|
NeuroticErotica posted:We can't shoot what characters are thinking. Only FFD passes the screenwriter's test... drat, yet another rejection to add to my pile.
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2011 19:08
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 19:53 |
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:Howard Hughes really liked soap. He sort of invented Netflix On Demand too by buying his own Las Vegas TV station and then calling them up and making them play Ice Station Zebra whenever he felt like watching it again, which was quite often.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2011 14:30
|
|
|
feedmyleg posted:Ever since I heard this I've wondered: was it actually his favorite film or was it just some OCD reason he picked it? Is it actually a good movie? I really like Ice Station Zebra. It's a good spy thriller film elevated by a great cast (Rock Hudson, Patrick McGoohan, Ernest Borgnine -- I'd include Jim Brown too but he's barely in it). In some ways, it has a lot in common with The Thing in that it centers around an exclusively male cast put into a paranoia inducing situation and most of the movie takes place in ice and snow (*). Hudson considered it his favourite of his own films. Now all that considered, Hughes being obsessed with the film was probably his OCD. Themes of paranoia, isolation, and having a mysterious saboteur in your midst must have struck a chord in his head at that point in his life. Also, he was always a fan of planes and boats and other big military toys of which there are many in this film. I don't think he randomly chose it to obsess over at least. Is it a film that only appeals to crazy people though? Hardly. (*) I just checked the wikipedia page for the film and discovered that John Carpenter loves this film - go figure.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2011 15:41
|
|
|
Snak posted:Does anyone else really hate David Lynch and think his movies are complete pretentious poo poo? I would argue that they're not really pretentious at all because if they were, Lynch would give a poo poo if people didn't understand his films. He doesn't give a poo poo though. One of the reasons he's consistently interesting is probably because he isn't trying to meet anybody's particular expectation. Snak posted:I've heard that Twin Peaks is really good and still plan to watch it, but Mullholland Drive pretty much put me off David Lynch forever. That's too bad because not all of his films are like Mullholland Dr. Have you seen his more accessible films like Blue Velvet or even The Straight Story? Snak posted:I'm not too stupid to "get" him, i just think he sucks. Am I alone? Lynch isn't mainstream so there are plenty of people who hate him. Snak posted:And also, people who are fans of him, can you tell me what you like about him? - Lynch films make me think - most Lynch films are like cinematic puzzles (Mullholland Dr is probably the best example here) - Lynch's short films are just as engaging as his feature films without the necessary time investment (I love The Grandmother) - Lynch's films can normally be torn apart with meta-analysis - Lynch's films are fearless - Lynch's films are the scariest loving films I've ever seen because he scares my psyche instead of going for a jump scare or just a gross out - Eraserhead helped to define the arthouse midnight movie - Lynch is a cool guy in interviews - Lynch's influence has been enormous and he's inspired some incredible filmmakers (see - Guy Maddin) I could go on and on. Snak posted:This post may come off as a little confrontational, but I really just don't get it and need either confirmation or enlightenment. Sometimes you won't like stuff other people do. It's not a big deal. You might come back to Lynch in a few years and everything will click. Maybe not. Again, not a big deal.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2011 16:42
|
|
|
kapalama posted:That scene in Brown Bunny jumped out at me for being informed stylistically by random hardcore porn, rather than being anything about how real people interact sexually. I don't want to blow your mind or anything, but in real life people "interact sexually" in a whole bunch of different ways.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2011 23:32
|
|
|
csidle posted:If there is an older movie that you guys haven't seen, how would you decide which version to watch? I just do some research and go from there. I don't think there's a single better way to go. Some directors get their movies cut for a good reason and other times the studio butchers a perfectly good film. Apocalypse Now, for example, I would argue is actually better in the original theatrical cut. Redux is fine (great even) but it does really slow the film down.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2011 20:16
|
|
|
csidle posted:I've recently decided that any movie made 2010 and onwards I'll buy in Bluray. Are you aware that a movie made in the 1930s will probably look just as much better on BluRay over DVD than a movie made last year?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2011 22:40
|
|
|
csidle posted:Yes. What is your reasoning for only buying movies made after 2009 on BluRay? Is it just arbitrary? New format for new films?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2011 23:16
|
|
|
Mr. Banana Grabber posted:It's really pretentious to be speaking English and then drop into a French accent to sound smart, plus a convincing French accent is tough to boot. I'm calling bullshit on this. Where do you live where pronouncing French words properly is considered "pretentious"? If you're accusing people of speaking French "to sound smart" then can I accuse you back of butchering French words so you can sound stupid? It doesn't make sense. (if it matters at all, I speak both languages too) EDIT -- and I don't really mean in this a nasty way ... I feel bad for you if you're living somewhere where people have such a lovely attitude to languages that aren't English. If not, then gently caress this "am I being pretentious" poo poo, you speak both languages so make no concessions, man. InfiniteZero fucked around with this message at 17:38 on Mar 18, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2011 17:31
|
|
|
