Due to some recent posts on the other movie thread, thought this would be fun....here is one that should kick it off nicely:
(http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/MG/396939~Rocky-IV-Posters.jpg)
As soon as seen the gloves exploding as they hit (see below) in the opening credits I knew I was in trouble.
(http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:FJzw8zGlkTpH8M:http://www.totalrocky.com/multimedia/wallpaper/gloves_800.jpg)
Quote from: Bogey on October 12, 2007, 03:13:27 PM
Due to some recent posts on the other movie thread, thought this would be fun....here is one that should kick it off nicely:
(http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/MG/396939~Rocky-IV-Posters.jpg)
As soon as seen the gloves exploding as they hit (see below) in the opening credits I knew I was in trouble.
(http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:FJzw8zGlkTpH8M:http://www.totalrocky.com/multimedia/wallpaper/gloves_800.jpg)
That was pretty bad. But I loved "
Rocky Balboa" (the movie) and the first 3 in the series.
The "
Celestine Prophecy" is one of the worse movies I've ever seen. Some preposterous hocus pocus junk. By the time the lead character spouted "It's a new step in evolution!" both my girl and I simultaneously burst out "SHUT UP!".
Independence Day. God that was awful. The whole climax of the story relies on the insame assumption that aliens from another planet use AppleTalk.
Quote from: hornteacher on October 12, 2007, 03:21:31 PM
Independence Day. God that was awful. The whole climax of the story relies on the insame assumption that aliens from another planet use AppleTalk.
lol
Quote from: hornteacher on October 12, 2007, 03:21:31 PM
Independence Day. God that was awful. The whole climax of the story relies on the insame assumption that aliens from another planet use AppleTalk.
I also really liked Bill Pullman's repeated "Jeezuss!"
Quote from: Corey on October 12, 2007, 04:06:12 PM
I also really liked Bill Pullman's repeated "Jeezuss!"
<Cringe>
Quote from: Corey on October 12, 2007, 04:06:12 PM
I also really liked Bill Pullman's repeated "Jeezuss!"
Wasn't that the entire script?
Quote from: Haffner on October 12, 2007, 04:11:13 PM
Wasn't that the entire script?
No, it's missing a "Sunzabitches".
As for me, I say Fassbinder's
Chinese Roulette.
By the time it got to the deaf woman dancing with crutches to Kraftwerk, I had given up all hope of the movie redeeming itself.
Troy was pretty hilarious. The entire cinema cracked up every time Brad Pitt took his gear off.
But I'm not sure whether that film wanted you to take it seriously though ??? ;D.
Perhaps I misunderstand, Bill. From the thread title, I expected a thread devoted to movies that want you to take them seriously, but are too ludicrous to regard as anything but a joke--movies like Titanic or Fahrenheit 911, that insult the viewer's intelligence when they ask to be taken seriously.
Granted, I didn't see Rocky IV, but did see Independence Day and certainly nothing about that suggests it's meant to be anything other than a hokey sci-fi/disaster flick!
Quote from: longears on October 12, 2007, 05:01:22 PM
Perhaps I misunderstand, Bill. From the thread title, I expected a thread devoted to movies that want you to take them seriously, but are too ludicrous to regard as anything but a joke--movies like Titanic or Fahrenheit 911, that insult the viewer's intelligence when they ask to be taken seriously.
Granted, I didn't see Rocky IV, but did see Independence Day and certainly nothing about that suggests it's meant to be anything other than a hokey sci-fi/disaster flick!
Yeah I thought that Independence Day was a tongue-in-cheek comedy. :)
Of course I mean has comedic elements.
Quote from: longears on October 12, 2007, 05:01:22 PM
Perhaps I misunderstand, Bill. From the thread title, I expected a thread devoted to movies that want you to take them seriously, but are too ludicrous to regard as anything but a joke--movies like Titanic or Fahrenheit 911, that insult the viewer's intelligence when they ask to be taken seriously.
Granted, I didn't see Rocky IV, but did see Independence Day and certainly nothing about that suggests it's meant to be anything other than a hokey sci-fi/disaster flick!
Don't you take Kate Winslett's Babylons seriously?
Gone with The Wind
Flame me if you like, but for me, this movie is a huge snooze-fest. AND I find that I can muster ZERO sympathy for Scarlett O'Hara! I have sympathy for all the soldiers who died and were injured in that horrible war, for their wives, for all the slaves who were owned by people like Ms. O'Hara, and even the men who had to put up with her (Rhett Butler, Ashley, etc.). But I find her a spoiled, whiny, self-absorbed bore.
