The Catcher in the Rye- Wes Anderson since he pretty much already did it with Rushmore
Infinite Jest- Soderbergh
Blood Meridian- Jim Jarmusch based on Dead Man, he’s my guy for the job
The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle- Wong Kar-Wai
A Winters Tale- Sorsese
Then what exactly DOES “pretentious” mean and WHEN can you use it to describe a work?
Pretentious is not always bad and Goddard IS pretentious at times
On the other hand while I like Breathless and Band of Outsiders and Contempt and most of the early stuff I really don’t need to sit through another movie about movies and specifically how certain types of movies (American popular films) make the director angry and cynical even though when he began his career (as critic and filmaker) he liked many things about those very films he now spends 2 hrs trashing
That is not so much pretentious as boring and a waste of time
Still Weekend and his early 60’s stuff rocked precicely because those films celeberated and deconstructed those films he admired in a loving and playful and truly revolutionary way without just seeming like an angry rant 24 frames per second
Every Goodard film from the early 60s to the 70s is about movies, specifically American Hollywood movies. Can you truly tell me Breathless, Contempt, and Band of Outsiders are not in a love/hate realtionship with American films and the culture that they inspired?
Its the later ones in the 70s and beyond where it turns more hate/hate and for me, diffcult to watch
While there are techincally brilliant aspects to all these later moives and sometimes a good idea or 2 that is not enough to get one through them
If it were, I would be the pendantic one
TDK has many problems
1. Nolan cannot direct an action scene to save his life
2. Like all actors that don the bat suit Bale is wooden with no character or inner life which makes anyone who plays the villian look awesome by comparsion
3. It suffers from the same issues that most modern American films(Hollywood and independent thoug mostly independent films) suffer from- intellectual laziness and dilettantism masked as depth.
The last is a particular annoyance in my mind as so many films come out and get praise as “deep” or rising above the genre which really they are not.
The Dark Knight is a perfect example.
Critics and film goers seem impressed that just because a movie hints at something greater but never explores it all. The sheer fact that a film will say mention the philosphy of Nietzsche or speak of the duality of superheros or bring up certain statements about human nature is always mistaken by critics as the SAME thing as actually exploring them.
Having a character name drop Schopenhauer is considered deep and the equivalent of talking about and analyzing the works thereof.
I never understood that.
All TDK does is this sort of name dropping and like a 20 year old trying to seem deep, feels that just by saying "the works of Wittgenstein is the same as actually knwoing what you are talking about.
In addition to which, what does TDK do different in superfically looking at the duality of the superhero persona that hasn’t been hinted at since the first Tim Burton Batman and done much more entertainingly in Batman Returns?
While comparisons my be odious I feel a movie that explores the same themes with much greater depth is Mann’s Heat. Plus Michael Mann has 2 or 3 of the greatest directed action scenes of all time in that film. Which is more than I can say for Nolan (see point 1).
I think anyone who is a fan of the novel or James Ellroy would say this is a pretty tepid and whitewashed version. All the actors were uniformly bad or pointless. The direction was confusing. It almost seemed like De Plama couldn’t get out of his own way and be true to the source material making a really good and intense and very dark novel into a movie of the week.
While I am not a huge fan of De Palma I do like Dressed to Kill and Sisters and most of his 70’s stuff.
If it were only THAT De Palama that made the movie rather than this later one
Still I think De Palama is too much of a formalist and detached to do Ellroy justice. Particularly a novel as personal this.
Ellroy needs a modern day Sam Fuller IMHO.
I would kill to see a Sam Fuller adaptation of White Jazz. :)
Well I agree with you that a film does not have to be faithful to the novel source.
Its really a purely personal and subjective issue with me when it comes to this film because I really loved the novel and James Ellroy and have many issues with Brian De Palma (alot that I can over look with his early work but his later stuff in the 90’s on makes what I see as his prentiousness and derivativeness harder to ignore).
But as I said this is more of MY issue than the film because I liked the novel so much.
For the record I never read The Watchmen either but felt the movie was close to unwatchable. But seeing who directed I was not surprised as I felt 300 was 90mins I’ll never get back of my life either :)
Anyway back to the original thread, I didn’t expect a great movie but this one was an adaptation of a great messy violent personal exciting dark novel by a once interesting director which turned out to be really boring for me ( a huge sin in art IMHO).
