| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Anim8rFSK
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 11:13 pm Post subject: Re: Crappy movies by great directors |
 |
|
In article <g5in8d$tdl$1@registered.motzarella.org>,
"Matt Barry" <barrys@bellatlantic.net> wrote:
| Quote: | "Anim8rFSK" <ANIM8Rfsk@cox.net> wrote in message
news:ANIM8Rfsk-43F1DB.09375315072008@news.west.cox.net...
A lot of people thought, based on NIMH, that Don Bluth would make good
films.
Boy, howdy, were THEY wrong.
There's someone you don't hear much about anymore. Has he worked on any new
projects recently? (I can't think of any since at least the early 90s). As a
kid, I always preferred his darker (especially "NIMH") films over the sappy
Disney fare.
|
He finally drove every studio that would have him under. The last
decade he keeps announcing stupid stuff like a Dragon's Lair movie done
CGI, when the only cool thing about Dragon's Lair was the cel work. He
tried to get a 'pay web site' going where you'd have to pay money to
read his words of wisdom, but nobody was interested in that either.
There was an announced Dragon's Lair and Space Ace remastered in 16:9
which just means they'd be cropping off information.
Yawn.
--
Star Trek 09:
No Shat, No Show. |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Matt Barry
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 11:57 pm Post subject: Re: Crappy movies by great directors |
|
|
"Okierazorbacker" <okierazorbacker@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:22a233df-fadd-4d14-ba4f-8d6501219773@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | On Jul 15, 12:25 pm, David Oberman <dober...@socal.rr.com> wrote:
"Michael" <michaelwy...@gmail.com> wrote:
Then of course, these guys make some excellent movies later on.
Such as . . . ?
OK, here's a list for you guys to flame into. My favorite of
Spielberg's directorial work, chronologically.
Duel
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Raiders Of the Lost Ark
Indiana Jones & the Last Crusade
Jurassic Park
Schindler's List
Amistad
A.I.
Minority Report
War Of the Worlds
|
I enjoyed most of those, especially the earlier films, although his later,
"historical" stuff strikes me as both shallow and completely uninvolving.
It's not an exaggeration to say that I probably enjoyed "Duel" more than any
of his later, big-screen work, precisely because of it's relative simplicity
and straightforward filming, focusing on a very intriguing character
relationship rather than on "mind-blowing" effects. It cut out all the
protracted, overlong, and overproduced stuff that mars his later work. (That
said, I also admire the skill and polish he brought to films like "Close
Encounters" and "E.T.").
--
Matt Barry
View my films at: www.youtube.com/comedyfilm
Read my blog at: http://filmreel.blogspot.com |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Magnus, Robot Fighter
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 12:07 am Post subject: Re: Crappy movies by great directors |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:54:26 +0000 (UTC), schultr@mail.biu.ack.il
(Richard Schultz) wrote:
| Quote: | In article <5unp74pihve5ms9tch8h6pndru22oig0lq@4ax.com>, David Oberman <doberman@socal.rr.com> wrote:
: calvin <crice5@windstream.net> wrote:
:
:>Robert Shaw being swallowed whole alive remains the most ludicrous
:>shot in all filmdom, that I can remember.
: JAWS is the saltiest & one of the most suspenseful (& funniest)
: American movies I've ever seen.
And Robert Shaw wasn't swallowed whole, either. The blood that was coming
out of his mouth implied that his lungs were being chomped upon.
-----
Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers which smell bad."
|
Yeah....all that bloody tissue hanging off Bruce's mouth while
attacking Brody didn't come from munching on the cage. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Anim8rFSK
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 12:19 am Post subject: Re: Crappy movies by great directors |
|
|
In article
<22a233df-fadd-4d14-ba4f-8d6501219773@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
Okierazorbacker <okierazorbacker@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On Jul 15, 12:25 pm, David Oberman <dober...@socal.rr.com> wrote:
"Michael" <michaelwy...@gmail.com> wrote:
Then of course, these guys make some excellent movies later on.
Such as . . . ?
OK, here's a list for you guys to flame into. My favorite of
Spielberg's directorial work, chronologically.
Duel
great
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Great originally, really suffered in it's special edition
Raiders Of the Lost Ark
Absolutely great; special edition is worse
Indiana Jones & the Last Crusade
Quite good; it helped that Temple of Doom was so awful
Jurassic Park
Crap on a stick; amazingly, LOST WORLD was even worse
Schindler's List
Amistad
A.I.