Oh yeah,
STAR WARS (All of 'em, especially the "prequels")
Quote from: XB-70 Valkyrie on October 12, 2007, 09:36:45 PM
Oh yeah,
STAR WARS (All of 'em, especially the "prequels")
Actually, even while being a rather commited Star Wars fan (though not more than I am a Tolkien fan), I can assure you that they were not initially meant to be taken all that seriously, either.
And even the "prequel" trilogy, which is on a more "serious" note, is deliberately "cheesy": as per George Lucas' own words! It's just the man's idiom, I suppose. But I still think it works. :)
'contact' (carl sagan) - deliver me, it think's it is serious.
'phenomenon' (travolta) - gag a maggot.
'kramer vs. kramer' - chuckle, chuckle...so hard to sit through. i won't do that again.
dj
Quote from: XB-70 Valkyrie on October 12, 2007, 09:34:00 PM
Gone with The Wind
Flame me if you like, but for me, this movie is a huge snooze-fest. AND I find that I can muster ZERO sympathy for Scarlett O'Hara! I have sympathy for all the soldiers who died and were injured in that horrible war, for their wives, for all the slaves who were owned by people like Ms. O'Hara, and even the men who had to put up with her (Rhett Butler, Ashley, etc.). But I find her a spoiled, whiny, self-absorbed bore.
I wouldn't say she's a bore, but her character is supposed to be spoiled and whiny. That's part of the point.
I name
Pearl Harbor. ;D
Quote from: XB-70 Valkyrie on October 12, 2007, 09:36:45 PM
STAR WARS (All of 'em, especially the "prequels")
Star Wars is fantasy adventure. I am huge SW fan myself and consider the saga (all 6 movies) the best there is. People who whine about the prequels do not understand anything about Lucas' art.
Quote from: 71 dB on October 13, 2007, 03:05:16 AM
I name Pearl Harbor. ;D
Star Wars is fantasy adventure. I am huge SW fan myself and consider the saga (all 6 movies) the best there is. People who whine about the prequels do not understand anything about Lucas' art.
I'm a great Star Wars fan as well, however I find the notion that SW somehow constitutes "art" completely ludicrous. Frankly, I think that delusion to be one of the reasons the prequels came out worse than the original trilogy.
Quote from: Daidalos on October 13, 2007, 03:14:02 AM
I'm a great Star Wars fan as well, however I find the notion that SW somehow constitutes "art" completely ludicrous. Frankly, I think that delusion to be one of the reasons the prequels came out worse than the original trilogy.
I'm not sure as to the "completely ludicrous" designation, In reference to the original SW and Empire Strikes Back... I'm not sure as to the "completely ludicrous" designation. Both were cowboys-in-space epics, and I feel that the heroic portrayals of several of the characters were done quite well. I guess if a person considered cowboy movies to be a form of "Art" (I'd readily contend that the "
Unforgiven" was, for example) then he or she would classify the early SWs as such also.
In regard to the 3rd SW installment and the prequels, I have to side with
Daidalos. The heroic aspect of the first two films seems way too pre-packaged to me at least...I guess that goes for the entire latter franchise as well.
Quote from: Daidalos on October 13, 2007, 03:14:02 AM
I'm a great Star Wars fan as well, however I find the notion that SW somehow constitutes "art" completely ludicrous. Frankly, I think that delusion to be one of the reasons the prequels came out worse than the original trilogy.
Completely ludicrous? ???
Have you any idea how much concept art just one Star Wars movie takes? Just all the costumes the characters wear take thousands of sketches. The characters, ships, buildings, planets, weapons, look of visual effects... that's a HUGE amount of concept art made by talented REAL artists. That's the visuals. Sound is half of movie experience according to Lucas. Ben Burt made fantastic job to create the sounds for everything that was drafted by the artists. John Williams added his wonderful scores and all the visual and sonic elements where carefully mixed together. The amount of art in a Star Wars movie is stunning.
The prequel trilogy is not any worse. My ranking of all 6 episodes is:
1. Episode III
2. Episode V
3. Episode II
4. Episode VI
5. Episode IV
6. Episode I
Quote from: 71 dB on October 13, 2007, 03:46:19 AM
Completely ludicrous? ???
