I think the current state of Hollywood is a movement, but I wouldn’t go to the extreme of calling it the American New Wave. I’d have to agree with Shade_Slayer’s comment that the New Hollywood produced the American New Wave. If you want to define it, it would go back to 1968 starting with Bonnie and Clyde and then Easy Rider. Its not a matter of critics or popularity, its more of the fact that it released independent cinema to North America. There is the underlying aspect of releasing a gratuitous amount of violence and a film about recreational drug use, these were taboo in American cinema at the time, these films broke that wall down. After their release many out-of-studio films were being released and becoming mainstream. Comparatively to other countries, its the films that take it out of the studio and into the people that create New Wave, not necessarily style.
I just watched the 8 hour cut of War and Peace, I basically watched the whole thing in the day taking the intermission breaks between each part. Its a quick break to compose and get some food, go to the bathroom, and then keep going.
I completely agree with you Dorothee. The Criterion specifically says in its mission statement that they don’t want to be “Snobbish” when it comes to selecting films. Go through the list and look at all the ones I’m sure you’d consider “unworthy” of the Criterion treatment, Equinox, Robocop, The Rock, Armageddon, actually go through the list and see if it shouldn’t be up there.
I agree with you Witkacy, what you say makes a lot of sense to me. It could even be argued that a human being consciously sitting still for too long could be unnatural and its more that we’re conditioned into it through manners and mores (save for sleeping). What other species of intelligent life will sit staring at something for hours?
Don’t get me wrong though, I’m one of the people who enjoys to watch a film with endurance, but if you have a way of watching it in your own privacy, what does it matter if its all at once or in segments?
No way! I was totally thinking about Greenway’s approach earlier too right after I posted I was thinking: “who said that?”
It is true though, one is forced with intimacy through consideration of those around you. Its like going to the theater with only you and your buddy sitting in. If you’re aware no one else is around, you’re going to make comments to one another throughout the film.
Ultimately I don’t think there’s a right or wrong way to watch a movie.
I don’t think it’s a direct relation with depressing the audience or being a sad film. Not all great films are depressing either. But for those great ones that are a little bit tear jerking it tends to be because they break the mold and come out as something completely different and above their genre. For example, Casablanca. It’s a romantic drama, the usual ending is, boy wins over girl and they live happily ever after. Casablanca didn’t end on as much of an up beat note. Same sort of thing with Gone With the Wind, they’re the first to really be that big and that bold. Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid is another similar case.
Another approach to the situation is that its easier to depress an audience then it is to woo them in another fashion. “Great films” are great because of how they control our emotions. A film maker will have an easier time to move the viewer’s emotions around to sadness then to joy. Think Schindler’s List. It is an incredible picture and it is constantly pulling you down to a sadder and more shocking place.
If you’ve read this far you’re probably going to think that comedy is an easier way to pull the audience around. And it’s true that anything can make some one laugh. Anchorman, people laugh at that! Why isn’t it a cinema classic, it pulls you around? A simple answer is that it’s all slapstick style, its nothing new. Chaplin was the last one to bring anything of that sort to the table.
To be considered a great cinema classic, a picture needs to be well made obviously and needs to offer something new and refreshing to the mix. It needs to bring something into the genre and in turn the genre needs to take from it to prove its worthiness.
Often times a sad story is a compelling way to do that.
He’s most certainly an important director that few realize, It’s amazing the work he has done and then you see it come across in directors today. His sense of dark humour has a wit about it similar to Wes Anderson, which is a very easy comparison to make. The end of The Life Aquatic is actually very similar to that of Harold and Maude.
To list one of Ashby’s as a favorite is definitely a difficult task. I’d hate to be running a broken record but I’d have to say wither Harold and Maude or Being There…
The American New Wave about 3 years ago
I think the current state of Hollywood is a movement, but I wouldn’t go to the extreme of calling it the American New Wave. I’d have to agree with Shade_Slayer’s comment that the New Hollywood produced the American New Wave. If you want to define it, it would go back to 1968 starting with Bonnie and Clyde and then Easy Rider. Its not a matter of critics or popularity, its more of the fact that it released independent cinema to North America. There is the underlying aspect of releasing a gratuitous amount of violence and a film about recreational drug use, these were taboo in American cinema at the time, these films broke that wall down. After their release many out-of-studio films were being released and becoming mainstream. Comparatively to other countries, its the films that take it out of the studio and into the people that create New Wave, not necessarily style.
Go to Comment
How do you watch long films? about 3 years ago
I just watched the 8 hour cut of War and Peace, I basically watched the whole thing in the day taking the intermission breaks between each part. Its a quick break to compose and get some food, go to the bathroom, and then keep going.