Minority Report
War Of the Worlds
Absolute garbage |
--
Star Trek 09:
No Shat, No Show. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Magnus, Robot Fighter
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 12:55 am Post subject: Re: Crappy movies by great directors |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:07:33 -0700 (PDT), calvin
<crice5@windstream.net> wrote:
| Quote: | On Jul 15, 2:54 pm, schu...@mail.biu.ack.il (Richard Schultz) wrote:
In article <5unp74pihve5ms9tch8h6pndru22oig...@4ax.com>, David Oberman <dober...@socal.rr.com> wrote:
: calvin <cri...@windstream.net> wrote:
:>Robert Shaw being swallowed whole alive remains the most ludicrous
:>shot in all filmdom, that I can remember.
: JAWS is the saltiest & one of the most suspenseful (& funniest)
: American movies I've ever seen.
And Robert Shaw wasn't swallowed whole, either. The blood that was coming
out of his mouth implied that his lungs were being chomped upon.
Since Sopielberg had the shark half out of the water
onto the boat, we could see the shark's teeth, and they
weren't chomping on Shaw's chest. The blood must
have come from something previous to the part of the
swallowing that we saw.
|
errrr...you need to watch again. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
calvin
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 1:13 am Post subject: Re: Crappy movies by great directors |
|
|
On Jul 15, 9:04 pm, David Oberman <dober...@socal.rr.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Anim8rFSK <ANIM8R...@cox.net> wrote:
Jurassic Park
Crap on a stick; amazingly, LOST WORLD was even worse
Was LOST WORLD the one with the pterodactyl? I call that one DODGE THE
DINOSAUR. It's just a video game.
|
No, that was JPIII.
(unless you mean the idyllic very last scene, just before the
fade-out, in Lost World, the only scene with a pterodactyl) |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Okierazorbacker
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 1:17 am Post subject: Re: Crappy movies by great directors |
|
|
On Jul 15, 6:04 pm, william <williamahe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Okay, but I don't have a glib answer. I tend to like his Brit films
and his silent films. For example, "The Farmer's Wife" is a rom-com
that anyone sees the end of coming. But it's shot beautifully. As is
"Blackmail."
|
I loved "Blackmail." First Brit sound film, so I've read. Hitch did
a most imaginative job of incorporating sound, not using it as a
gimmick but as a character. Very nice work.
| Quote: | But to jump to his major works, I find "Vertigo"
to be gutless. She fell? Oh, please. Read the book. The film only
makes sense if he pushes her. And read "Strangers On A Train." No
wonder Raymond Chandler bailed on that.
|
I think "Vertigo" is overrated myself, but SOaT is a GREAT film.
Unqualified GREAT.
| Quote: | "North by Northwest" is fluff
and would be good fluff if it weren't so condescending toward "good"
girls. (I loved "Shadow Of A Doubt.")
|
I loved SOaD too. But NxNW is just too much fun to diss.
| Quote: | "Psycho" is important in film
history but it is marred by needless psychobabble. (Many "important"
films have stupid stories, eg, "Metropolis," "Cabinet of Dr
Caligari.") Then we could talk about the non-films or films that flat
out sucked such as "The Paradine Case," "Under Capricorn," "Rope,"
"Topaz," "Family Plot," "Suspicion," or "Marnie." He had a tendency to
make the same innocent-man-on-the-run flick over and over and over
again.
|
Well, I like "Marnie" and I like psychobabble, even when it's
inaccurate. Personal failing of mine. Otherwise I generally agree
with the above except that he didn't make the "same" film over and
over, he used the same THEME quite often, all the way back to the
'30s, but that's like quibbling that John Ford used Monument Valley
too often. If it works, it works. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
calvin
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 1:22 am Post subject: Re: Crappy movies by great directors |
|
|
On Jul 15, 9:17 pm, Okierazorbacker <okierazorbac...@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: | ... quibbling that John Ford used Monument Valley
too often. ...
|
No, but he shouldn't have called it Texas in The Searchers. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Adam Cameron
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 1:56 am Post subject: Re: Crappy movies by great directors |
|
|
| Quote: | Mean Streets had no purpose.
|
My problem with Mean Streets is that I found the acting to be a bit
overwrought. To a lesser degree Robert De Niro, but in particular Harvey
Keitel, whose character never rose above "caricature" to me. I found this
distracted from the film as a whole to me, and I could never get immersed
in it.
| Quote: | nothing. The Duel was a chase film
|
That's *kinda* like saying Alien was just a haunted house film.