Have you any idea how much concept art just one Star Wars movie takes? Just all the costumes the characters wear take thousands of sketches. The characters, ships, buildings, planets, weapons, look visual effects... that's a HUGE amount of concept art made by talented REAL artists. That's the visuals. Sound is half of movie experience according to Lucas. Ben Burt made fantastic job to create the sounds for everything that was drafted by the artists. John Williams added his wonderful scores and all the visual and sonic elements where carefully mixed together. The amount of art in a Star Wars movie is stunning.
The prequel trilogy is not any worse. My ranking of all 6 episodes is:
1. Episode III
2. Episode V
3. Episode II
4. Episode VI
5. Episode IV
6. Episode I
Hey, you
like them, and that of course is just fine :). Maybe I'm just a jaded, middle-aged dude whom has trouble identifying with most "modern" movies.
Quote from: Haffner on October 13, 2007, 03:48:09 AM
Hey, you like them, and that of course is just fine :). Maybe I'm just a jaded, middle-aged dude whom has trouble identifying with most "modern" movies.
Modern movies? I don't care if the movie is new or old as long as it is good. Most new movies (at least from Hollywood) are utter crap made to cash in teenagers. So, I have the same problem you do. Lucas is not a Hollywood moviemaker. He hates Hollywood. He finances his movies from his own pocket in order to have total artistic freedom. Lucas is an independent moviemaker. His movies are just huge in scale (due to amazing imagination) and expensive. Lucas supports independent moviemaking and talks for low budget movies where artistical compromises are not necessory. His lifelong efforts for advancing technology of moviemaking is reducing the costs. New digital technology makes it possible to make low-budget movies with minimal artistic compromises. Lucas says it's better to make 50 independent movies with $4 million each than one blockbuster with $200 million. The new Star Wars movies cost "only" $125 million each which isn't much considering their overwhelming complexity.
Modern does not always mean worse. Future means better possibilities. Lucas is an old-fashioned moviemaker (just watch his style of directing and storytelling. No fast MTV cuts, no "cool" bullet-time effects. He knows what's superficial and what's not). He just uses cutting-edge technology because he is a visionary genius.
Quote from: 71 dB on October 13, 2007, 04:17:00 AM
Modern movies? I don't care if the movie is new or old as long as it is good. Most new movies (at least from Hollywood) are utter crap made to cash in teenagers. So, I have the same problem you do. Lucas is not a Hollywood moviemaker. He hates Hollywood. He finances his movies from his own pocket in order to have total artistic freedom. Lucas is an independent moviemaker. His movies are just huge in scale (due to amazing imagination) and expensive. Lucas supports independent moviemaking and talks for low budget movies where artistical compromises are not necessory. His lifelong efforts for advancing technology of moviemaking is reducing the costs. New digital technology makes it possible to make low-budget movies with minimal artistic compromises. Lucas says it's better to make 50 independent movies with $4 million each than one blockbuster with $200 million. The new Star Wars movies cost "only" $125 million each which isn't much considering their overwhelming complexity.
Modern does not always mean worse. Future means better possibilities. Lucas is an old-fashioned moviemaker (just watch his style of directing and storytelling. No fast MTV cuts, no "cool" bullet-time effects. He knows what's superficial and what's not). He just uses cutting-edge technology because he is a visionary genius.
These are some really interesting points, Poju. I guess I kind of gave up when I say (and really disliked) "Return of the Jedi". Shame on me.
Quote from: Renfield on October 12, 2007, 11:57:50 PM
Actually, even while being a rather commited Star Wars fan (though not more than I am a Tolkien fan), I can assure you that they were not initially meant to be taken all that seriously, either.
And even the "prequel" trilogy, which is on a more "serious" note, is deliberately "cheesy": as per George Lucas' own words! It's just the man's idiom, I suppose. But I still think it works. :)
Exactly. He wanted to create something in the tradition of the 50s space operas like Flash Gordon, something that your diehard SW fan would be loath to admit nowadays, considering what the franchise has ballooned to.
As much as I love them, it's really B-movie material, but excellently executed — that's what separates it from other cheesy sci-fi flicks.
Is it art? That depends on your own definition of what art is. For me, it isn't.
Kevin Costner's body of work comes to mind.
Allan
Quote from: Haffner on October 13, 2007, 04:39:50 AM
These are some really interesting points, Poju. I guess I kind of gave up when I say (and really disliked) "Return of the Jedi". Shame on me.
