|
Schweinhund posted:
Exactly! This is probably the best summation of how some current approaches to comedy strike me. Along with what cat doter included about editing, I think I can finally make sense of it. Again, I'm not at all saying I think these types of shows and films are "bad". I've laughed at a good amount of the stuff I've seen, but it was just so backwards compared to the humor in something like Ghostbusters (maybe not the best example) which seemed much more reactive and in the moment. Thanks everyone!
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2011 02:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 11:17 |
|
|
In Quantum of Solace, there's a scene where Leiter and his partner, Beam, are on a jet negotiating a deal with the villain, Greene. Greene shows the Americans a surveillance photo of Bond, who Leiter pretends not to recognize. Beam figures out who it is and it's made clear that Bond will be at odds with the C.I.A. My question is, why did Leiter even try to cover for Bond, and why did it work? Doesn't the C.I.A. know that Leiter cooperated with Bond at the Casino Royale operation? Bond explicitly made a deal to deliver Le Chiffre to the Americans. Beam should have taken one look at the photo and said "Look Felix, it's your buddy from Montenegro. We might have to take him out." Did I miss something?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2011 05:05
|
|
|
Rake Arms posted:In Quantum of Solace, there's a scene where Leiter and his partner, Beam, are on a jet negotiating a deal with the villain, Greene. Greene shows the Americans a surveillance photo of Bond, who Leiter pretends not to recognize. Beam figures out who it is and it's made clear that Bond will be at odds with the C.I.A. My question is, why did Leiter even try to cover for Bond, and why did it work? Doesn't the C.I.A. know that Leiter cooperated with Bond at the Casino Royale operation? Bond explicitly made a deal to deliver Le Chiffre to the Americans. Beam should have taken one look at the photo and said "Look Felix, it's your buddy from Montenegro. We might have to take him out." I think you're overthinking it. He's just looking out for his buddy. Although there's that bit later on where Beam asks Leiter "what did you tell him" and Leiter says "just what we agreed" and I'm not sure what context that was in.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2011 05:46
|
|
|
Rake Arms posted:Did I miss something? Probably not. Quantum of Solace is such a mess anyway. How they went from Casino Royale to this appears to be the high probability of a Bond movie being lovely to make up for the movie before it being good. (See: Goldeneye/Tomorrow Never Dies and The Living Daylights/Licence to Kill).
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2011 06:02
|
|
|
Encryptic posted:Probably not. Quantum of Solace is such a mess anyway. How they went from Casino Royale to this appears to be the high probability of a Bond movie being lovely to make up for the movie before it being good. (See: Goldeneye/Tomorrow Never Dies and The Living Daylights/Licence to Kill). I like Quantum of Solace, but it is pretty hard to follow on the first viewing. My overall impression of the movie is that there is a good story, it just takes far more scrutiny than it should to understand. I do hope Bond 23 simplifies things a bit, since there's a lot of genuine talent attached and I'd like to see a satisfying conclusion to the new
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2011 06:24
|
|
|
Rake Arms posted:I like Quantum of Solace, but it is pretty hard to follow on the first viewing. My overall impression of the movie is that there is a good story, it just takes far more scrutiny than it should to understand. I do hope Bond 23 simplifies things a bit, since there's a lot of genuine talent attached and I'd like to see a satisfying conclusion to the new QoS works a lot better if you watch it back to back with Casino Royale. I think it just needed another two or three passes on the script, which wasn't possible because of the writers' strike. This is me being charitable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2011 10:43
|
|
|
Rake Arms posted:In Quantum of Solace, there's a scene where Leiter and his partner, Beam, are on a jet negotiating a deal with the villain, Greene. Greene shows the Americans a surveillance photo of Bond, who Leiter pretends not to recognize. Beam figures out who it is and it's made clear that Bond will be at odds with the C.I.A. My question is, why did Leiter even try to cover for Bond, and why did it work? Doesn't the C.I.A. know that Leiter cooperated with Bond at the Casino Royale operation? Bond explicitly made a deal to deliver Le Chiffre to the Americans. Beam should have taken one look at the photo and said "Look Felix, it's your buddy from Montenegro. We might have to take him out." I think he was expecting Beam to cover for him as well only he sold him out immediately because he's so desperate to get a deal. Leiter's trying to keep secrets and be professional while Beam's trying to be more forthcoming and slimey. Szmitten fucked around with this message at 12:28 on Sep 27, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2011 12:25
|
|
|