I haven't seen Duel for about twenty years, but I recall it being almost
unrelentingly tense. I don't recall Dennis Weaver's character being
particularly one-dimensional, but I think the lack of there even being a
character representing the truck driver as making the film even *more*
intense.
I see The Hitcher (which I presume is what you mean when saying "The
Hitchhiker") as a poor-man's version of Duel, in a way. That said, I do
like the original version of The Hitcher quite a lot. I've not seen the
newer one (not on purpose, just haven't got around to it).
| Quote: | interesting character development. And Bad Taste, well, that really lived up
to it's title.
|
Well: it was supposed to.
I don't know what to say about this one because it's a Kiwi film. I don't
mean "where the money came from", but it's *particularly Kiwi* in its
approach to itself, if that makes sense, and I'm a Kiwi who watched it
premiere at the New Zealand Film Festival in 1988 (it might have been the
main film on opening night... can't remember). To be honest, I don't know
how much of it would be lost one someone from abroad. I enjoyed it, but
then at that age (late teens) I was seeking out films like Return of the
Living Dead and Reanimator and such like, so it was a niche I was
interested in. I've seen it a couple of times since, and I still find it
"great Kiwi cinema", but not too sure about its merits beyond that.
If only Peter Jackson made more films like Heavenly Creatues or Forgotten
Silver. I thought the LotR stuff was a fascinating spectacle, but I
thought the "drama" was all a bit turgid... not helped by the script or the
source material though. I enjoyed King Kong, I guess. I don't think it
took itself as seriously as LotR did.
| Quote: | Then of course, these guys make some excellent movies later
on.
|
I just looked through Spielberg's back catalogue, and I found it rather hit
and miss. There are a few really good films in there - for me Jaws, RotLA
and Schindler's List stick out - but there's really a lot of also rans in
there. I suppose he should have points for ambition.
Martin Scorsese I think I relate to more as a director because his work
seems more gritty than Spielberg, which appeals to me. There's a lot of
movies there that I consider highly. Nothing I'd put in my top 100 though,
strangely enough. I'm weird in that I didn't like Raging Bull - at all -
which is quite a minority position, I imagine.
Peter Jackson has done some very big films recently, but he doesn't deserve
(the measure being "history" and "volume") to be talked about in the same
conversation as the other two. That's not to denigrate him, you
understand. He's just not there yet.
| Quote: | exception I can think of, is Hitchcock, who seems to have started out with a
bang in silent movies and just kept going, although he later on occasionally
made a turkey or two as well.
|
I bought the Early Hitchcock Collection (http://tinyurl.com/63bf78) a
couple of months back, and have thusfar only watched The Ring. I've only
watched a few silent films (Metropolis and... err... I'm sure there's been
a couple of others...) and I was surprised to find it completely
accessible and really quite engaging. I've watched thirty-odd Hitchcocks,
and the only ones I've found a bit grim were Torn Curtain and Topaz. I've
really enjoyed the rest.
--
Adam |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
william
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 2:03 am Post subject: Re: Crappy movies by great directors |
|
|
On Jul 15, 9:17 pm, Okierazorbacker <okierazorbac...@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Well, I like "Marnie" and I like psychobabble, even when it's
inaccurate. Personal failing of mine. Otherwise I generally agree
with the above except that he didn't make the "same" film over and
over, he used the same THEME quite often, all the way back to the
'30s, but that's like quibbling that John Ford used Monument Valley
too often. If it works, it works.
|
That's why people bet on horses. To me, there's so many films to see
that limiting yourself to some supposed canon is absurd. Some watch
films to be entertained or comforted and others to be challenged or
disturbed. I'm in the latter group until it gets to be too much and
then drop back to the former and on and on in ever widening gyres.
These days while researching film noir I sometimes think, jeez,
louise, how many low-budget, badly-lit, over-wrought, B-films with
some twisted morality message do I have to watch before something
really worthwhile jumps out? And then something does. What is "if it
works"? How many bad girl redeemed or innocent man on the run films do
you have to see by the same director before it doesn't work? The first
"innocent man" flick was "The Lodger" and the first "bad girl" film
was "Number 17." For me, Hitch has two or three films worth seeing and
the great vast unseen is a far deeper lure than the same old tired
story with fake monuments and bad rear-projection and marionettes
spitting into space will ever be. There's too many other undiscovered
-- to me -- films sitting on a shelf to be bothered with even
considering watching another hatchet job by Hitchcock. Been there,
seen that and I'm done with it.
