on stage. I have the dvd of him and Lansbury and watch it from time to time. His version of “My Friends” is the of the most magnetic I’ve heard from a musical outside Les Miserables. And he doesnt scream.
I know this is considered one of Depp’s finest performances but considering what the film could have been I was very disappointed. I think In fact Bonham Carter failed as well…the entire film cast came off dispassionate, imo.
maybe I’ll have to direct a version someday…
Man…I saw Sweeney Todd in the theater and thought it was completely forgettable. I have never seen the play so I have no point of reference but I REALLY disliked the songs particularly. I’m not a harsh critic either it’s just that not one of them stuck out in my head at all after seeing the film. Johnny Depp has pretty much bored me in every performance he has done for a decade but I enjoyed the rest of the cast. The stylization was pretty typical Burton if you ask me, definitely nothing here that made me want to cry masterpiece. Maybe another viewing might help.
Patapon, I saw Hearn do the play, and he was pretty well bonkers from the minute he got off the boat at the beginning. He didn’t scream My Friends, of course, but there wasn’t much development going on there — he was out for blood from the word go, as opposed to Cariou (who I first saw in the role) and Depp who I thought played the role more sympathetically.
Garrett, looks like SWEENEY TODD isn’t your cup of tea. I loved the score and was terrified of what Burton was going to do with it, and thought he brought it off handsomely, far more intelligently than any other filmmaker would have done. Never going for Rob Marshallian Cuisinart Editing or Luhrmannesque excess.
He does make Ed Wood type of films
that is his problem really
@DENNIS BRIAN. Do you not like ED WOOD, or do you have a more interesting theory?
I mean to say that he makes schlock like the real Ed Wood these days
Wonderland and Apes were as poorly thought out as any Bride of the Monster
Ed Wood the film is his best, tho his first films have their value
My favorite is Ed Wood, a like a few of his older movies but he’s been pure crap post-Corpse Bride. I liken him less to Gilliam and Svankmajer and see him more as a wannabe “dark” and “imaginative” Kevin Smith.
again, i think there’s less merchandice to be made on tim burton’s less “over the top” films like ed wood and big fish, where, imo the story line is much better and the film relies less on special effects. i feel like edward scissorhands sorta combined the two but there was never a huge emphasis on special effects as there has been in his films in recent years.
honestly, i just like a good story. i don’t need special effects and goofy costumes to makes me wanna see a film.
Whats happened to Burton is the same thing that happened to Scorsese! they both as of recent(perhaps the last 5-10 years) have been directing films that are SHELLS of their work….
Lets look at Burton’s work from starting in 2001:
Alice in Wonderland: Burton and the Blue/Green Screens of Hollywood, aside from the costume design there aint nothing to the movie…oh its 3D…
2007 Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street: I rather watch the Ray Winestone version! or the one with Angela Lansburry!
2006 Cinema16: American Short Films (video short): no comment I havent seen it…..
2005 Corpse Bride: The second most enjoyable film he has done…in the last few years…this was for all the fans of Nightmare before Christmas…I enjoyed it but most people havent even seen it due to the fact, its animation…
2005 Charlie and the Chocolate Factory: Not a a bad movie but not a great movie….its ok…It was nessary and It would of been better if he had made another movie..but the way the studios work, its remake, re telling, with a fan base…..same thing with Apes..except this is way better than Apes..I can watch this at least and one redeeming factor for me is the colors…story wise, dull.
2003 Big Fish: The last movie Time Burton made that I truly enjoyed with all my heart. Honestly the best thing he has done in a decade.
2001 Planet of the Apes: BIG STUDIO movie, hes done em before but this one is crap and devoid of anything Burton fans recognize to be his hand or style….
Its funny at one point Burton was gonna do After Hours and if you look at the art work, the sculptures in After Hours they remind me of the mother in Beatlejuices’ art. How Cool would it have been to see Burton direct Finding Neverland?