For the record I thought L.A. Confidential was pretty good example of a Hollywood version of a equally dark novel by the same writer that was very good despite cuts made to some of the novel’s more unsavory aspects.
What it ulitmately comes down to is that I expected more of both director and source material and that is more my prejudices and faults than that of the film I guess.
Unfortuantely empty references to other better films does not a good movie make. In a nutshell that pretty much encapsulates the work of DePalma.
DePalma is a interesting director to discover whne you are 14/15 years old as a gateway to other better directors. While I have a speical place in my heart for Dressed to Kill and Carrie and Sisiters and Body Double (the first DePalma film I saw in the theaters) my 40 year old head has a hard time taking him seriously.
Almost all his work was been emtpy genuflecting before Hitchcock and other better directors. To just reference a great scene in a movie with no point is something I have no paitence with any longer.
I really like the novel and i guess that is why I can’t tolerate the film very much. Scarlett Johansen is not a good or even medicore actress by any definition. And the less said about Aaron Eckhart and Josh Harnett, the better. Talk about wooden and pointless. here we have a double shot. But every hack director gets the leading stars they deserve.
I know I am being harsh but the novel was a passionate dark over the top uber hard boiled insane palying fast and losse with history while still being true to the time examination of a mother’s death by one crazy amazing son of a bitch writer.
While I don’t look at source material as scared text and feel a movie does NOT have to be true t its source at all, I feel Ellroy desrved a better director.
At the very least the DePlama of Dressed to Kill…..
my pointless 2 cents
I’m not really getting the suggestions here-
Ron Howard is actually NOT a bad director. I would’nt say “great” of course but as a pure old school style Hollywood journeyman director he is pretty good. He is no autuer but who cares. He falls in line with alot of old school studio directors that made some pretty classic films (Casabalnca to name one). In fact he is the kind of director Soderbergh would like to be if his prentions weren’t always getting in his way. Apollo13 is IMHO an object lesson in classical film making and where to put the camera.
Ron Howard is not a favorite director of mine by a long shot and not great by any standard but I don’t think he deserves the belittlement he gets on film fan lists.
PTA on the other hand is a little too young to make any judgements on but I feel he has it in him to become a pretty great filmmaker as soon as he shakes off his anexity of influnces.
Punch Drunk Love and TWBB are pretty incredible in my opnion. And I actually feel PDL is the better of the two. Its unfortunate that currently he is most remebered for Boogie Nights and Magnolia, If he only made those 2 films then I could easily write him off as a wanna be technically talented hack. However based on the latter 2 films he is begining to reach for greatness (or really really good at least).
Finally I actualy think Hard Eight (Sydney) is also a really good first effort and pretty much makes Boogie Nights/Magnolia even more irrelevant as that first film manages to touch on all the themes of those 2 except with less prentention and bombast.
My 2 useless cents
Thanks
@Grant I wouldn’t consider Oliver Stone medicore. That is giving him too much credit. I would put Oliver in with Good movies by bad directors.
I think Sofia Coppola at her age and only 3 films to her credit it is way too soon to make the “medicore” call. Most artists would kill to have a Lost in Translation at that age. Besides Virgin Suicides was pretty decent and Marie Antionette deserves credit just for getting Kevin Shields on the soundtrack.
To Kathryn Bigelow I would add Near Dark as well
If by “entertainment” you mean a work with absolutely no subtext or under lining theme (either consiously or not by the filmmaker) then I don’t think such a work exists…
Coppola’s “Bram Stroker’s Dracula” is a noble failure but hardly just an amusment park ride. There are quite obivious references to the Lumiere bros and the birth of cinema and the Great Train Robbery as well as deconsructions of pretty much every aspect of the vampire myth from Vlad the Implaer to Stroker/Shelley to Hammer films and Anne Rice.
Under the right conditions it is actually quite brilliant in its over the top spectacle and as I said before a noble failure.
Casion Royale was if you are a fan of the Ian Flemming novels a consious hark back to the old sadism/sexism of the source of the Bond myth (as much as they could do in these PC times) so it does actually have some subtext.
What am I saying is there is no such thing as pure escapist art. Everything has some subtext or underlying theme wheter intended or not by the creator of the work (which is irrelevant and besides the point anyway).
And yes I agree, Singin’ in the Rain is an example of a perfect work of high art if there was one.
So is Top Hat for my money.
Those films can stand side by side with Andrei Rublev and Rules of the Game et al.