Go to Comment
actors that aren't that great but about 3 years ago
Yeah Bill Murray for sure
Also Seymour Cassel… (Max’s dad in Rushmore) every time you see him in a movie all you can do is smile!
Go to Comment
IS "BENJAMIN BUTTON" WORTHY OF BEING IN THE COLLECTION? about 3 years ago
I completely agree with you Dorothee. The Criterion specifically says in its mission statement that they don’t want to be “Snobbish” when it comes to selecting films. Go through the list and look at all the ones I’m sure you’d consider “unworthy” of the Criterion treatment, Equinox, Robocop, The Rock, Armageddon, actually go through the list and see if it shouldn’t be up there.
Go to Comment
How do you watch long films? about 3 years ago
I agree with you Witkacy, what you say makes a lot of sense to me. It could even be argued that a human being consciously sitting still for too long could be unnatural and its more that we’re conditioned into it through manners and mores (save for sleeping). What other species of intelligent life will sit staring at something for hours?
Don’t get me wrong though, I’m one of the people who enjoys to watch a film with endurance, but if you have a way of watching it in your own privacy, what does it matter if its all at once or in segments?
Go to Comment
How do you watch long films? about 3 years ago
No way! I was totally thinking about Greenway’s approach earlier too right after I posted I was thinking: “who said that?”
It is true though, one is forced with intimacy through consideration of those around you. Its like going to the theater with only you and your buddy sitting in. If you’re aware no one else is around, you’re going to make comments to one another throughout the film.
Ultimately I don’t think there’s a right or wrong way to watch a movie.
Go to Comment
Movies you hated that everyone else loves about 3 years ago
This whole list is making me a little bit upset listening to people not enjoy certain pictures… some I do agree with though…
All my cult movie friends DESPISE me for not being capable to enjoy myself with any of the EVIL DEAD films
Go to Comment
Do great films have to be depressing and bleak to be great? about 3 years ago
I don’t think it’s a direct relation with depressing the audience or being a sad film. Not all great films are depressing either. But for those great ones that are a little bit tear jerking it tends to be because they break the mold and come out as something completely different and above their genre. For example, Casablanca. It’s a romantic drama, the usual ending is, boy wins over girl and they live happily ever after. Casablanca didn’t end on as much of an up beat note. Same sort of thing with Gone With the Wind, they’re the first to really be that big and that bold. Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid is another similar case.
Another approach to the situation is that its easier to depress an audience then it is to woo them in another fashion. “Great films” are great because of how they control our emotions. A film maker will have an easier time to move the viewer’s emotions around to sadness then to joy. Think Schindler’s List. It is an incredible picture and it is constantly pulling you down to a sadder and more shocking place.
If you’ve read this far you’re probably going to think that comedy is an easier way to pull the audience around. And it’s true that anything can make some one laugh. Anchorman, people laugh at that! Why isn’t it a cinema classic, it pulls you around? A simple answer is that it’s all slapstick style, its nothing new. Chaplin was the last one to bring anything of that sort to the table.
To be considered a great cinema classic, a picture needs to be well made obviously and needs to offer something new and refreshing to the mix. It needs to bring something into the genre and in turn the genre needs to take from it to prove its worthiness.
Often times a sad story is a compelling way to do that.
Go to Comment
Best movie with a train in it ? about 3 years ago
Oh my… Have you people forgot about Sergio Leone?!
For a Few Dollars More
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
Once Upon a Time in the West
OOOOH and of course the mob epic
Once Upon a Time in America
But I am thankful some one mentioned Frankenhimer’s The Train… that is definitely a goodie
Go to Comment
Fav Ashby? about 3 years ago
He’s most certainly an important director that few realize, It’s amazing the work he has done and then you see it come across in directors today. His sense of dark humour has a wit about it similar to Wes Anderson, which is a very easy comparison to make. The end of The Life Aquatic is actually very similar to that of Harold and Maude.
To list one of Ashby’s as a favorite is definitely a difficult task. I’d hate to be running a broken record but I’d have to say wither Harold and Maude or Being There…
Go to Comment
The Auteurs' Fake Criterion Covers about 3 years ago
These are all pretty amazing!
I sure would love to see one for THX1138
Go to Comment
The Auteurs' Fake Criterion Covers about 3 years ago
It’s definitely the most minimalist! I love it but there have been some pretty fabulous designs! This is more so the Criterion way, simplistic.
Go to Comment
This Film is Not Yet Rated over 2 years ago
I have to agree with you, in class we were talking about the Hayes Code and Rating system and this movie just kept coming up again and again.
Go to Comment