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
so it wasn’t just me. i thought she looked so uncomfortable in that photo. this whole move just seems weird for everyone involved.
To fit in that costume,she’s probably subsisting on a diet of crackers and low fat milk. That would make anyone crabby.
Yeah that costume sucks, her being cast as Wondie is still pretty terrible, and this show seems like another set-back for a character that deserves better.
I’m confused as to how this works…..
Dave goes on a working vacation to an irrelevant film festival and I get denied Klady’s usually retarded film numbers but then when he deigns to go on line Dave will complain about Nikki’s numbers even though he hasn’t bothered to fucking post any. Is this succinct enough?
You forgot to add the part where no ones forcing you to read or comment here, Don. But other than that, I think you got it.
Don R- if you want to get into the middle of this you will end up crying. Stay away while you still can.
I already cry when I read your comments.
Adam West had a lousy costume too, and that show still ruled.
OH YEAH… IT’S… SUCKER PUNCH WEEK! GET READY FOR A CONFUSING FILM THAT MIGHT NOT MAKE AS MUCH AS LIMITLESS DID THIS WEEKEND!
saw Charlie Valentine movie – basic gangsters vs gangsters … needed clearer subplot but overall
not bad ..
the lead actor Raymond J Barry should have
a had a DP/30 …
here’s the trailer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn09m0jqfHA
Netflix series to star Kevin Spacey with David Fincher
Just pointing out the obvious there, DM…carry on!
Speaking of La Finke, did anyone else notice this bombshell in her post on the WGA strike negotiations:
“7:30 PM: So say several news outlets. I’m out in the rain with no email/computer access and checking… (I’m dictating this).”
CONCLUSIVE PROOF THAT SHE’S ACTUALLY LEFT HER HOUSE!
[Pokes blog.]
The Adjustment Bureau is almost a good movie. The leads are superb and have real chemistry. They are a convincing couple and considering that a movie has a short period of time to make the audience believe two people are in love and want them to live happily ever after, the romance is handled nicely overall. The first hour is very engaging and enjoyable. Plus, Anthony Mackie is always a bonus. But it all sort of falls apart as it approaches the conclusion, and it begins to feel really drawn out as they try to escape from the bureau. Decent enough but a missed opportunity.
I know Snyder’s live action flicks are synonymous with March, but is the second weekend of the NCAA tournament a good time to release Sucker Punch? Is it tracking at all with females (or tracking period)?
I know we’re all Charlie Sheen-ed out, but over at Film Threat, we have “underground cult filmmaker” J.X. Williams on-board as a blogger. He just wrote a killlllllllller piece about how Charlie Sheen has become a sort of performance artist tapping into America’s subconscious in really clever ways. Whether or not Sheen is doing this on purpose, I dunno. I think he partly is…but the piece is really smartly written so go check it out!
http://www.filmthreat.com/blogs/33363/
Is he really the first person to suggest that this is a sort of performance art? Yes, definitely not interested in anything Charlie Sheen unless it’s about his retirement to a small island with no access to communications devices.
What do you all think about the Bret Easton Ellis piece for Newsweek/The Daily Beast on Sheen?
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-03-16/bret-easton-ellis-notes-on-charlie-sheen-and-the-end-of-empire/
In my opinion, it’s an engaging read but falls into self parody. As a fan of Ellis’s novels, this is almost him embracing every flaw that his critics accuse him of, wrongly I think, (obssession with surface, vanity, misogyny, amorality) in a rather disappointing fashion.
Olivia Wilde has seen Cowboys and Aliens ..
Saw a little picture called Cowboys & Aliens last night. Now THAT’s a movie! Couldn’t be more excited to show it off this summer.
http://twitter.com/oliviawilde/status/49140299758440448
Please, keep the Twitter messages coming. What has Ashton tweeted today?
Cowboys and Aliens is done so waiting for DP/30 with Ford and Craig .. these 100 million dollar movies + don’t just sell themselves …i’m guessing another movie site gets
the world exclusive interview first ..probably ain’t it cool news.
so i watched the final episode of Big Love last night
spoilers…. obviously….
i liked the final scene a lot. it made me remember how well cast this show was, even though the final season was often a labor to watch.
i don’t agree with how they wrapped up Bill’s character. Not that the choice was wrong, but it seemed so completely random.