Look only Spielberg would make a film about the Holocaust with a happy ending.
Manipulation is present in every work of art and like everything can be good or bad.
Spielberg is a hugely manipulative filmmaker. That is his gift. He is a hugely talented native filmmaker on a pure visceral level.
In Jaws,Duel, Jurassic Park etc that manipulation and unthinking dumb visceral genius is a great thing.
For films about actual historic events like the Holocaust it is insulting and demeaning to the events that occured.
It belittles the history and turns it into another bloated self serving feel good Hollywood production number.
I am not one of those that is on the “Spielberg is over rated” bandwagon. I think he is quite talented as a director (see the mall scene in Minority Report) but his talent should stay away from topics depicting actual history and stick to fiction in the line of Jaws et al.
Just my thoughs
1. Wasn’t this film already made w/o CGI and it was called The New World and was really beautiful and great? Just asking.
2. CGI per se is not bad it is just that no one has used it effectively yet. Right now it is just a lazy man’s approach to film making using CGI as a cover up for no story, no sense of camera placement replaced by pure spectacle.
3. I don’t know about anyone else here but usually when I see an over the top explosion/action scene in CGI it DOES look like a cartoon and fake and distracting and I think of green screens and wonder which linux distro they are using rather than the film itself. Compare that with the car chase in the French Connection or Jaws or any non CGI film.
4. I am not a luddite and think CGI does have potential and realize the so called “real” films that I like were done with tech advancements of thier day as well just not as hyped and prevalent as CGI.
5. For the record I am 40 years old which may disqualify me from this topic (but I do work in the software industry as an engineer :) )
6. For every Terminator and Aliens Cameron has given us an Abyss and True Lies. Spectcale and no plot and really bad politics and cheesy ideas. Never understood why Cameron is so worshipped by film geeks.
7. So is 3-D CGI the new Schwarzenegger for JC?
8. 3 words- The Polar Express
@polarisdib- “wouldn’t you like to create an entire science fiction reality from your own computer and then run outside with your camera and a few friends to inhabit it?”
Sure that sounds like a great idea for a theme park ride :)
Look lets be honest for a second and then we can all go back to meaningless bickering and critical one up manship and all that worthless nosie-
Knife in the Water,Cul De Sac, Repulsion, Chinatown, Rosemary’s Baby and The Tenant are all pretty great and amazing films.
Pirates is a piece of turd and any attempt to justify it is just an attempt to seem different and get a reaction.
The Pianist is a pretty medicore lifetime movie and only made a big deal out of due to the fact that compared to his 80’s and 90’s later output it looks like Rules of the Game by comparsion.
Frantic is ersatz bad Hitchcock.
The rest is really not worth talking (or writing ) about.
For the record Michael Mann is not over rated. He is a pretty geat living US director IMHO. I friggin’ love Heat and have seen very little that can compare. For that reason alone he is the shit.
Even Ali and Collateral had pretty awesome moments in it that any director would kill for (like the opening of Ali).
I think that Miami Vice was supremely UNDER rated and an object lesson in how an action film should be directed.
Soderbergh might be over rated by The Limey and Out of Sight are pretty friggin’ sweet.
Finally Scorsese has been downhill (with a couple of exceptions) since Casino which is a really bad rehash of Goodfellas and I cannot see why film fans actually fawn over that film because aside from a couple of scenes it stinks and plays like bad Scorsese.
His post Casino output has been pretty lame (with some exceptions like 2 scenes in Gangs of New York and Kundun). If you watch Infernal Affairs and then The Departed you can see how much better the former is and how a remake was pointless.
Farrell has never been better
Any director that hires Gong Li in a major role is a genius
The action scenes are amazingly directed and are bested only by the ones in Heat.
The film is a stripped down minimalist analysis of Mann’s major concerns which is men and work and how that relationship affects and defines all others in their lives.
Its Mann and his themes stripped of all fat almost ansurdly so.
But I understand many don’t hold this view so attack away.
I think it is pretty amazing and considering that it was probably sold like a typical successful tv show nostalga crowd remake to the backers, even more subversive.
That and the use of HD video is pretty nice
Oh yeah and most likely the most adult non teenage pandering almost emotionally real sex scene in a film, big budget or otherwise that I’ve ever seen in awhile is just the icing on the cake.
But hey I’ve been wrong about alot and admittedly don’t get out much or watch as many films as the posters on this list.
Thanks for reading.