Mr. Banana Grabber posted:Plus (if you're American) don't you agree that French is up there on the pretentious language list. Nah, I'm Canadian and I've spent time in Montreal, Paris, and Bruges so French doesn't sound pretentious to me at all. Mr. Banana Grabber posted:Sorry for this enormous tangent. I just watched Manhattan a few nights ago and it was my first Woody Allen movie. I thought it was tremendous. Where should I go next? I'm assuming Annie Hall but I've heard there's two types of Woody Allen movies: the neurotic Jewish New Yorker films and the genre parodies. What's a good way to approach both of these? You're right -- Annie Hall should be next. I'd recommend Crimes and Misdemeanors after that. For the genre films, pick the ones that relate to what you like. Love and Death is great, but even better if you're aware of that kind of film. Sleeper is better if you're good with sci-fi, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2011 20:47
|
|
|
FitFortDanga posted:Guys, I just watched Analyze That and I don't understand why everyone is so gaga over this DeNiro guy. I hear you bro, DeNiro and that Harvey Keitel guy were the worst part of Little Fockers too. Have they ever really done anything interesting?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2011 17:51
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:I don't think my life is any less richer missing Divine eating poop. Female Trouble is way better anyway. If you only end up doing one early Waters film, that's where you should start. Also if you don't watch Eraserhead you're doing yourself a huge disservice!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2011 20:53
|
|
|
Rusty Shackelford posted:What was so special about Prizzi's Honor that it was nominated for so many awards? I just caught it for the first time on HBO and thought that it was pretty average. The IMDB users agree with me, because it has a 6.8 rating, yet it was up for Best Picture at the 1986 Academy Awards. What am I missing? Cocaine was cheap and popular in the 80s you see.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2011 21:13
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Romero should have taken a picture of the negative and mailed it to himself and put it in a vault. That would only help if the issue was a claim of authorship. Nobody claims that Romero didn't make NOTLD. The issue is over rights of distribution and that the film is public domain (or at least that's the issue for Romero). Romero ended up sort of cashing back in on NOTLD when he EP'ed the 1990 remake.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2011 19:54
|
|
|
morestuff posted:What are the essential De Palma movies? I've mostly just seen his bigger releases (Carrie, Blow Out, Scarface, The Untouchables, Mission: Impossible, Mission to Mars) and want to dip into his other stuff. Body Double is one of my personal favourites. It relentlessly plunders from Hitchcock, it is full of DePalma signatures (spinning cameras, escalators, surveillance, masks, random hookups) and it also features my favourite DePalma signature: it's willfully sleazy at times. C'mon, this film has a Frankie Goes To Hollywood sequence, what are you waiting for? Sisters is a must see because it sticks to the formula. It's also a straight up bizarre film but it has art film pretensions in a good way. I wish I could put to words why, but I feel a bit of Fassbinder in this film. The Fury is interesting because DePalma quotes from himself (what do you after making the definitive movie about telekinesis? If you're Brian DePalma, you make another movie about telekinesis!). It also has my favourite John Cassavettes scene ever at the end. Dressed To Kill is a no-brainer too. You can't really say you've seen DePalma's "bigger releases" unless you've seen this one. It's got the DePalma formula down pat (there's a great random hookup in this one), it pilfers from Hitchcock in a wonderful way and well ... it's got Michael Caine. DTK also has the best notice from an STD clinic ever put to film in it. Dark horse nomination: Femme Fatale is often maligned, but I enjoyed it, mostly because DePalma returned to his willfully sleazy style in it. If you watch it in the context of his other films, it's not nearly as bad as so many people say. AS Voodoofly suggests, it's wonderful batshit DePalma -- once you've developed a taste for that. NOTE: when I say that DePalma uses a formula I mean it in a great way, like a master chef who specializes in one style and does it better than any other. BONUS DEPALMA TRIVIA: DePalma very nearly directed Flashdance. I would love to see DePalma's Flashdance.  DePalma
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2012 22:24
|
|
|
penismightier posted:Okay here's a question the Prometheus thread made me think of: I agree that BWP probably marked the start of the modern approach since it benefited so much from internet hype. As for the WHY with sci-fi films, I think at least a part of it is because genre films rely so much on community word of mouth now and that community is so well connected. A good example that comes to mind is how a film can live and die by how well it tests at Comic-Con. Sci-Fi and Horror fans are really fickle, and winning them over with cool production design previews is a smart move. Back in the BWP days, you had to impress Harry Knowles (and he certainly helped BWP). Now you can play the field and impress a bunch of anonymous already excitable fans at a convention or film festival instead and generate the same kind of hype. I'm not saying that there's anything wrong about this either -- I just think maybe that's where it comes from now.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2012 22:19
|
|
|
In Evil Dead 2 the hand does give him the finger though.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2012 19:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 19:53 |
|
|
Yeah, I always thought you were supposed to apply dream logic to Lynch. You're not supposed to spend too much time figuring it out proper, at best you just guess at maybe what was represented or why you reacted to it the way you did. This makes the movies much more rewarding too because you're not wasting your time on trying to apply your own biases and rules to the logic of the films.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2014 22:28
|
|