Fox continues to Blu up its library for its 75th birthday, this time going in for the Baz Luhrman pair… and it’s hard to imagine too many other films that are more meant for Blu. Visual feasts, bigger, brighter, betterer.
I’m looking forward to Oct 19.
amit on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
Christian on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
YancySkancy on: Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Hcat on: Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: I Should Be Doing Box Office
Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
see all »
[twitter-widget username="DavidPoland" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"][twitter-widget username="MCNTweets" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"]
It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?
So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.
And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.
There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.
I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.
But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”
My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher
“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.
~ David Simon
COME WHAT MAY POWER.
There’s a WHOLE lot of dumb shit in Moulin Rouge that is exactly the kind of mugging camp that sends me through the roof with rage, but the actual Kidman/MacGregor stuff gets me choked up like a little girl, Titanic-style.
Rouge gets better each time I see it, can’t wait for Blu. Forget Pirahna or Yogi Bear, 3-D was made for Baz and I will be crushed if he doesn’t film his next in the format.
The write-up is a complete overstament but I’m not in the fighting mood nor am I dumb enough to actually starting listing more “deserving” spectacles.
In fact, I quite like parts of Moulin Rouge and while it will never been a favorite of mine I can admire those things that it does well. So it’s all well and good and I glad it’s coming to Blu-ray.
Still (and if you’d actually seen it you might understand where I’m coming from)…
I can’t help but feel that if Luhrman’s earlier films were coming to Blu-ray, that and even more pleasing announcement would have been one that included what is hands down Luhrman’s best work and one movie of his I can say I love – Strictly Ballroom.
I am not blaming Fox (as it’s very likely the movie isn’t even theirs) and SB may not be as flashy as MR or R+J but it’s damn fine film and it’s one I’d love to see more people find out about.
The Peter Grisham Fuming Rage-to-Normal Decoder Ring Succinct Translation of the above post minus whole paragraphs of pointless putting on of airs:
“I like Strictly Ballroom better than these 2 movies.”
i fucking HATE strictly ballroom, the most annoying movie in the history of movies, i hate it like elaine benes hates ‘the english patient’. i’m known for my hatred of it. my sphincter tightens at the mere thought of it (and i hate very few movies). of course that’s just me. so i’m quite glad it’s not included here, because i’d rather pop my eyeball like a grape than pay for it to sit in my home, mocking me.
having said that i’m a fan of luhrman in general because he’s a grand visual stylist and has the force of personality to do his thing and do it in good humour. i dig his ‘R+J’, daring and earnest, and ‘MR’ is a grand, garish, lavish operatic spectacle (that puts me to sleep in places but i can live with that), which should look great on blu-ray. i love blu-ray.
I, obviously, didn’t say anything about “deserve.”
I like Strictly Ballroom too. But it’s not nearly as visually dense as these two films. In terms of Blu-ray being a special experience, I find that visual intensity is a good standard.
Kubrick is not as flashy as Luhrman, but his films on Blu-ray are breathtaking. Coppola too. And I suspect, Luhrman’s will be as well… especially these two.
Moulin Rouge! is my favorite movie the past decade. Might just have to finally make the move to Blu-ray to get this…
Luhrman will never make a 3-D movie. He’s too addicted to that ADD editing style, and it’s totally incompatible with 3-D.
“The Peter Grisham Fuming Rage-to-Normal Decoder Ring Succinct Translation of the above post minus whole paragraphs of pointless putting on of airs:”
Of the people who post here, Lex, you should be the last one to write something like. Especially the pointless part.
I’d given you a proper comeback but that would just be too easy. While you didn’even find anything of mine to quote. Weak.
And yes, as metter of fact I do prefer SB, thank you.
“But it’s not nearly as visually dense as these two films.”
Here I would disagree. I certainly know what you mean as Moulin Rouge are R+J both a lot flashier, ect. That’s not the point. To me that’s not where the greater beauty lies. I much prefer the CGIless shots in SB. The scene on the roof for example and ballroom shots are just as eye-catching to me. And I would argue that the camera work is more memorable too, due to fewer cuts.
“Kubrick is not as flashy as Luhrman”
This, however I just plain don’t get. Especilly in light of 2001’s “Star Gate” sequence (ever seen that in 70mm?) and so-much of “Clockwork Orange”. Bad example methinks.
Speaking of Kubrick though, I’m sure we’d both agree that “Barry Lyndon” would look absolutely terrific on Blu-ray.
Still don’t own a Blu-Ray player. Stupid economy!…
Still don’t own a Blu-Ray player. Stupid economy!…
bad example? i think not. i’m going to stick up for DP here because by definition ‘flashy’ means inherently garish, gaudy, showy, superficial razzle-dazzle. ‘flashy’ as a sensibility is intrinsic to baz’s kinetic style, inherent to his design incorporating dramatic and visual excess to tell his particular brand of bedazzled stories.
however, using ‘flashy’ to accurately describe kubrick’s sensibility is highly debatable. the ‘star gate’ sequence in 2001 is not purposely designed to be gaudy or garish (psychedelic, yes, using colour, dimension and contrast rather brilliantly to depict an abstract trip through space and time); and while there are some garish design elements inherent to the ‘clockwork o’ production, i’d argue such aesthetic touches are used more far more subtly to heighten the eclectic clash of the past and a modern/futuristic sensibility, not as an overwhelming aesthetic used to heighten and define the drama as is common to luhrmann’s work.
(if that’s what DP meant, i wouldn’t like to put words in his mouth. simply that i agree that “kubrick is not as flashy as luhrmann’ by a long shot)
I hope they put that video on the disc with Mya, Xtina, Pink and, er, Lil Kim.
YEP YEP YEP YEP YEP YEP.