I would like to see Burton do more movies like Ed Wood
For the record my favorite Burton movies are
1996 Mars Attacks!
1994 Ed Wood
1992 Batman Returns
1990 Edward Scissorhands
1988 Beetle Juice
Pee Wees Big Adventure
The First few movies I EVER saw where Burton movies, his influence on me is unfathomable. Like wise for my generation his influence is HUGE. I much rather watch his Batman movies then those of Nolan’s. I can honestly say Beetlejuice was one of the first movies I ever owned on VHS same with Batman and Batman Returns. As for Pee Weee and Ed Scissorhands I saw those movies a lot when i was growing up. So I love Burton movies its just that now he is raking in the $$$$$$$$$$ making what I call “shells movies” like Scorsese.
“Ed Wood” has a lot of favourable elements going for it. It’s a comical film about a fellow generally considered the worst Hollywood filmmaker of all time—who could resist? Tim Burton was the perfect director for such a project, given Tim is a director who genuinely loves the art of making film to entertain (rather than always looking for the big dollars) and has a firm grasp on the weird. The project was obviously very dear to him and maybe he knew it wouldn’t be a huge commercial picture. So he did the film in black and white (and it really couldn’t have been any other way) and probably wasn’t worried about how commercially viable the whole thing was going to be. He seemed concerned with authenticity which is why he had lesser known names play a number of the supporting roles. Films tend to become less-than-brilliant when they yield overwhelmingly to commercial compromise.
I’m generally impressed with Tim Burton’s films (although I haven’t seen all of ‘em), but “Ed Wood” is a rare film indeed, and I think the bigger and more relevant question is: "Why can’t MOST OTHER DIRECTORS make more “Ed Wood”-esque film?" Another question I have is, given the monster success of the recent Tim Burton exhibition in Melbourne, why don’t more people here know about “Ed Wood”? People were lined up around the block buying tickets for the exhibition, and it’s strange to note the crowds for his film screenings didn’t come close to the number of folks who just wanted to stare at some memorabilia in glass cases—do people forget why they are going to a Tim Burton exhibition in the first place?
I think Tim Burton attracts the hipster goths who refuse to view any Tim Burton film that doesn’t have some sense of gruesome horror or trippy special effects. “Ed Wood” was pure heart and soul and a million times better than “Pulp Fiction” (another film overrated by hipsters), erroneously called by many as the best of 1994. In fact, I shall go one step further and dub “Ed Wood” one of the greatest flicks of all time. Johnny Depp and Martin Landau really do disappear into their characters, the film combines offbeat humour, pathos and the true spirit of cinema magic, and I only wish I’d managed to catch it upon its original theatrical run (it had only a short stint at the cinemas and I wasn’t going to the movies nearly as much back in those days). Thanks to the Astor Theatre, I can relive this wonderful film multiple times, just as new audiences can feel the brilliance of this modern masterpiece.
So to answer the question: masterpieces don’t simply fall from trees. And few if any of the directors nowadays could have done the film as well as Tim Burton. That’s why “Ed Wood” -esque films are so rare these days.
Oh, another reason: I think Tim Burton ought to find more use for this guy in his films…
“I’m generally impressed with all of Tim Burton’s films (although I haven’t seen all of ‘em), but “Ed Wood” is a rare film indeed, and I think the bigger and more relevant question is: “Why can’t MOST OTHER DIRECTORS make more “Ed Wood”-esque film?” Another question I have is, given the monster success of the recent Tim Burton exhibition in Melbourne, why don’t more people here know about “Ed Wood”? P
here are some of the common complaints i hear about Ed Wood, particularly from younger views:
1.it’s black and white
2.it’s not funny
3.it’s too long
“eople were lined up around the block buying tickets for the exhibition, and it’s strange to note the crowds for his film screenings didn’t come close to the number of folks who just wanted to stare at some memorabilia in glass cases—do people forget why they are going to a Tim Burton exhibition in the first place?”"
the point of the exhibition was to showcase his art rather than his films.