Nah...it was a big disappointment after the first two, which were a lot of fun: old movie serials with more sophisticated special effects. But then Lucas lost his way--amazing how often extreme worldly success does that to people [insert wry emoticon here].
I do agree with Pojo about
Pearl Harbor--in fact,
almost anything with Afleck. The kids rented it and I sat through about 40 minutes, but not even Kate Beckinsale's beauty was enough to keep me watching. I told them to see
Tora Tora Tora if they wanted a good dramatization, or
From Here to Eternity if they wanted a Hollywood drama set against that backdrop. Crap like
Pearl Harbor is to movies what
Kenny G is to jazz.
Quote from: longears on October 13, 2007, 04:57:24 AM
I do agree with Pojo about Pearl Harbor--in fact, almost anything with Afleck.
Did you see Hollywoodland? He wasn't bad in that. I didn't think he could pull it off, but he sort of did.
Quote from: longears on October 12, 2007, 05:01:22 PM
Perhaps I misunderstand, Bill. From the thread title, I expected a thread devoted to movies that want you to take them seriously, but are too ludicrous to regard as anything but a joke--movies like Titanic or Fahrenheit 911, that insult the viewer's intelligence when they ask to be taken seriously.
Granted, I didn't see Rocky IV, but did see Independence Day and certainly nothing about that suggests it's meant to be anything other than a hokey sci-fi/disaster flick!
Yup, this is what I am looking for David....movies that "believe" they are sending civilization a "message" that will inspire or change our thinking when in fact, in the end, they are actually deliver pretentious "crapola" that makes us just shake our heads muttering "what the....", or in some cases making us laugh out loud because in the end they crossed into the realm of "comical genius" without even realizing it.
Quote from: david johnson on October 13, 2007, 12:37:05 AM
'contact' (carl sagan) - deliver me, it think's it is serious.
Great call.
Quote from: Corey on October 13, 2007, 04:51:16 AM
Is it art? That depends on your own definition of what art is. For me, it isn't.
If Star Wars is not art I don't know what is. Don't be fooled by the entertaining side of the movies. Lucas is a genius of combining art with entertainment. I'm sure all the artists working hard for Lucas would laugh hysterically hearing claims that Star Wars is not art. It's like saying Beethoven's 5th piano concerto is not music. Creativity is crucial part of art. George Lucas created planets, ecosystems, cultures, speces, etc. Who has created as much?
Quote from: longears on October 13, 2007, 04:57:24 AM
But then Lucas lost his way
He didn't loss anything. The world became cynical and unable to apprecite his art.
Quote from: Haffner on October 13, 2007, 04:39:50 AM
These are some really interesting points, Poju. I guess I kind of gave up when I say (and really disliked) "Return of the Jedi". Shame on me.
Dude, that movie came out 1983. There's 3 new movies now for you to "really dislike". I'm sorry you can't enjoy these awesome movies.
Quote from: 71 dB on October 13, 2007, 06:37:49 AM
Lucas is a genius of combining art with entertainment.
As long as Lucas is not be allowed to be within 10 miles of any of the actors, let alone actually sitting in the director's chair, I have no problem with his genius. ;D
Quote from: 71 dB on October 13, 2007, 03:46:19 AM
Completely ludicrous? ???
Have you any idea how much concept art just one Star Wars movie takes? Just all the costumes the characters wear take thousands of sketches. The characters, ships, buildings, planets, weapons, look of visual effects... that's a HUGE amount of concept art made by talented REAL artists. That's the visuals. Sound is half of movie experience according to Lucas. Ben Burt made fantastic job to create the sounds for everything that was drafted by the artists. John Williams added his wonderful scores and all the visual and sonic elements where carefully mixed together. The amount of art in a Star Wars movie is stunning.
The prequel trilogy is not any worse. My ranking of all 6 episodes is:
1. Episode III
2. Episode V
3. Episode II
4. Episode VI
5. Episode IV
6. Episode I
As far as I'm concerned, Lucas dropped the ball very early in the game. The saga became extremely simplistic after Episode V. Recall in the original movie when a point was made regarding faith and disbelief in the Force, as a metaphor for religion. As far as most people in the galaxy were concerned, the Jedi were a hokey, ancient religion. The Force manifested itself subtly, so you could entertain the notion that the metaphor was sound. HOWEVER, later in the movies that subtlety was smashed with wild telekinetic tricks, lightning bolts and god-knows-what. And the then we have the entire dark side thing, which of course lacks any subtlety or nuance. The bad guys go around spouting "give in to the DAAAARK side of the Force", "let the HATE flow through you!!" Lucas could learn alot about evil seduction by reading Paradise Lost, where Satan is slyly persuasive yet irredeemably dark.