Kevin Smith is a pretty to very good screenwriter who probably should focus on that more than directing his own work.
That said Clerks was a pretty good first feature and Chasing Amy is a boderline great film that is his crowning achievment.
I am not sure what happened after that and why he has never been able to follow through on the potential I saw in that film.
His unfilmed script for Superman was pretty good as well.
As I stated earler maybe he should just concentrate and writing and producing but stay away from directing.
Because it was an unexceptional Hollywood film. Not good and not particularlybad either. Not the kind of film to love or actively hate.
I barely even recall it except for the horrible Bryan Adams song
I am sure more people can comment and trash the song than the actual movie that it was written for.
For the record Costners greatest film was Fandango. Now I have not seen that since I was ~22 (about 18 years ago) but I have pretty good memories of that (and even Judd Nelson. hahaaha)
The Breakfast Club/Star Wars/Raiders of the Lost Ark-the films I saw as a kid that I loved with that pure unjudging kid love
Veritgo-reailized the true potential of film when I first saw it at 16 years old
Near Dark-good b-movie seen as a kid that had some deeper undertones
Last Tango in Paris-same as above for art films
Wings of Desire-my first and most important conscious cinematic love. will stay with me forever like all first loves
Rushmore-closest to capturing that Catcher in the Rye feeling
Buffalo 66-the closest anyone has come to making a film with that ’70s feel that all US indie directors seem to want
Detour-the genius of b-movies and their depth when done well
Rules of the Game- ’nuff said
His Girl Friday- turned me on to the genius of screwball
Chungking Express-pop cinematic visceral art at its purest
Heat has 2 of the best action scenes ever directed. It is pretty much the distillation of all his themes.
I also think Miami Vice was pretty good as well. The use of HD and Gong Li alone make it memorable. Miami Vice is like a mimalist action film stripped of all fat. Its almost abstract.
Mann is an amazing director and one of the best living American directors in my opinion.
His use of the camera and music is amazing.
I also feel Heat is pretty sensitive toward women. However it is men and their realtionship to each other and work and the affects thereof that are Mann’s primary comncerns.
Guys seriously, Criterion rocks and all but I think the current Kubricks on DVD are just fine and would waste more $$ on double buying if they came out on CC.
CC should try to relase Killer’s Kiss, The Killing, and Fear and Desire if possible….
The whole point of CC is to relase films that are not out on DVD or relatively unknown here or out on DVD but in poor quality.
I don’t think the current Kubricks fall under any of those categories.
i can think of better things for CC to spend money and time on….
I don’t know how old Gallo is but yes I assumed in terms of output and directorial experience. I didn’t know it was that literal.
Besides 50 is not old.
I don’t know waht kind of person Gallo is and I don’t understand what that has to do with liking his films.
I have never been very interested in the private lives of directors I admire.
Anyway Buffalo 66 is an amazing film. A first effort by an actor unmatched since Charles Laughton and Night of the Hunter (yes 2 very different films but both equally impressive first tries).
Greatest movie about a writer. almost 3 years ago
Barfly
Go to Comment
You choose the book to make into a film. Then choose the director. Go! almost 3 years ago
The Catcher in the Rye- Wes Anderson since he pretty much already did it with Rushmore
Infinite Jest- Soderbergh
Blood Meridian- Jim Jarmusch based on Dead Man, he’s my guy for the job
The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle- Wong Kar-Wai
A Winters Tale- Sorsese
Go to Comment
Godard - Pedantic and Pretentious? almost 3 years ago
Then what exactly DOES “pretentious” mean and WHEN can you use it to describe a work?
Pretentious is not always bad and Goddard IS pretentious at times
On the other hand while I like Breathless and Band of Outsiders and Contempt and most of the early stuff I really don’t need to sit through another movie about movies and specifically how certain types of movies (American popular films) make the director angry and cynical even though when he began his career (as critic and filmaker) he liked many things about those very films he now spends 2 hrs trashing
That is not so much pretentious as boring and a waste of time
Still Weekend and his early 60’s stuff rocked precicely because those films celeberated and deconstructed those films he admired in a loving and playful and truly revolutionary way without just seeming like an angry rant 24 frames per second
Go to Comment
Godard - Pedantic and Pretentious? almost 3 years ago
Every Goodard film from the early 60s to the 70s is about movies, specifically American Hollywood movies. Can you truly tell me Breathless, Contempt, and Band of Outsiders are not in a love/hate realtionship with American films and the culture that they inspired?