I didn't like QoS, but something that stood out to me when I rewatched it recently is that it's drat good looking. The colors pop and the sets are all very interesting and well designed; that opera house in particular is gorgeous with that white color scheme. Whoever was in charge of all that did a great job.ServoMST3K posted:Exactly! This is probably the best summation of how some current approaches to comedy strike me. Along with what cat doter included about editing, I think I can finally make sense of it. Again, I'm not at all saying I think these types of shows and films are "bad". I've laughed at a good amount of the stuff I've seen, but it was just so backwards compared to the humor in something like Ghostbusters (maybe not the best example) which seemed much more reactive and in the moment. Thanks everyone! To clarify, are you talking about the acting, or the dialogue itself, or a combination? When I think of Ghostbusters I think of dialogue that's timed very naturally and also sounds like real things a group of old friends would say to each other.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2011 21:17
|
|
|
Most often it is the acting that gets to me, the dialogue doesn't matter quite as much. Even in some instances where the scripted line is reactive or an appropriate follow-up to something another character just said, the actual acting is so far off base that it seems jarring and sloppy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2011 01:59
|
|
|
Could you provide some specific examples of both? I'm intrigued by what you're talking about but don't think I quite follow.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2011 04:31
|
|
|
Szmitten posted:I think he was expecting Beam to cover for him as well only he sold him out immediately because he's so desperate to get a deal. Leiter's trying to keep secrets and be professional while Beam's trying to be more forthcoming and slimey. That makes more sense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2011 04:47
|
|
|
Rake Arms posted:I like Quantum of Solace, but it is pretty hard to follow on the first viewing. My overall impression of the movie is that there is a good story, it just takes far more scrutiny than it should to understand. I do hope Bond 23 simplifies things a bit, since there's a lot of genuine talent attached and I'd like to see a satisfying conclusion to the new I'd just hope we actually get another good Bond movie with Daniel Craig. He's too good as Bond (and a great actor in general) to waste on a lackluster followup to Casino Royale. If Bond 23 actually gets Sam Mendes on board for real, I'm a lot more hopeful for it not sucking.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2011 05:45
|
|
|
Bobfromsales posted:Could you provide some specific examples of both? I'm intrigued by what you're talking about but don't think I quite follow. I don't have a specific scene or episode or anything in mind. Part of the problem with this approach to humor I've been trying to flesh out is how so much of a given episode or film blends together and lacks distinction. Like Schweinhund pointed out, since few people want to be the "butt" or the straight man nowadays, I'm often left wondering where a bit or a joke actually finds resolution. Again, this isn't a bad thing necessarily, I just don't think I'm programmed to really appreciate a lot of the newer comedy offerings. I'll keep my eyes peeled and if I see anything that really illustrates my point I'll be sure to post it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2011 05:59
|
|
|
Encryptic posted:I'd just hope we actually get another good Bond movie with Daniel Craig. He's too good as Bond (and a great actor in general) to waste on a lackluster followup to Casino Royale. If Bond 23 actually gets Sam Mendes on board for real, I'm a lot more hopeful for it not sucking. I'm pretty sure he's officially on board. It starts shooting pretty soon, and it's already leaked out that the plot will center on railways or something like that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2011 06:15
|
|
|
ServoMST3K posted:I'll keep my eyes peeled and if I see anything that really illustrates my point I'll be sure to post it. It's not a particularly good film---I wouldn't recommend it, although I'm reasonably fond of the other films in the series---but that one scene really highlights the difference between the old guard style of comedy, with a visibly ageing Hope and Crosby nonplussed and completely failing to connect with a young Sellers, who's doing something completely different. Anyway, I can't think of any single scene elsewhere that (without making an overt point of it) illustrates the distinction you're making better. Fake edit: Here's the scene on youtube. It really stands out more in the context of the rest of the film and series, but I'm not going to suggest you sit down and watch the whole thing just to see my observation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2011 06:28
|
|
|
Wow, Sellers is amazing in that short bit. Completely steals the scene from Hope and Crosby.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2011 06:57
|
|
|
Thanks SubG, I'll look into that flick. Your recommendation is putting this phenomenon into historical context for me, I appreciate it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2011 23:37
|
|
|
ServoMST3K posted:Thanks SubG, I'll look into that flick. Your recommendation is putting this phenomenon into historical context for me, I appreciate it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2011 00:12
|
|
|