It’s funny. This morning i was looking around for other opinions about the finale and at ew.com there was this massive argument going on about polygamy and how the show glorified it. If anything, that show made polygamy seem like an awful idea. i kept waiting for Bill Paxton’s character to blow his head off at the end of every episode.
I didn’t like what happened to Bill at all. Felt like a cheat. The final scene was OK but the episode as a whole wasn’t very good, much like the last 2 seasons of the show as a whole. Just too many storylines and too much crammed into every episode. Scenes constantly end too quickly (Barb hugging Nicki last night) because they have to keep things moving. Certain characters are treated like they’re an afterthought, so their scenes are unsatisfying and often feel like wasted time. Season 5 was better than season 4, but that’s not saying much.
i agree. the show was on the decline. plots weren’t given enough time to play out. i didn’t mind what happened to Bill. I did mind how they achieved it. I was expecting him to hand Bill a plate of red herring.
if we’re playing armchair showrunner, i’d have ditched the entire season 5 subplot with Nikki’s daughter and the teacher and i would have wrapped up Albee awhile back. Season 5 had some real opportunities but they were stuck tying up old threads.
It wasn’t a perfect show, but it was well cast and different enough from the other dramas on tv to be watchable.
Speaking of shows on the decline, does anyone else watch Fringe. I loved the first 2 years, but this last season has quickly spiraled into lunacy
I didn’t like the subplot with Nikki’s daughter and the teacher either. Season 5 did have a lot of promise, but you’re right, too much time was spent tying up old threads. Season 3 remains the show’s high point. The central characters and their daily struggles were almost always more compelling than all of the crazy Juniper Creek folks and other side characters. I wish it had retained a tighter focus these last 2 seasons. That it remained watchable is a testament to the quality of the performances.
Ever notice how many HBO series tend to end the way they ended Big Love?
SPOILERS
With the main character getting shot and killed by a minor character in the last 10 minutes of the series finale?
The Sopranos, Six Feet Under, Rome, Big Love… main character dies. And with Big Love more than any of those others, it feels like a cop-out.
Well, there are some who will argue the main character doesn’t die at the end of one of those shows…
I thought in the six feet under finale nate had already died.
and yes, bills death felt convenient, but at the end i felt relieved. It was like they were free. His death didnt serve as an end for them but a beginning. And since the wives were always the most interesting aspect of the show I was fine with that.
Paxton at least hated that ending because it’s a BULLSHIT ENDING! Seriously, you spend five years watching a show and they whack the lead character off like that? What a waste of time.
That aside, not all HBO shows end with characters dying. Two of the best… maybe the best… The Wire and Deadwood just had their characters going about their lives, which works a lot more than killing lead characters for no other reason than… fuck it… he has to die for FEMALE EMPOWERMENT! BOOYAH!
Once Upon a Time in the West on Blu-Ray May 31. Fuck. Yes.
wasn’t the Sorprano’s ending the same thing Io. Tony and his family sitting around having a meal, an air of uncertainty, but basically life just goes on.
Anghus, Chase is a fucking weird dude, and I could have sworn that he put out some comments last year that contradicted his previous comments about the ending. The new comments were basically stating that the ending now equated to death or some shit. I cannot find them for some reason but I remember reading them, and boom goes the dynamite.
If not, you have a point, but that ending is still so fucking weird. It’s so weird that it basically fucks over the entire series.
Now this is a hot blog.
Dave is going to be so disappointed that he was out of the loop and missed IndieWIRE’s breakdown of the numbers on that LINCOLN LAWYER Groupon. The entire time I was reading it I kept looking back at the byline to make sure it didn’t read “D. Poland.”
Re: Big Love, I thought the Cara Lynn storyline was one of the strongest things they’ve ever done. Nicki rescuing her from Juniper Creek only to inadvertently lead her to another predator cast a new light on so many other issues: Bill’s relationship with Margene, Nicki’s response to her own abusive childhood, and the cycle of exploitation that seeps out of the compound into the outside world through both good girl Cara Lynn and bad girl Rhonda.
Except for the nutty eugenics subplot and Hollis Greene arm-slicing in season four, I actually appreciated Big Love’s over-stuffedness. If I want to immerse myself in languorous atmosphere, I’ll watch Treme. For a funny, moving, beautifully acted, action-packed soap, Big Love did the trick.