Its the later ones in the 70s and beyond where it turns more hate/hate and for me, diffcult to watch
While there are techincally brilliant aspects to all these later moives and sometimes a good idea or 2 that is not enough to get one through them
If it were, I would be the pendantic one
Go to Comment
not with a whimper, the last great films of the masters over 2 years ago
Madadayo-Kurosawa
One-Eyed Jacks-Brando
Brown Bunny-Gallo
Go to Comment
how many of you think that watchmen is the best superhero flick ever made ? over 2 years ago
TDK has many problems
1. Nolan cannot direct an action scene to save his life
2. Like all actors that don the bat suit Bale is wooden with no character or inner life which makes anyone who plays the villian look awesome by comparsion
3. It suffers from the same issues that most modern American films(Hollywood and independent thoug mostly independent films) suffer from- intellectual laziness and dilettantism masked as depth.
The last is a particular annoyance in my mind as so many films come out and get praise as “deep” or rising above the genre which really they are not.
The Dark Knight is a perfect example.
Critics and film goers seem impressed that just because a movie hints at something greater but never explores it all. The sheer fact that a film will say mention the philosphy of Nietzsche or speak of the duality of superheros or bring up certain statements about human nature is always mistaken by critics as the SAME thing as actually exploring them.
Having a character name drop Schopenhauer is considered deep and the equivalent of talking about and analyzing the works thereof.
I never understood that.
All TDK does is this sort of name dropping and like a 20 year old trying to seem deep, feels that just by saying "the works of Wittgenstein is the same as actually knwoing what you are talking about.
In addition to which, what does TDK do different in superfically looking at the duality of the superhero persona that hasn’t been hinted at since the first Tim Burton Batman and done much more entertainingly in Batman Returns?
While comparisons my be odious I feel a movie that explores the same themes with much greater depth is Mann’s Heat. Plus Michael Mann has 2 or 3 of the greatest directed action scenes of all time in that film. Which is more than I can say for Nolan (see point 1).
My 2 unasked for cents
Go to Comment
The Black Dahlia over 2 years ago
I think anyone who is a fan of the novel or James Ellroy would say this is a pretty tepid and whitewashed version. All the actors were uniformly bad or pointless. The direction was confusing. It almost seemed like De Plama couldn’t get out of his own way and be true to the source material making a really good and intense and very dark novel into a movie of the week.
While I am not a huge fan of De Palma I do like Dressed to Kill and Sisters and most of his 70’s stuff.
If it were only THAT De Palama that made the movie rather than this later one
Still I think De Palama is too much of a formalist and detached to do Ellroy justice. Particularly a novel as personal this.
Ellroy needs a modern day Sam Fuller IMHO.
I would kill to see a Sam Fuller adaptation of White Jazz. :)
Go to Comment
The Black Dahlia over 2 years ago
Well I agree with you that a film does not have to be faithful to the novel source.
Its really a purely personal and subjective issue with me when it comes to this film because I really loved the novel and James Ellroy and have many issues with Brian De Palma (alot that I can over look with his early work but his later stuff in the 90’s on makes what I see as his prentiousness and derivativeness harder to ignore).
But as I said this is more of MY issue than the film because I liked the novel so much.
For the record I never read The Watchmen either but felt the movie was close to unwatchable. But seeing who directed I was not surprised as I felt 300 was 90mins I’ll never get back of my life either :)
Anyway back to the original thread, I didn’t expect a great movie but this one was an adaptation of a great messy violent personal exciting dark novel by a once interesting director which turned out to be really boring for me ( a huge sin in art IMHO).
For the record I thought L.A. Confidential was pretty good example of a Hollywood version of a equally dark novel by the same writer that was very good despite cuts made to some of the novel’s more unsavory aspects.
What it ulitmately comes down to is that I expected more of both director and source material and that is more my prejudices and faults than that of the film I guess.
Go to Comment
The Black Dahlia over 2 years ago
Unfortuantely empty references to other better films does not a good movie make. In a nutshell that pretty much encapsulates the work of DePalma.
DePalma is a interesting director to discover whne you are 14/15 years old as a gateway to other better directors. While I have a speical place in my heart for Dressed to Kill and Carrie and Sisiters and Body Double (the first DePalma film I saw in the theaters) my 40 year old head has a hard time taking him seriously.