“I think Tim Burton attracts the hipster goths who refuse to view any Tim Burton film that doesn’t have some sense of gruesome horror or trippy special effects. “Ed Wood” was pure heart and soul and a million times better than “Pulp Fiction” (another film overrated by hipsters), erroneously called by many as the best of 1994. In fact, I shall go one step further and dub “Ed Wood” one of the greatest flicks of all time.”
There are hipster goths? news to me :-) But i agree that Ed Wood has certainly aged more gracefully than Pulp Fiction, and is pretty much a timeless film.
“I only wish I’d managed to catch it upon its original theatrical run (it had only a short stint at the cinemas and I wasn’t going to the movies nearly as much back in those days)”
I saw it at the Nova. it played for maybe 3 weeks, and the release was delayed at least 2-3 times because it flopped in the U.S. the film was originally meant to play at Greater Union and selected multiplexes towards the end of 1994, but didn’t actually get released until mid 1995. The Nova was a completely different place back then. nowhere near as busy as it is now. The cinema was mabye half full at best.
Objections to “Ed Wood” answered:
“It’s in black and white”.
Some of the greatest film of all time are in black and white. They are also in 2-D. Such objections are ludicrous. How would these “youngsters” feel if I objected to Pixar films and manga because they are not “realistic” visual representations/interpretations of life?
“It’s not funny”.
Not a valid objection from people who believe Rick Gervais is a comic genius.
Pertinent to the film itself, “Ed Wood” is full of hilarious moments. In particular, I love the bit where the colour-blind fellow is asked to pick between the red dress and the green dress—I won’t divulge the punchline, but it wouldn’t have worked in a colour film.
“It’s too long”.
The film doesn’t last much longer than 100 minutes. I realise a film only 100 minutes in duration can still “feel” long, but this film has such economy of time that it never lags for a moment. Again, one can’t expect much from people who are brain-fucked by “music” videos and “songs” from the current crop of MTV performers laughably noted as “recording artists”.
Ed Wood makes lots of weird friends in Hollywood, struggles to get his movies made the way he wants them to be produced, experiences domestic problems with his main squeeze and establishes a touching friendship with Bela Lugosi. It’s a film about making films in addition to the bond between Bela and Eddie (that’s Bela Lugosi and Ed Wood, not those two morons from “Twilight”). Anyone who says “nothing happens” in “Ed Wood” is a z-grade imbecile.
(But probably not as weird as going to see a film at the cinema, paying 16 bucks for the privilege, then checking on your mobile phone/Lamebook every five to ten minutes—are you listening, kids?).
I realise these objections aren’t your own, Joks: I’m not shooting the messenger.
Hipster goths…eh, they’re like those doofuses who wear Lynchian hairdos and skinny jeans (I must say it—SHITHOUSE!) showing their entire underwear-clad arse (again, SHITHOUSE!) with a redundant belt hanging below their cheeks (What the fuck is the point of wearing a belt, then? Hey kids, remember when belts were worn to keep pants UP?).They show up often at Cinemateque, which, by the way, is showing “Seven Samurai” to start the 2011 programme, ostensibly as a restored 35 mm print.
I’ll be wearing my kimono to show these sartorially challenged folks how to dress with a bit of style, but mainly because I love dressing up for “Samurai”.
The Nova isn’t even half-full now…then again, I don’t go that much, but when I do, the place seems deserted.
>>“Ed Wood” is full of hilarious moments.<<
Like the baptism scene. Depp and Murray’s reactions to being dunked cracks me up every time.
It’s nice to see so many other fans of ED WOOD. Burton does such an amazing job at making jokes, but always respecting Ed Wood as a filmmaker and often even paying homage to him. A lesser director would have fallen into the temptation of making a mockery of Ed Wood’s life, but Tim Burton applauds his optimism and passion.