There’s a balance though Rob, and Big Love actually achieved it in season 3, the show’s best. It’s not like there was a lack of drama during that season, but the show was more contained and stronger for it. The acting remained strong throughout, but there is a noticeable difference in overall quality between the first 3 seasons and the last 2.
The best HBO series finale ever is for Six Feet Under (and if I remember correctly Nate died 3 episodes before the finale). I liked the final episodes for Deadwood, The Wire, and The Sopranos as well.
Definitely agree that season three was the best. I think HBO cutting season four to nine episodes created some problems with pacing and loose ends that they never quite found their way out of. But man, I was hooked the whole way through.
Lex, only David Poland could have a blog and have no idea what to do with it while on vakay!
Yeah why did they ever decide on a 9-episode season in the first place? I remained interested through the finish as well, while also disappointed that it never reached the highs of season 3 during the last 2 seasons. I do think it featured some of the very best acting on television, something it didn’t receive enough recognition for.
B.Easton ellis is telling me via mcn news that James Franco’s perez hiltoning of Bruce Vilanch about Franco’s oscar “hosting” is so so very post-empire.
The concept is interesting but rather inanely applied by B.E.E. His embrace of Charlie Sheen as cultural avatar is lame and predictable. Sheen has said some funny things. And the media deserves the contempt. But Sheen is a troubled and creepy guy who’s mostly harmless next to the appalling and brazen criminals we have running our world.
“Yeah why did they ever decide on a 9-episode season in the first place?”
Chloe Sevigny said it was because HBO needed room for The Pacific. They only have so many Sundays.
“B.Easton ellis is telling me via mcn news that James Franco’s perez hiltoning of Bruce Vilanch about Franco’s oscar “hosting” is so so very post-empire.”
i’ve read this sentence 8 times and have no idea what the fuck it means.
MCN news was running a teaser quote from an essay Ellis wrote in some other publication, wherein Ellis, among other things, says Franco’s act is “post-empire”. The Vilanch thing has just sprung up today on gossip blogs because Franco posted a Perez Hilton style response to some sort of negative comments Vilanch made. Basically no big deal.
I liked the final episode of Deadwood, except it wasn’t supposed to be the final episode of Deadwood. My understanding is after they wrapped, HBO let them know there’d be no season 4.
Sopranos, yeah, Tony’s dead, he telegraphed int he previous episode where he and Bobby are talking and they think when you die you don’t even hear it, and since Sopranos was Tony’s POV, one second he’s there and the next second, darkness, he ceases to exist.
Now I loved the Sopranos finale. (And right, I think Nate died in the penultimate episode of Six Feet Under), but since HBO has a small sample size for dramas, it just seems odd that Big Love would go that way too, and to have it be so random..
The one aspect I like about it is through the season I found myself hoping the women would separate from Bill, be it divorce or his jailtime, and it was by his death that they were able to stay together.
Stoked for Game of Thrones…
death as a finale is so often used in these shows because that is the lives the characters lead.
Tony Sorprano dealt with life and death every day. His character was on the precipice of disaster every season. To end the show with his death, or not, makes sense.
Six Feet Under was a show where death was practically a character. The ending of the show was watching them all die. Makes perfect sense.
Deadwood was about the lawless west where people died all the time. Rome was a show about war and politics where murder and assassination was a foregone conclusion.
In the end, many of these shows have no other way of closing out a series without the main character eating a bullet.
If you make TV shows about gangsters, funeral home directors, the wild west and ancient rome you’re going to be dealing with some death.
Trial balloon: Vinnie Chase dies on the series finale of Entourage…
Re: TorpidBunny: Quote from Ellis’ Daily Beast piece, “Notes on Charlie Sheen and the End of Empire.”
Sample from the several thousand words Ellis wrote: “That’s when we first really noticed Charlie Sheen, and it’s the key moment in his movie career (it now seems to define and sum up everything that followed). He hasn’t been as entertaining since. Until now. In getting himself fired from Two and a Half Men, this privileged child of the media’s sprawling entertainment Empire has now become its most gifted prankster. And now Sheen has embraced the post-Empire, making his bid to explain to all of us what celebrity means in that world. Whether you like it or not is beside the point. It’s where we are, babe. We’re learning something. Rock’n roll. Deal with it.