Almost all his work was been emtpy genuflecting before Hitchcock and other better directors. To just reference a great scene in a movie with no point is something I have no paitence with any longer.
I really like the novel and i guess that is why I can’t tolerate the film very much. Scarlett Johansen is not a good or even medicore actress by any definition. And the less said about Aaron Eckhart and Josh Harnett, the better. Talk about wooden and pointless. here we have a double shot. But every hack director gets the leading stars they deserve.
I know I am being harsh but the novel was a passionate dark over the top uber hard boiled insane palying fast and losse with history while still being true to the time examination of a mother’s death by one crazy amazing son of a bitch writer.
While I don’t look at source material as scared text and feel a movie does NOT have to be true t its source at all, I feel Ellroy desrved a better director.
At the very least the DePlama of Dressed to Kill…..
my pointless 2 cents
Go to Comment
Masterpieces By Mediocre Directors over 2 years ago
I’m not really getting the suggestions here-
Ron Howard is actually NOT a bad director. I would’nt say “great” of course but as a pure old school style Hollywood journeyman director he is pretty good. He is no autuer but who cares. He falls in line with alot of old school studio directors that made some pretty classic films (Casabalnca to name one). In fact he is the kind of director Soderbergh would like to be if his prentions weren’t always getting in his way. Apollo13 is IMHO an object lesson in classical film making and where to put the camera.
Ron Howard is not a favorite director of mine by a long shot and not great by any standard but I don’t think he deserves the belittlement he gets on film fan lists.
PTA on the other hand is a little too young to make any judgements on but I feel he has it in him to become a pretty great filmmaker as soon as he shakes off his anexity of influnces.
Punch Drunk Love and TWBB are pretty incredible in my opnion. And I actually feel PDL is the better of the two. Its unfortunate that currently he is most remebered for Boogie Nights and Magnolia, If he only made those 2 films then I could easily write him off as a wanna be technically talented hack. However based on the latter 2 films he is begining to reach for greatness (or really really good at least).
Finally I actualy think Hard Eight (Sydney) is also a really good first effort and pretty much makes Boogie Nights/Magnolia even more irrelevant as that first film manages to touch on all the themes of those 2 except with less prentention and bombast.
My 2 useless cents
Thanks
Go to Comment
Masterpieces By Mediocre Directors over 2 years ago
@Grant I wouldn’t consider Oliver Stone medicore. That is giving him too much credit. I would put Oliver in with Good movies by bad directors.
I think Sofia Coppola at her age and only 3 films to her credit it is way too soon to make the “medicore” call. Most artists would kill to have a Lost in Translation at that age. Besides Virgin Suicides was pretty decent and Marie Antionette deserves credit just for getting Kevin Shields on the soundtrack.
To Kathryn Bigelow I would add Near Dark as well
Go to Comment
Can Great Films be Merely Great Entertainment? over 2 years ago
If by “entertainment” you mean a work with absolutely no subtext or under lining theme (either consiously or not by the filmmaker) then I don’t think such a work exists…
Go to Comment
Can Great Films be Merely Great Entertainment? over 2 years ago
Coppola’s “Bram Stroker’s Dracula” is a noble failure but hardly just an amusment park ride. There are quite obivious references to the Lumiere bros and the birth of cinema and the Great Train Robbery as well as deconsructions of pretty much every aspect of the vampire myth from Vlad the Implaer to Stroker/Shelley to Hammer films and Anne Rice.
Under the right conditions it is actually quite brilliant in its over the top spectacle and as I said before a noble failure.
Casion Royale was if you are a fan of the Ian Flemming novels a consious hark back to the old sadism/sexism of the source of the Bond myth (as much as they could do in these PC times) so it does actually have some subtext.
What am I saying is there is no such thing as pure escapist art. Everything has some subtext or underlying theme wheter intended or not by the creator of the work (which is irrelevant and besides the point anyway).
And yes I agree, Singin’ in the Rain is an example of a perfect work of high art if there was one.
So is Top Hat for my money.
Those films can stand side by side with Andrei Rublev and Rules of the Game et al.
Thanks for reading.
Go to Comment
watching schindler's list: a tug-of-war? over 2 years ago
Look only Spielberg would make a film about the Holocaust with a happy ending.
Manipulation is present in every work of art and like everything can be good or bad.
Spielberg is a hugely manipulative filmmaker. That is his gift. He is a hugely talented native filmmaker on a pure visceral level.