William
www.williamahearn.com |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Michael
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 2:45 am Post subject: Re: Crappy movies by great directors |
|
|
I think I agree with you in most of you what you said. It is interesting to
hear from the home country of Kathrine Mansfield because it is half a world
away from my own country. I guess i lack the humour to watch Bad Taste. The
plot wasn't interesting and the exaggerated effects reminded me of Tim
Burton's Mars Attacks, another film that I don't find funny. I have been a
life-long fan of Tolkien though, and as you know, he was an Oxford professor
who took himself very seriously. And we Tolkien fans are almost as bad as
Treckies! There are Tolkien fans who meet every year at Tolkiens grave to
sing poetry in his invented elf- language. (But not in klingon, Sorry)
What impressed me about Jackson's version was that he really captured the
pompousness of Tolkien: the great battles and the sense of history. I think
a lot of the success of both his recent successes, however, is due to the
excellent set designers who have created the imaginary worlds for him. The
films are all visually extremely good. In addition he seems to have an eye
for action scenes. Some great performances also: Wiggo Mortensen joined the
ranks of great actors and Gandalf was excellent. Iljah Wood, who has had a
long distinguished career as a child actor, got a well deserved boost.
I am bit surprised, however, that no one has given Speilberg credit for his
landing scene in Saving Private Ryan. It is just as good as the landing
scenes in the Longest Day. The Longest Day has a fly by battle scenes very
much like the ones in Lord of the Rings. Speilberg, however, places the
camera behind Tom Hanks, and it dips with hjim into the water with him as
the bullets fly by. That first scene is just brilliant, what ever you might
think of the rest of the Saving Private Ryan. Of course, the fly by scenes
in The Longest Day are also excellent. The Longest Day is just an event
movie though, with a parade of famous faces.
"Adam Cameron" <adam_junk@hotmail.com> skrev i melding
news:14bhytalf5xpl$.yfbwu08ixfa7.dlg@40tude.net...
| Quote: | Mean Streets had no purpose.
My problem with Mean Streets is that I found the acting to be a bit
overwrought. To a lesser degree Robert De Niro, but in particular Harvey
Keitel, whose character never rose above "caricature" to me. I found this
distracted from the film as a whole to me, and I could never get immersed
in it.
nothing. The Duel was a chase film
That's *kinda* like saying Alien was just a haunted house film.
I haven't seen Duel for about twenty years, but I recall it being almost
unrelentingly tense. I don't recall Dennis Weaver's character being
particularly one-dimensional, but I think the lack of there even being a
character representing the truck driver as making the film even *more*
intense.
I see The Hitcher (which I presume is what you mean when saying "The
Hitchhiker") as a poor-man's version of Duel, in a way. That said, I do
like the original version of The Hitcher quite a lot. I've not seen the
newer one (not on purpose, just haven't got around to it).
interesting character development. And Bad Taste, well, that really lived
up
to it's title.
Well: it was supposed to.
I don't know what to say about this one because it's a Kiwi film. I don't
mean "where the money came from", but it's *particularly Kiwi* in its
approach to itself, if that makes sense, and I'm a Kiwi who watched it
premiere at the New Zealand Film Festival in 1988 (it might have been the
main film on opening night... can't remember). To be honest, I don't know
how much of it would be lost one someone from abroad. I enjoyed it, but
then at that age (late teens) I was seeking out films like Return of the
Living Dead and Reanimator and such like, so it was a niche I was
interested in. I've seen it a couple of times since, and I still find it
"great Kiwi cinema", but not too sure about its merits beyond that.
If only Peter Jackson made more films like Heavenly Creatues or Forgotten
Silver. I thought the LotR stuff was a fascinating spectacle, but I
thought the "drama" was all a bit turgid... not helped by the script or
the
source material though. I enjoyed King Kong, I guess. I don't think it
took itself as seriously as LotR did.
Then of course, these guys make some excellent movies later
on.
I just looked through Spielberg's back catalogue, and I found it rather
hit
and miss. There are a few really good films in there - for me Jaws, RotLA
and Schindler's List stick out - but there's really a lot of also rans in
there. I suppose he should have points for ambition.
Martin Scorsese I think I relate to more as a director because his work
seems more gritty than Spielberg, which appeals to me. There's a lot of
movies there that I consider highly. Nothing I'd put in my top 100
though,
strangely enough. I'm weird in that I didn't like Raging Bull - at all -
which is quite a minority position, I imagine.
Peter Jackson has done some very big films recently, but he doesn't
deserve
(the measure being "history" and "volume") to be talked about in the same
conversation as the other two. That's not to denigrate him, you
understand. He's just not there yet.
exception I can think of, is Hitchcock, who seems to have started out
with a
bang in silent movies and just kept going, although he later on
occasionally
made a turkey or two as well.