Post-Empire started appearing in full-force just about everywhere last year while Cee Lo Green’s “Fuck You” gleefully played over the soundtrack. The Kardashians so get it. The cast (and the massive audience) of Jersey Shore gets it. Lady Gaga arriving at the Grammys in an egg gets it, and she gets it while staring at Anderson Cooper (Empire!) and admitting she likes to smoke weed when she writes songs—basically daring him: “What are you gonna do about that, bitch?” Nicki Minaj gets it when she sings “Right Thru Me” and becomes one of her many alter-egos on a red carpet. (Christina Aguilera starring in Burlesque doesn’t get it at all.) Ricky Gervais’s hosting of the Golden Globes got it. Robert Downey Jr., getting pissed off at Gervais, did not. Robert De Niro even got it, subtly ridiculing his career and his lifetime achievement trophy at the same awards show.”
the best ending for entourage would be to have all the characters die.
I would have had all the characters die in the Entourage pilot.
ENTOURAGE is the GREATEST and MOST IMPORTANT THING in the history of the universe, you will BOW TO IT and I CANNOT WAIT until it returns. BEST SHOW ON TV.
Hey, I don’t watch BIG LOVE, but can someone clarify:
Was Amanda Seyfried on it at some point? Why do I seem to have that belief? Can I assume she’s long gone and wasn’t on the finale? What role did she serve on the show? Because if Paxton was taxing THE SEYFRIED and still stuck with those four old grandmas, they should’ve killed his character years ago on the grounds of general stupidity.
Was she on the show when she was like 17, 18? Mmmm.
Minor Big Love finale spoiler
Seyfried was on the first 4 seasons of Big Love. She played the oldest child of Bill and his first wife. She is briefly in the finale but left with a little bad blood (I think) after season 4. She says the show cost her a role in Sucker Punch, which she really wanted. She left after season 4 to focus on her movie career.
LOOK AT HER BEING A LITTLE SEYFRIED! MMMMMMM! Guess I’ll be watching that finale now. BONER.
Did she ever show her feet on the show?
SUCKER PUNCH = three more days. Lex ranks the squ– I mean the cast:
Browning: MMMMM YEP YEP 11.
Cornish: 10.
Chung: 8 (which is an Asian 11)
Jena Malone: 9. post-Ruins.
Carla Gugino: Zero. Okay, a two.
LITTLE HUDGENSY MMMMMMM: 100 ZILLION.
I believe she does show her feet on the show. She has a few sex scenes with Breaking Bad’s Aaron Paul.
Wait, how long was Big Love on the air then? Paul’s been on Jesse Pinkman duty since, what, 2007? Seyfried’s been starring in big movies for four years or so, too (and acting in them since 2004). Were they still doing BL when they had movies and shows going?
I DO NOT UNDERSTAND actors anymore. Used to be they’d do some TV till their big movie break then never look back. Now they’re doing TWO TV shows while doing movies, then still finding time to do short comedy films and FUNNY OR DIE and VIRAL VIDEOS and commercials and fashion lines and cutting records.
Just pick one thing. I don’t remember Burt Young being that much of an attention whore.
I believe Big Love first aired in 2004. 5 seasons over 7 years I think.
Since this is the Ye Olde Poland Chatroom and this is just a dick-off thread at this point anyway: How much does SOBRIETY SUCK?
How do you guys get through your days and nights like this? It is SO. BORING. Has anyone here every kicked a drinking problem? Is it SUPPOSED to be this BORING at first?
On day 6 and just EPICALLY fucking bored. And I often go four, five days taking a break anyway, so it shouldn’t be a big deal. But I swore I’d go 30, and already I’m feeling like caving. SO BORING. SO BORING.
Like it’s bad enough not having had sex in nine years; When you have to entertain that thought SOBER, it’s unbearable. I AM SO HORNY.
DO IT FOR JOHNNY LEX!
DO IT FOR JOHNNY!
Speaking of Seyfried, got around to watching CHOLE this week and, man, she looks incredible in that movie. There’s one close-up of her, during a pivitol part in her character’s emotional journey, that is simply breath taking.