SubG posted:I want to clarify that I'm not recommending The Road to Hong Kong. The Hope/Crosby Road to... films in general are worth a look if you're into that kind of comedy, but Hong Kong is definitely the weakest of the series. I think that one scene is the most memorable thing about the film. Gotcha, I'll look into the other entries in the series. The contrast between Hope/Crosby and Sellers in that clip is definitely apparent. When do you think the intense, invested style of Sellers really took off? Would you say right around the time that last Road to... film came out? Or do you think Sellers was ahead of his time?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2011 00:38
|
|
|
ServoMST3K posted:Gotcha, I'll look into the other entries in the series. The contrast between Hope/Crosby and Sellers in that clip is definitely apparent. When do you think the intense, invested style of Sellers really took off? Would you say right around the time that last Road to... film came out? Or do you think Sellers was ahead of his time? A lot of Sellers' memorable roles---Clouseau in the Pink Panther films, Mandrake, Muffley, and Strangelove in Dr. Strangelove (1964)---were probably what you'd call ahead of their time. It wasn't until the late '60s, with films like The Party (1968), I Love You, Alice B. Toklas! (1968), and The Magic Christian (1969) that Sellers' work really started intersecting pop culture. And really in those examples vice versa, which I think hurts them slightly. Sellers Dr. Strangelove doesn't feel dated at all, and later Sellers in Being There (1979) is striking even today. But a lot of those late '60s Sellers roles are embedded firmly in their historical moment. `I've got pot, I've got acid, I've got LSD cubes. I'm probably the hippest guy around here. I'm so hip it hurts!' And it does.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2011 01:05
|
|
|
Haha, great. Thanks for the input. That's a good point about Monty Python and the other emerging comedy programs. I'm going to see if I can find anything from the Goon Show, I haven't heard too much about it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2011 01:28
|
|
|
ServoMST3K posted:Haha, great. Thanks for the input. That's a good point about Monty Python and the other emerging comedy programs. I'm going to see if I can find anything from the Goon Show, I haven't heard too much about it. If you're particularly interested in tipping points in comedy, The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour is particularly interesting. It starts out as a slightly self-consciously `hip' variety show---you know how it feels when the mainstream tries to co-op a popular fringe culture?---but morphed into this legitimately subversive (for the time) programme...at which point it was cancelled. Looking back on it, it's really tame stuff compared to what you would expect something like SNL to do with the participation of the people being mocked (like Tina Fey's portrayal of Sarah Palin), which kinda highlights the fact that it was such a tipping point---the material considered too controversial beforehand is so tame it looks almost quaint today.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2011 01:47
|
|
|
ServoMST3K posted:Haha, great. Thanks for the input. That's a good point about Monty Python and the other emerging comedy programs. I'm going to see if I can find anything from the Goon Show, I haven't heard too much about it. They usually rebroadcast them on BBC 4 and put them up on the iPlayer for a week after so you can catch a few there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2011 10:00
|
|
|
The Goon Show is absolutely brilliant.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2011 11:58
|
|
|
ServoMST3K posted:Haha, great. Thanks for the input. That's a good point about Monty Python and the other emerging comedy programs. I'm going to see if I can find anything from the Goon Show, I haven't heard too much about it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2011 16:36
|
|
|
Does anybody know if there's a handy list for things on netflix streaming that aren't available on dvd?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2011 21:30
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:Does anybody know if there's a handy list for things on netflix streaming that aren't available on dvd? I've been looking for something like this too. For some reason the "recommended for you" stuff seems to leave out a ton. Like even if you're browsing the documentaries section and it breaks them down into subgenres it seems to leave out some and recommend some lovely ones. I've been trying to find articles and stuff for "stuff you should see that's on netflix". Edit: Ok jumped the gun and didn't entirely read what you said, but my question stands. Why are some things on netflix hard to find unless you search for them explicitly. Are there any good articles about what you should catch on netflix?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2011 21:49
|
|
|
What is the name of this song from The Royal Tenenbaums (41 seconds in) and Man on Wire (at 1:30)? For some reason, Youtube won't load any comments at the moment so if it says what the song is, I apologize.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2011 00:10
|
|
|
Palmtree Panic posted:What is the name of this song from The Royal Tenenbaums (41 seconds in) and Man on Wire (at 1:30)? It totally did, Erik Satie - Gymnopédie No.1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-Xm7s9eGxU
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2011 00:13
|
|
|
