|
|
#71
08-02-2006, 05:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: The \"Do I Need to See This Movie\" Thread
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.
|
|
#72
08-02-2006, 05:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The \"Do I Need to See This Movie\" Thread
Off the top of my head...
Full Metal Jacket Hamburger Hill Requiem for a Dream
|
|
#73
08-02-2006, 05:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The \"Do I Need to See This Movie\" Thread
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Adaptation. [/ QUOTE ] Absolutely, this is a brilliant and completely original idea (try to argue otherwise!) for a movie. The main criticism I've read is that it degenerates into formulaic nonsense at the end. But if you believe that, you missed the point. [/ QUOTE ] Worth watching, but I hated, hated, hated the movie. But most people aren't going to have read "Story: Substance, Structure, Style and The Principles of Screenwriting" by Robert McKee, so you won't realize the screenwriter is insulting you. If you don't realize Charlie Kaufman thinks the average filmgoer, including you, is a moron, then I suppose it's enjoyable. [/ QUOTE ] I do realize that Kaufman thinks that, and that makes it all the funnier. I'm sorry it didn't work for you. [/ QUOTE ] Congrats on being one of the few who gets this. Call me strange, but being called an idiot, no matter how subtle, has always struck me as insulting, not funny. Kaufman has talent, but is too clever by half.
|
|
#74
08-02-2006, 05:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The \"Do I Need to See This Movie\" Thread
[ QUOTE ]
Off the top of my head... Full Metal Jacket Hamburger Hill Requiem for a Dream [/ QUOTE ] starts chanting, "ASS 2 ASS! ASS 2 ASS!" yeah Requiem of a Dream, is a MUST SEE, in fact go rent it right now. It will make you not want to be a crack head.
|
|
#75
08-02-2006, 05:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The \"Do I Need to See This Movie\" Thread
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Adaptation. [/ QUOTE ] Absolutely, this is a brilliant and completely original idea (try to argue otherwise!) for a movie. The main criticism I've read is that it degenerates into formulaic nonsense at the end. But if you believe that, you missed the point. [/ QUOTE ] Worth watching, but I hated, hated, hated the movie. But most people aren't going to have read "Story: Substance, Structure, Style and The Principles of Screenwriting" by Robert McKee, so you won't realize the screenwriter is insulting you. If you don't realize Charlie Kaufman thinks the average filmgoer, including you, is a moron, then I suppose it's enjoyable. [/ QUOTE ] I do realize that Kaufman thinks that, and that makes it all the funnier. I'm sorry it didn't work for you. [/ QUOTE ] Congrats on being one of the few who gets this. Call me strange, but being called an idiot, no matter how subtle, has always struck me as insulting, not funny. Kaufman has talent, but is too clever by half. [/ QUOTE ] Well, wait a minute. Explain to me how he's calling everyone an idiot (I'm called one on a daily basis, btw). I know it sounds a bit pretentious to claim that I got his joke when so many others didn't, but surely Kaufman must expect a certain percentage of his viewers to understand what he's doing. Otherwise, he'd be making the movie for himself only, and what fun would that be? Edit: I believe Kaufman is insulting mainstream Hollywood filmmakers and cookie-cutter plots, not those who watched Adaptation (except for those folks who actually want your run-of-the-mill Hollywood blockbuster).
|
|
#76
08-02-2006, 05:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The \"Do I Need to See This Movie\" Thread
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Worth watching, but I hated, hated, hated the movie. But most people aren't going to have read "Story: Substance, Structure, Style and The Principles of Screenwriting" by Robert McKee, so you won't realize the screenwriter is insulting you. If you don't realize Charlie Kaufman thinks the average filmgoer, including you, is a moron, then I suppose it's enjoyable. [/ QUOTE ] did you explain this the last time i asked you? you don't actually summarize how kaufman is insulting us every time you raise the subject. [/ QUOTE ] Last time the thread ended before I could answer you, so I still do owe you an explanation. I'll need to pull the book out to answer you exactly, but to summarize, McKee's theory is that screenwriters should look to past great movies to see how they are stuctured because most screenwriters don't have the ability to come up anything truly original. According to McKee, if screenwriters would just stick to the formula, they would make better movies most of the time. Now, of course this means that "great art" won't be created, but most movies are not "great art", they're mass entertainment, which is exactly where formula should be used. Kaufman, one of the most talented screenwriters in Hollywood, takes McKee's work as a cheapening of the screenwriters art, which it is, but most screenwriters don't have Kaufman's talent. Even McKee will admit that truly talented screenwriters can depart from the norm, it's just that most screenwriters don't have that talent. Now, McKee's course is very popular in Hollywood and he's widely admired. Kaufman, IMO, takes offense at this and thinks this sinks to the audience's level, and rather than screenwriters puting out "art", they follow McKee and put out schlock that the public demands. He mistakes McKee for the cause rather than the solution, and thinks that what McKee is saying is copy successful movies rather than learn from them. So, we get to Adaptation, where Kaufman takes McKee's theory, stands it on it's head, and uses it to make a bad movie within a movie, because "this is what the public wants". It's Kaufman thumbing his nose at the audience, saying you want a bad movie, I'll give you a bad movie, but I'll make you think it's very clever, all while really despising you and your taste for schlock.
|
|
#77
08-02-2006, 05:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The \"Do I Need to See This Movie\" Thread
FMJ- Absolutely. Definitely rent it ASAP.
RFAD- Yes. Powerful movie, a little on the gross side but it's something I think everyone should see.
|
|
#79
08-02-2006, 06:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The \"Do I Need to See This Movie\" Thread
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Blade Runner. [/ QUOTE ] A ton of people here are going to tell you it's the most amazing movie ever. I saw it recently, and I disagree. If you like your sci-fi movies slow and boring, heavy on melodrama and light on special effects and action, then it's for you, but it just wasn't what I was looking for. I still say it's a must see, just for the influence it had on the genre, and on science fiction in general. It's also really well directed and acted, and there are a couple of great scenes in there. I can see why film lovers like it, I just don't think it's the average film-goer's movie. I probably would have loved it if I was born in the 70's. Edit: something tells me I'm going to hate Metropolis. [/ QUOTE ] I can absolutely see how some people will find this movie boring. It's certainly not action-packed. And there aren't any amazing special effects, per se. But I think the sets, the backdrops, all the varied and weird people jammed in elbow to elbow in this world make the movie visually amazing. I'm afraid I can't do it justice with my description, of course. I agree that it's not an "average film-goer" type movie, but somehow I thought you weren't looking for those types anyway in this thread. And I was born in the 70s. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
|
|
#80
08-02-2006, 06:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The \"Do I Need to See This Movie\" Thread
thanks for the detailed explanation!
the "implementation" of his beliefs in adaptation doesn't insult me. i could see his perspective as snide though. top athletes can have trouble coaching for sort of similar reasons - they tell you to just swing the bat at the ball and hit a home run. for people that aren't them, it's not that simple.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