Good performances all around, and a fun, if minor, arty thriller. Kind of surprised it wasn’t released wider. Dug it.
best take on entourage ever
http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1914477
Fuzzy math. Big Love ran from early 2006 to Sunday.
I also enjoyed Chloe. Seyfried is good but Moore is excellent. A great showcase for her. Fun if minor arty thriller is a good description.
Based on the reviews and box-office of Red Riding Hood, I guess Seyfried has a point about Sucker Punch. How IS that tracking? I can’t imagine it’s going to do Watchmen business.
Is Weeds going to have another season? Man, is that a show where all the characters deserve to die.
News today that The Thin Man remake has a new writer. But I find myself wondering with what actress as Nora Johnny Depp would have chemistry. If Jolie couldn’t fake it, who could? I can’t think of a movie more recent than Benny & Joon where he actually had chemistry with a lead actress. I think Gwyneth could do it.
I wonder how contemporary audiences will respond to a new Thin Man. Years ago, I saw a TV interview with Peter Lawford — who played Nick Charles on the ’50s TV series version of The Thin Man — and Lawford noted that, on the very few occasions he tried to play Nick as a heavy boozer, they way William Powell did, viewers complained. Seriously.
About the Big Love ending..
SPOILERS
It seemed like an easy way out for the wives to me. It would have been more interesting to have Barb (and maybe even Margene) leave Bill of their own free will rather than to kill him off.
“I can’t think of a movie more recent than Benny & Joon where he actually had chemistry with a lead actress”
“chemistry” is in the eye of the beholder but in particular depp and binoche had a lovely sweet palpable attraction/passion/romance in ‘chocolat’, and depp and morton had a rather fiery tempestuous lustful love display in ‘the libertine’
(i’m scared of a ‘thin man’ rebootmake but i hope at least nat pendleton’s role is reprised by josh brolin)
the new sucker punch ads are a lot better. they seem to be selling the spectacle a lot more.
Red Riding Hood was the most wrong I’ve been in a box-office prognostication since THE GOODS. I swear I thought that was gonna be some Twilight-level teen-chick Zeitgeist thing from the director of their favorite series with a similar romance angle with two dudes, plus an actress in Seyfried that girls seem to like and feel comfortable with and not intimidated by… Thought that would do like 50-60 mil opening weekend, not be pretty much gone without a trace in two weeks.
So that established, maybe I should rethink my theory that Sucker Punch is going to TAAAAAAAAAANK. Watch it go and be a big smash hit now.
Just seems like that kind of aggressively lecherous boner-tastic treatment of hot chicks in outfits NEVER does that well at the box office, because it’s off-putting to young women, and dudes ALWAYS say, time and again, “Eh, I could just stay home and watch porn.” Other than the disarming and femme-centric Charlie’s Angels movies, or things where the castsuited chick kicks ass with a straight face in straightforward genre fare (see, Beckinsale, Jovovich), when’s the last time a movie billed as “All your favorite hot chicks making out and looking HOT!” was a runaway smash?
Forgot about Chocolat, Leahnz. Good call. (And I hated The Libertine at the time and shredded most of it out of my memory.)
I think The Thin Man could work nowadays as long as the dialogue and chemistry are there. I think of the success of Mr. & Mrs. Smith, where the two leads together is what gave it its legs. Hollywood isn’t churning out the great screen couplings like they used to.
And is it just me, or would Larry Crowne be slightly more appealing if it was Meg Ryan in the Julia Roberts role?
Lousy movie, but Depp and Charlize Theron (in her FETCHING Mia Farrow cut) were pretty bad-ass together in Astronaut’s Wife. (Come to think of it, I might kinda like that one, guilty pleasure or whatnot.)
Also think he has decent chemistry with Ricci in two movies, Man Who Cried and Sleepy Hollow. And with Anne Heche in Donnie Brasco. And INSANE chemistry with Cotillard in PE.
Actually might disagree entirely with this theory that Depp’s so off in his own world he doesn’t have chemistry with his female co-stars. Not buying it. It’s JOHNNY DEPP, only one of the best looking and suavest motherfuckers EVER. I’m pretty sure he could work up chemistry with any chick they pair him with.