In Jaws,Duel, Jurassic Park etc that manipulation and unthinking dumb visceral genius is a great thing.
For films about actual historic events like the Holocaust it is insulting and demeaning to the events that occured.
It belittles the history and turns it into another bloated self serving feel good Hollywood production number.
I am not one of those that is on the “Spielberg is over rated” bandwagon. I think he is quite talented as a director (see the mall scene in Minority Report) but his talent should stay away from topics depicting actual history and stick to fiction in the line of Jaws et al.
Just my thoughs
Go to Comment
Avatar (2009, James Cameron) trailer over 2 years ago
1. Wasn’t this film already made w/o CGI and it was called The New World and was really beautiful and great? Just asking.
2. CGI per se is not bad it is just that no one has used it effectively yet. Right now it is just a lazy man’s approach to film making using CGI as a cover up for no story, no sense of camera placement replaced by pure spectacle.
3. I don’t know about anyone else here but usually when I see an over the top explosion/action scene in CGI it DOES look like a cartoon and fake and distracting and I think of green screens and wonder which linux distro they are using rather than the film itself. Compare that with the car chase in the French Connection or Jaws or any non CGI film.
4. I am not a luddite and think CGI does have potential and realize the so called “real” films that I like were done with tech advancements of thier day as well just not as hyped and prevalent as CGI.
5. For the record I am 40 years old which may disqualify me from this topic (but I do work in the software industry as an engineer :) )
6. For every Terminator and Aliens Cameron has given us an Abyss and True Lies. Spectcale and no plot and really bad politics and cheesy ideas. Never understood why Cameron is so worshipped by film geeks.
7. So is 3-D CGI the new Schwarzenegger for JC?
8. 3 words- The Polar Express
Go to Comment
Avatar (2009, James Cameron) trailer over 2 years ago
@polarisdib- “wouldn’t you like to create an entire science fiction reality from your own computer and then run outside with your camera and a few friends to inhabit it?”
Sure that sounds like a great idea for a theme park ride :)
Go to Comment
Most Disturbing Film Ever (strictly speaking) over 2 years ago
Jack by Coppla
Truly evil and sick and sinister
Go to Comment
Roman Polanski - which is his best film? over 2 years ago
Pirates baby!! :)
Ok maybe not. THAT is probably another good reason for his incarceration.
Knife in the Water and the Tenant seriously.
Go to Comment
Roman Polanski - which is his best film? over 2 years ago
Look lets be honest for a second and then we can all go back to meaningless bickering and critical one up manship and all that worthless nosie-
Knife in the Water,Cul De Sac, Repulsion, Chinatown, Rosemary’s Baby and The Tenant are all pretty great and amazing films.
Pirates is a piece of turd and any attempt to justify it is just an attempt to seem different and get a reaction.
The Pianist is a pretty medicore lifetime movie and only made a big deal out of due to the fact that compared to his 80’s and 90’s later output it looks like Rules of the Game by comparsion.
Frantic is ersatz bad Hitchcock.
The rest is really not worth talking (or writing ) about.
For the record Michael Mann is not over rated. He is a pretty geat living US director IMHO. I friggin’ love Heat and have seen very little that can compare. For that reason alone he is the shit.
Even Ali and Collateral had pretty awesome moments in it that any director would kill for (like the opening of Ali).
I think that Miami Vice was supremely UNDER rated and an object lesson in how an action film should be directed.
Soderbergh might be over rated by The Limey and Out of Sight are pretty friggin’ sweet.
Finally Scorsese has been downhill (with a couple of exceptions) since Casino which is a really bad rehash of Goodfellas and I cannot see why film fans actually fawn over that film because aside from a couple of scenes it stinks and plays like bad Scorsese.
His post Casino output has been pretty lame (with some exceptions like 2 scenes in Gangs of New York and Kundun). If you watch Infernal Affairs and then The Departed you can see how much better the former is and how a remake was pointless.
Anywhoo, my worthless unasked for 2 cents.
Go to Comment
Roman Polanski - which is his best film? over 2 years ago
Farrell has never been better
Any director that hires Gong Li in a major role is a genius
The action scenes are amazingly directed and are bested only by the ones in Heat.
The film is a stripped down minimalist analysis of Mann’s major concerns which is men and work and how that relationship affects and defines all others in their lives.
Its Mann and his themes stripped of all fat almost ansurdly so.
But I understand many don’t hold this view so attack away.