And, of course, we have the farce that is the prequels. Virgin birth? Come on. Midichlorians? Puh-lease. It is even more trite and banal than the worst moments of Episode V and VI.
Don't get me wrong, they are exciting movies, but as art I would consider them failures. Lucas is a genius as far as marketting goes, I'll give him that, but Star Wars is no profound artistic statement. Maybe it could have been if Lucas had applied some self-criticism and thought more about the substance of the story, its philosophical implications, rather than overwhelm the audience with gaudy, cartoonish special effects.
I liked the first two movies, meaning Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back.
After that, meh.
Quote from: Daidalos on October 13, 2007, 07:23:57 AM
As far as I'm concerned, Lucas dropped the ball very early in the game. However, the saga became extremely simplistic after Episode V. Recall in the original movie when a point was made regarding faith and disbelief in the Force, as a metaphor for religion. As far as most people in the galaxy were concerned, the Jedi were a hokey, ancient religion. The Force manifested itself subtly, so you could entertain the notion that the metaphor was sound. HOWEVER, later in the movies that subtlety was smashed with wild telekinetic tricks, lightning bolts and god-knows-what. And the then we have the entire dark side thing, which of course lacks any subtlety or nuance. The bad guys go around spouting "give in to the DAAAARK side of the Force", "let the HATE flow through you!!" Lucas could learn alot about evil seduction by reading Paradise Lost, where Satan is slyly persuasive yet irredeemably dark.
And, of course, we have the farce that is the prequels. Virgin birth? Come on. Midichlorians? Puh-lease. It is even more trite and banal than the worst moments of Episode V and VI.
Don't get me wrong, they are exciting movies, but as art I would consider them failures. Lucas is a genius as far as marketting goes, I'll give him that, but Star Wars is no profound artistic statement. Maybe it could have been if Lucas had applied some self-criticism and thought more about the substance of the story, its philosophical implications, rather than overwhelm the audience with gaudy, cartoonish special effects.
The ideas of the force and dark side did not go anywhere. Fear and hate are the reasons to jump over to the dark side. The prequels show that the dark side is pretty similar to Jedi side. Midichlorians are just a pseudoscientific way to explain why some people are strong with the force. The prequals are far more complex movies. That's why Lucas needed to wait long for the technology to make them possible. The whole saga deals a lot of philososy and the importance of moral choices in life. Star Wars is a profound artistic statement, one of the most amazing ever.
Quote from: 71 dB on October 13, 2007, 07:40:34 AM
The ideas of the force and dark side did not go anywhere. Fear and hate are the reasons to jump over to the dark side. The prequels show that the dark side is pretty similar to Jedi side. Midichlorians are just a pseudoscientific way to explain why some people are strong with the force. The prequals are far more complex movies. That's why Lucas needed to wait long for the technology to make them possible. The whole saga deals a lot of philososy and the importance of moral choices in life. Star Wars is a profound artistic statement, one of the most amazing ever.
I disagree. You cannot make a profound statement on the importance of moral choices by reducing such a complex question to something as black and white as the dark and the light side. And as far as philosophy goes, it seems to be some watered-down hybrid of Buddhism with a little bit of Christianity sprinkled on top, and some bad psychology: "If you are angry you will kill puppies" and so on. When the villains practically brag of their evil, then it's not very profound. Read Othello and Paradise Lost, then you will see a sophisticated take on the notion of evil and seduction and morality. SW does not have that. It does, however, have lightsabers.
Daidalos, do you enjoy unloading lead into fishtanks?
Quote from: locrian on October 13, 2007, 07:25:15 AM
I liked the first two movies, meaning Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back.
After that, meh.
In full agreement with you and the later of two being the better of these.
Quote from: 71 dB on October 13, 2007, 07:40:34 AM
The ideas of the force and dark side did not go anywhere. Fear and hate are the reasons to jump over to the dark side. The prequels show that the dark side is pretty similar to Jedi side. Midichlorians are just a pseudoscientific way to explain why some people are strong with the force. The prequals are far more complex movies. That's why Lucas needed to wait long for the technology to make them possible. The whole saga deals a lot of philososy and the importance of moral choices in life. Star Wars is a profound artistic statement, one of the most amazing ever.