I bought the Early Hitchcock Collection (http://tinyurl.com/63bf78) a
couple of months back, and have thusfar only watched The Ring. I've only
watched a few silent films (Metropolis and... err... I'm sure there's been
a couple of others...) and I was surprised to find it completely
accessible and really quite engaging. I've watched thirty-odd Hitchcocks,
and the only ones I've found a bit grim were Torn Curtain and Topaz. I've
really enjoyed the rest.
--
Adam |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Adam Cameron
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 3:05 am Post subject: Re: Crappy movies by great directors |
|
|
| Quote: | I am bit surprised, however, that no one has given Speilberg credit for his
landing scene in Saving Private Ryan.
|
Oh, I give him a lot of credit for it. It would rate - for me - as some of
the best war realisation committed to film (fictional ~).
And the last battle scene wasn't too bad either.
Pity about the two hours or so that separated the two, which were a bit
limp. I don't know if they would seem so limp if the opening wasn't so
good; but the opening *was* that good, so what followed was sub-par.
I have always wondered whether it would have been a better work if the
entire duration of the film was simply 2.5hrs of beach assault. People
would shy away thinking "well... that sux... no plot", but if the idea was
to demonstrate the intensity and relentlessness and grimness of The
Invasion, then it would probably be a reasonable way of doing it. I
imagine an awful lot of what those blokes went through seemed fairly light
on meaning ("plot") at the time.
--
Adam |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Okierazorbacker
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:05 am Post subject: Re: Crappy movies by great directors |
|
|
On Jul 15, 9:03 pm, william <williamahe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
That's why people bet on horses. To me, there's so many films to see
that limiting yourself to some supposed canon is absurd.
|
I agree 100% with this.
| Quote: | Some watch
films to be entertained or comforted and others to be challenged or
disturbed. I'm in the latter group until it gets to be too much and
then drop back to the former and on and on in ever widening gyres.
|
I'm not so much on "disturbed." There is a small handful of films
that I'll watch that fit that particular scenario, and some of them
are by Hitch!
| Quote: | These days while researching film noir I sometimes think, jeez,
louise, how many low-budget, badly-lit, over-wrought, B-films with
some twisted morality message do I have to watch before something
really worthwhile jumps out? And then something does.
|
This puts my entire recent movie-viewing experience into one
paragraph. Gene Kelly in "The Three Musketeers"? Well, duh, gee OK,
Wally, I'll give it a shot.....yuck, couldn't sit through an hour of
it. Oh well, something else is coming on later.
| Quote: | What is "if it
works"? How many bad girl redeemed or innocent man on the run films do
you have to see by the same director before it doesn't work? The first
"innocent man" flick was "The Lodger" and the first "bad girl" film
was "Number 17." For me, Hitch has two or three films worth seeing and
the great vast unseen is a far deeper lure than the same old tired
story with fake monuments and bad rear-projection and marionettes
spitting into space will ever be. There's too many other undiscovered
-- to me -- films sitting on a shelf to be bothered with even
considering watching another hatchet job by Hitchcock. Been there,
seen that and I'm done with it.
There. Hopefully you feel better now. That'll be $200 for the |
therapy session. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Magnus, Robot Fighter
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:06 am Post subject: Re: Crappy movies by great directors |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:05:50 +0100, Adam Cameron
<adam_junk@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | I am bit surprised, however, that no one has given Speilberg credit for his
landing scene in Saving Private Ryan.
Oh, I give him a lot of credit for it. It would rate - for me - as some of
the best war realisation committed to film (fictional ~).
And the last battle scene wasn't too bad either.
|
They were doing pretty well til Jerry brought up that anti-personnel
gun that chewed them up. And that knife fight was horrific. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
David Oberman
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:57 am Post subject: Re: Crappy movies by great directors |
|
|
schultr@mail.biu.ack.il (Richard Schultz) wrote:
| Quote: | : JAWS is the saltiest & one of the most suspenseful (& funniest)
: American movies I've ever seen.
And Robert Shaw wasn't swallowed whole, either. The blood that was coming
out of his mouth implied that his lungs were being chomped upon.
|
The Orca was tilting steeply at that point, & Shaw went sliding in.
The shark was probably as surprised as Shaw was. When a large chunk
comes sliding in to your mouth -- even if you're a great white shark
-- you're going to gag!
____
I will wage war against destiny!
-- Beethoven |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