Lao Tsu posted:I've been looking for something like this too. For some reason the "recommended for you" stuff seems to leave out a ton. Like even if you're browsing the documentaries section and it breaks them down into subgenres it seems to leave out some and recommend some lovely ones. I've been trying to find articles and stuff for "stuff you should see that's on netflix". There's this database, which is better than what netflix itself provides although it might not satisfy your needs: http://instantwatcher.com/ The most useful part is probably the list of movies about to expire.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2011 04:00
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:There's this database, which is better than what netflix itself provides although it might not satisfy your needs: http://instantwatcher.com/ That's fantastic, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2011 04:55
|
|
|
For the record, this question is not inspired by the fact that a guy named ServoMST3K posted: I've been watching more than my share of MST3K episodes, and it struck me how wrong some of the Super Future science-fiction movies got things. But that's not a question for this thread: Is it a bias on my part, or is modern science fiction (and their audiences) expecting movies to be outclassed by the Real World for more than in days past?. 50s era science fiction seems so earnest with their Ray Guns, Martians, and Flying Saucers Are Really The Future! motif? Would people here say thats true? If so, when would you say this shift happened? MisterBibs fucked around with this message at 05:13 on Sep 30, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2011 05:09
|
|
|
Probably some time during the 70s when the "future" turned out to be shag carpeting, oil shortages, and bulky station wagons.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2011 06:55
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Is it a bias on my part, or is modern science fiction (and their audiences) expecting movies to be outclassed by the Real World for more than in days past?. 50s era science fiction seems so earnest with their Ray Guns, Martians, and Flying Saucers Are Really The Future! motif? Would people here say thats true? If so, when would you say this shift happened? Edit: And I think this applies to more than just strictly science fiction visions of the future. The alien invasion scenarios in District 9 (2009), Battle Los Angeles (2011), Skyline (2010), and so on look as distinctively of their era---in terms of visual aesthetics, creature design, alien technologies, and so on---as any creature flick from the '50s. And I think the Star Wars prequel trilogy already looks stereotypically like an early 2000s render farm film (and I know that the first of them was actually released in 1999). I think by and large the science fiction futures that don't look that dated today---like the ones in Ridley Scott's early science fiction films---have aged so well because they're intentionally modelled after contemporary locations and environments, and generally the alien/futuristic/speculative elements are only included as demanded by the narrative. This is more or less exactly the opposite philosophy adopted by for example Lucas, who appears to be constantly looking for any square mm of negative that he can doodle more effects into. Not directly related to that: not counting things like Blow-Up (1966) or The Conversation (1974), what's the first instance of an `enhance! enhance! enhance!' sequence like in Blade Runner (1982)? If that wasn't so goddamn common today, it might look more dated than it does. SubG fucked around with this message at 08:56 on Sep 30, 2011 |
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2011 08:29
|
|
|
What are some action movies where the hero isn't physically injured once in the entire movie? Steven Seagal's Fire Down Below is probably the best example of this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2011 09:23
|
|
|
I don't remember the hero ever being injured in Equilibrium.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2011 09:37
|
|
|
I thought it was most action movies before Die Hard - wasn't that one of the reasons it was such a breath of fresh air? Arnie comes out of most of his movies without much more than a scratch on him.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2011 10:32
|
|
|
FreakyZoid posted:I thought it was most action movies before Die Hard - wasn't that one of the reasons it was such a breath of fresh air? Arnie comes out of most of his movies without much more than a scratch on him. He gets his rear end whooped in Predator and looks like he never wants to soldier again by the end. One year before Die Hard!
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2011 10:51
|
|
|
codyclarke posted:What are some action movies where the hero isn't physically injured once in the entire movie? Steven Seagal's Fire Down Below is probably the best example of this. If we're counting Superman, he certainly didn't get injured physically in the first movie that I recall. (II is debatable, I suppose and Returns had him get stabbed with kryptonite) The original Burton Batman I suppose would be a better example - Batman only really gets visibly "injured" once (when he gets shot while wearing body armor).
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2011 12:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 11:17 |
|
|
Encryptic posted:The original Burton Batman I suppose would be a better example - Batman only really gets visibly "injured" once (when he gets shot while wearing body armor). He looks pretty messed up after the Batwing crashes. I think there was some blood. What about James Bond? What's the worst thing that ever happened to him?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2011 13:46
|
|