Is there a thread for posters who want you to take them seriously but...?
Quote from: Corey on October 13, 2007, 07:52:34 AM
Daidalos, do you enjoy unloading lead into fishtanks?
Yes, it is one of my favourite pastimes.
Quote from: Daidalos on October 13, 2007, 07:50:47 AM
I disagree. You cannot make a profound statement on the importance of moral choices by reducing such a complex question to something as black and white as the dark and the light side. And as far as philosophy goes, it seems to be some watered-down hybrid of Buddhism with a little bit of Christianity sprinkled on top, and some bad psychology: "If you are angry you will kill puppies" and so on. When the villains practically brag of their evil, then it's not very profound. Read Othello and Paradise Lost, then you will see a sophisticated take on the notion of evil and seduction and morality. SW does not have that. It does, however, have lightsabers.
Okay, you NEED to see Star Wars (a cultural phenomenon) crappy. Your choice. I enjoy the movies, a lot.
Quote from: Bogey on October 13, 2007, 07:56:34 AM
In full agreement with you and the later of two being the better of these.
You are correct, sir.
Quote from: 71 dB on October 13, 2007, 08:01:47 AM
Okay, you NEED to see Star Wars (a cultural phenomenon) crappy. Your choice. I enjoy the movies, a lot.
I'm sorry? I "need" to perceive the cultural phenomenon Star Wars as crappy? I don't think it's crap. I think it is great entertainment that could have been much more. I consider it to be a lost opportunity. That doesn't mean I don't like the movies, far from it.
Quote from: Daidalos on October 13, 2007, 08:07:26 AM
I'm sorry? I "need" to perceive the cultural phenomenon Star Wars as crappy? I don't think it's crap. I think it is great entertainment that could have been much more. I consider it to be a lost opportunity. That doesn't mean I don't like the movies, far from it.
Why don't you make you own saga and show Lucas how it's done? ;D If Star Wars lacks something it's Lucas' artistical choice, his way to balance things. Othello may have deeper philosophy but it lacks lightsabers. Is it meaningful to critizise it for that? Of course not.
If you like the movies how are they lost opportunities?
Quote from: 71 dB on October 13, 2007, 08:13:46 AM
Why don't you make you own saga and show Lucas how it's done?
Just you wait!
QuoteIf Star Wars lacks something it's Lucas' artistical choice, his way to balance things.
Yes, Lucas' films, just as the Force, must always remain in balance. Such is the way of things. May the Fudge be with you. *bows*
QuoteOthello may have deeper philosophy but it lacks lightsabers. Is it meaningful to critizise it for that? Of course not.
If fans of Othello were deluded into thinking it had great lightsabre-duels, then yes, it would be meaningful to critizise it for it and point out that infact it lacks lightsabre-duels alltogether.
QuoteIf you like the movies how are they lost opportunities?
Well, as entertainment I guess they are not lost opportunities, hence my general liking of the movies. However, they could have been better on the "artistic" side of things, and as such they represent lost opportunities in that regard.
Quote from: Corey on October 13, 2007, 04:51:16 AM
Exactly. He wanted to create something in the tradition of the 50s space operas like Flash Gordon, something that your diehard SW fan would be loath to admit nowadays, considering what the franchise has ballooned to.
As much as I love them, it's really B-movie material, but excellently executed — that's what separates it from other cheesy sci-fi flicks.
Is it art? That depends on your own definition of what art is. For me, it isn't.
Cool post,
Corey! Especially concerning the definition of art.
Quote from: longears on October 13, 2007, 04:57:24 AM
Nah...it was a big disappointment after the first two, which were a lot of fun: old movie serials with more sophisticated special effects. But then Lucas lost his way--amazing how often extreme worldly success does that to people [insert wry emoticon here].
I do agree with Pojo about Pearl Harbor--in fact, almost anything with Afleck. The kids rented it and I sat through about 40 minutes, but not even Kate Beckinsale's beauty was enough to keep me watching. I told them to see Tora Tora Tora if they wanted a good dramatization, or From Here to Eternity if they wanted a Hollywood drama set against that backdrop. Crap like Pearl Harbor is to movies what Kenny G is to jazz.
Spyro Gyra, anyone?
Great post, and I agree with much of it. I should mention that I watched movies like Armageddon and Pearl Harbor having the mindset that they were basically junk, and ended up enjoying them (and of course later mostly forgetting them). MacDonald's makes movies.