I think it is pretty amazing and considering that it was probably sold like a typical successful tv show nostalga crowd remake to the backers, even more subversive.
That and the use of HD video is pretty nice
Oh yeah and most likely the most adult non teenage pandering almost emotionally real sex scene in a film, big budget or otherwise that I’ve ever seen in awhile is just the icing on the cake.
But hey I’ve been wrong about alot and admittedly don’t get out much or watch as many films as the posters on this list.
Thanks for reading.
Go to Comment
Kevin Smith over 2 years ago
Kevin Smith is a pretty to very good screenwriter who probably should focus on that more than directing his own work.
That said Clerks was a pretty good first feature and Chasing Amy is a boderline great film that is his crowning achievment.
I am not sure what happened after that and why he has never been able to follow through on the potential I saw in that film.
His unfilmed script for Superman was pretty good as well.
As I stated earler maybe he should just concentrate and writing and producing but stay away from directing.
Go to Comment
Did anyone like over 2 years ago
Because it was an unexceptional Hollywood film. Not good and not particularlybad either. Not the kind of film to love or actively hate.
I barely even recall it except for the horrible Bryan Adams song
I am sure more people can comment and trash the song than the actual movie that it was written for.
Go to Comment
Did anyone like over 2 years ago
For the record Costners greatest film was Fandango. Now I have not seen that since I was ~22 (about 18 years ago) but I have pretty good memories of that (and even Judd Nelson. hahaaha)
Go to Comment
Which film has changed your life forever? over 2 years ago
The Breakfast Club/Star Wars/Raiders of the Lost Ark-the films I saw as a kid that I loved with that pure unjudging kid love
Veritgo-reailized the true potential of film when I first saw it at 16 years old
Near Dark-good b-movie seen as a kid that had some deeper undertones
Last Tango in Paris-same as above for art films
Wings of Desire-my first and most important conscious cinematic love. will stay with me forever like all first loves
Rushmore-closest to capturing that Catcher in the Rye feeling
Buffalo 66-the closest anyone has come to making a film with that ’70s feel that all US indie directors seem to want
Detour-the genius of b-movies and their depth when done well
Rules of the Game- ’nuff said
His Girl Friday- turned me on to the genius of screwball
Chungking Express-pop cinematic visceral art at its purest
Go to Comment
Your opinion on Michael Mann? over 2 years ago
Heat has 2 of the best action scenes ever directed. It is pretty much the distillation of all his themes.
I also think Miami Vice was pretty good as well. The use of HD and Gong Li alone make it memorable. Miami Vice is like a mimalist action film stripped of all fat. Its almost abstract.
Mann is an amazing director and one of the best living American directors in my opinion.
His use of the camera and music is amazing.
I also feel Heat is pretty sensitive toward women. However it is men and their realtionship to each other and work and the affects thereof that are Mann’s primary comncerns.
Go to Comment
who else wants more kubrick in the collection? over 2 years ago
Guys seriously, Criterion rocks and all but I think the current Kubricks on DVD are just fine and would waste more $$ on double buying if they came out on CC.
CC should try to relase Killer’s Kiss, The Killing, and Fear and Desire if possible….
The whole point of CC is to relase films that are not out on DVD or relatively unknown here or out on DVD but in poor quality.
I don’t think the current Kubricks fall under any of those categories.
i can think of better things for CC to spend money and time on….
Go to Comment
KUBRICK'S INFLUENCE ON "THERE WILL BE BLOOD" over 2 years ago
When it is not Kubrick it is Welles in TWBB.
Still that does not take away from the fact that it is a great flick.
Go to Comment
Movies That Should Be In the Criterion Collection over 2 years ago
Buffalo 66
Brown Bunny
Any Herzog
Go to Comment
Young directors that have potential over 2 years ago
Vincent Gallo
2 for 2
The first film was damn near perfect
Go to Comment
Young directors that have potential over 2 years ago
I don’t know how old Gallo is but yes I assumed in terms of output and directorial experience. I didn’t know it was that literal.
Besides 50 is not old.
I don’t know waht kind of person Gallo is and I don’t understand what that has to do with liking his films.
I have never been very interested in the private lives of directors I admire.
Anyway Buffalo 66 is an amazing film. A first effort by an actor unmatched since Charles Laughton and Night of the Hunter (yes 2 very different films but both equally impressive first tries).
Thanks
Go to Comment