Quote from: Bogey on October 13, 2007, 06:09:54 AM
Yup, this is what I am looking for David....movies that "believe" they are sending civilization a "message" that will inspire or change our thinking when in fact, in the end, they are actually deliver pretentious "crapola" that makes us just shake our heads muttering "what the....", or in some cases making us laugh out loud because in the end they crossed into the realm of "comical genius" without even realizing it.
Arma-f'-in-geddon
Quote from: 71 dB on October 13, 2007, 06:37:49 AM
Dude, that movie came out 1983. There's 3 new movies now for you to "really dislike". I'm sorry you can't enjoy these awesome movies.
Thank you for being kind. I should give the prequels another spin...sometime.
Quote from: Daidalos on October 13, 2007, 08:25:08 AM
If fans of Othello were deluded into thinking it had great lightsabre-duels, then yes, it would be meaningful to critizise it for it and point out that infact it lacks lightsabre-duels alltogether.
What exactly were you deluded into thinking about Star Wars? Othello with lightsabers? ;D
Quote from: Daidalos on October 13, 2007, 08:25:08 AMWell, as entertainment I guess they are not lost opportunities, hence my general liking of the movies. However, they could have been better on the "artistic" side of things, and as such they represent lost opportunities in that regard.
I followed closely the making of the new trilogy online between 1997-2005. I think I have very good understanding about Lucas' way of thinking and his art. After seeing the insane amount of concept art created and perfected for the movies I can say they are pretty much as perfect artistically as possible.
Here's one I cannot take seriously: Crash
Quote from: Bogey on October 13, 2007, 07:56:34 AM
In full agreement with you and the later of two being the better of these.
Yeah,
Bill, didn't Empire Strikes Back seem to be "dark" in an enormously cool way?
Quote from: Keemun on October 13, 2007, 08:34:32 AM
Here's one I cannot take seriously: Crash
Post of the day!
Quote from: Haffner on October 13, 2007, 08:34:45 AM
Yeah, Bill, didn't Empire Strikes Back seem to be "dark" in an enormously cool way?
Exactly Andy....but all for not when the Ewoks were introduced in the next movie.
Quote from: Haffner on October 13, 2007, 08:31:43 AM
Thank you for being kind. I should give the prequels another spin...sometime.
Kind? ;D I am not one to say what you should do but if you give them another spin I advice you to do what Lucas wants people to do: sit comfortable on you sofa, eat pop corn and just enjoy the ride. Star Wars tends to get better with multiple viewing as they are so complex.
Also, watch the extra materials on the DVDs. They give you a very good picture about the quality of these movies.
Quote from: 71 dB on October 13, 2007, 08:34:05 AM
What exactly were you deluded into thinking about Star Wars? Othello with lightsabers? ;D
Yes, I want my money back.
QuoteI followed closely the making of the new trilogy online between 1997-2005. I think I have very good understanding about Lucas' way of thinking and his art. After seeing the insane amount of concept art created and perfected for the movies I can say they are pretty much as perfect artistically as possible.
Yes, the movies are well-made conceptually. But that is still the surface, superficial. No matter how pretty the dresses or how well-thought out the starships are, if the story is bloated and overblown it will still be mediocre.
Quote from: Bogey on October 13, 2007, 08:37:12 AM
Exactly Andy....but all for not when the Ewoks were introduced in the next movie.
I was 16 or 17 when "Return..." premiered, and my parents came up to the front of the theater where my brother and I were sitting and said they were ready to leave over 1/2 hour before the movie was over.
Quote from: 71 dB on October 13, 2007, 08:39:27 AM
[...] shit comfortable on you sofa, eat pop corn and just enjoy the ride.
That made my day. Oh, silly me.
Quote from: 71 dB on October 13, 2007, 08:39:27 AM
Kind? ;D
I see you as an essentially good person with alot of great insight to contribute,
Poju. I don't get engaged in vehement debates, as I come to this forum to enjoy the companionship and insights of others whom also love Our Music.
I will certainly give those 3 movies another spin, but "
Return of the Jedi" is a lost cause for me.
Quote from: Daidalos on October 13, 2007, 08:40:37 AM
That made my day. Oh, silly me.
Und mich auch,
D. ;D :D :D :D.
Quote from: Daidalos on October 13, 2007, 08:39:42 AM
Yes, I want my money back.
Yes, the movies are well-made conceptually. But that is still the surface, superficial. No matter how pretty the dresses or how well-thought out the starships are, if the story is bloated and overblown it will still be mediocre.
Says who? Lucas is free to create his own style and he has. Star Wars has a good story.
Quote from: Haffner on October 13, 2007, 08:43:05 AM
I will certainly give those 3 movies another spin, but "Return of the Jedi" is a lost cause for me.
I actually think RotJ is quite a good a movie. The ewoks were disgusting, naturally, but besides that I think it's satisfactory. The space battle is one of the best in the saga and the scenes on the Deathstar II are fascinating. If we excise the prequels from our minds for a minute, much philosophy can be read into those scenes. Whether it was intentional or not, I don't know.
Quote from: 71 dB on October 13, 2007, 08:44:37 AM
Says who? Lucas is free to create his own style and he has. Star Wars has a good story.
A good story, just not very deep.
Quote from: Daidalos on October 13, 2007, 08:46:30 AM
The ewoks were disgusting, naturally,
Disgusting? ??? I found them cute and funny. :)
A lot of the appeal of the original three lies for me in the way events seemed to logically flow into one another. In the prequels it seemed like a bunch of disconnected episodes that were more excuses for ugly special effects (indeed, effects that will not and age well) than an architectural piece of the plot. I also think that what they didn't show in the original trilogy was much more fascinating than what they did show in the prequels. Just a glimpse through a window, or a passing reference to some planet is much more inspiring to me. You have to make the audience use their imagination. If Hitchcock had plainly shown the knife stabbing into Janet Leigh's breasts in Psycho, would it have been nearly as effective as merely giving the impression of violence?
Quote from: Daidalos on October 13, 2007, 08:47:02 AM
A good story, just not very deep.
You people just keep on coming up with ridiculous claims against SW. You think it makes you look intellectual. I don't fear to admit I love these "childish" movies. They are just so great!
Though I am a great, great fan of the Star Wars movies (that meaning I like, enjoy, and appreciate them), I will stand with Daidalos well-considered posts, in this argument.
In fact, most of the "debate" (71 dB's point apart) regards two very distinct aspects of the Star Wars movies:
1) The Star Wars movies as entertainment.
2) The Star Wars movies as a cultural product, including its philosophical repercussions, but far from limited to them alone.
Still, very interesting points, all-round. Fascinating how we can finally discuss something so relevant to aesthetics in a thread about "unserious" films, isn't it? ;)
Battlefield Earth, which will one day be viewed in the same category as Solaris:
(http://www.sattlers.org/mickey/site/archive/2005/07/images/battlefield-earth.jpg)
Quote from: Danny on October 13, 2007, 04:41:00 PM
Battlefield Earth, which will one day be viewed in the same category as Solaris:
(http://www.sattlers.org/mickey/site/archive/2005/07/images/battlefield-earth.jpg)
???
I hope you mean the Soderbergh
Solaris and not Tarkovsky's
Solyaris.
Anyone remember Quest for Fire, or see Clan of the Cave Bear?
Quote from: Danny on October 13, 2007, 04:41:00 PM
Battlefield Earth, which will one day be viewed in the same category as Solaris:
(http://www.sattlers.org/mickey/site/archive/2005/07/images/battlefield-earth.jpg)
I actually rented that movie with a friend just so that we could laugh our asses off. Unfortunately, I just found the movie to be plainly dull, stupid and pointless--- in a bad way! Unlike gems such as Boa vs. Python, Pterodactyl, or Plan 9 from Outer Space - movies that were robbed of their well-deserved Oscars.
Oliver Stone's fix on Alexander turned out to be tripe, that despite the input of Robin Lane Fox who is a real authority on Alexander and ancient Greek history generally. Colin Farrell undermined any serious intent the film had. All the Macedonians ended up with Irish accents, presumably because Farrel does Irish, mid Atlantic and nothing else.
As to Star Wars, I enjoyed the first three, disliked the prequels and feel that if Lucas is a genius, it is at making money. The dialogue is about as clunky as it gets. No wonder the human emotion side of the prequels seems so boring and artificial, it was not just the actors that made it wooden, try saying those words and making them seem like anything that might come out of the mouth of human beings.
Mike
The Postman (Costner)
Battlefield Earth (Travolta) [How dare someone have already picked this :(]
V for Vendetta [Enjoying the comic before this was made makes it difficult, it is a good "action" film but the "message" was diluted with piss]