Apparently young people did not go to the movies last weekend. Granted, Limitless and Lincoln Lawyer were aimed at older audiences and Paul is rated R, but I also have to think the NCAA Tournament played a role in keeping younger males away from the theater. Seems like that could hurt Sucker Punch this weekend (along with the reasons Lex mentioned).
Been on a TOTAL “Die Hard” kick of late..it’s like action packed comfort food. What do you guys think makes the film so fucking awesome? I mean the first 3 anyway.
I think for me- when it came out- it was refreshing to see a non-steroid induced douche bags saving the day Plus, it was DAVID ADDISON! Rickman was also such a new face and villain. Anyone else a “Die Hard” freak?
Die Hard is my favorite action movie just squeeking to the top of the list above Raiders. The thing that does it for me was the unexpected bits of humor, the SWAT team guy pricking himself on the roses, the Joel Silver stock company chinese guy stealing the candy bar. Willis was a total suprise and perfection in the role as determined everyman.
As the 15 year old know-it-all movie fan I completly dismissed the movie when I first saw the ads thinking that a tv actor in a movie with such a generic title was never going to amount to anything much. But then again I always thought Will Smith was just a step away from obscurity all the years between Parents Just Don’t Understand and ID4 as well.
I’m guessing Amy Adams’ name is in play for THE THIN MAN. She was a natural in the 30s-set MISS PETTRIGREW LIVES FOR A DAY, and THE FIGHTER showed she can have a bit of an edge.
The trick with casting this kind of remake is finding actors who are believably adult. Myrna Loy was only about 30 in THE THIN MAN; most 30-ish actors today still seem like college kids.
The real problem with the THIN MAN remake will be the boozing. The Charleses are flat-out alkies–albeit funny and functional ones–and I can’t imagine any studio wanting to risk the avalanche of opprobrium they’ll be inundated with because they “glamorized” drinking.
Back to SUCKER PUNCH, if anyone cares, but man, “flying hero touching down on one knee and hand then looking up” has become the new “casually walking away from giant explosion”.
Is SP screening on Thursday night, or is it not screening at all? Not a single review at RT yet. Even AICN doesn’t have a review. Can’t be a good sign.
Since Biutiful has made over 4.5 million having never gone wider than 200 screens, anyone think that maybe Focus or SPC are kicking themselves for letting Roadside Attractions get their hands on it? Between that, Winter’s Bone, Phillip Morris, and the upcoming Ferrell movie they seem to becoming a real player in the field.
Whatever happened to “next Tarantino” Steven Baigelman, who made Feeling Minnesota, then never did ANYTHING ELSE EVER? How does that happen? Everyone rags on Troy Duffy, but at least he got to make his sequel and had that AWESOME documentary that’s made him somewhat immortal.
And why was that utterly mundane mid-90s slacker-irony crime comedy hyped in the first place? Someone should hold a retrospective of all the QT ripoff movies from that initial run– Things to Do In Denver, Keys to Tulsa, Truth or Consequences NM, Suicide Kings, Love and a .45, Blood Guts Bullets and Octane, etc etc.
And am I mistaken or has Tarantino gone on record as saying of ALL those things, his LEAST favorite is Usual Suspects?
(No idea why I’m thinking of this today.)
At least Feeling Minnesota’s title stems from an awesome song. I remember thinking it was a cool flick when I saw it as a teen in 1996. Don’t think I’ve seen it since. I like the retrospective idea, and I agree that it’s puzzling how some directors seem to only get one shot while others are given multiple opportunities.
Another prime offender was PHOENIX, wherein Ray Liotta, Daniel Baldwin and two other mooks actually sit around in a parked car for like six minutes profanely debating King Kong. Unbelievable how blatant some of those were.
I’d like to make a movie called FEELING DAKOTA.
How about Thursday with Thomas Jane and Aaron Eckhart?
Thursday! And Mickey Rourke. Yeah, I liked that one. Came out like a year or two after Boogie Nights and Face/Off, and I was all about Thomas Jane then coming off those two (and Thin Red Line.) Don’t get me wrong, Jane’s had a solid career and he’s good on Hung, but after his role as TODD PARKER or even Velocity of Gary, I thought that dude was gonna be some firebrand MANIAC always rolling into movies with a crazy ‘stache dropping some Nic Cage-Gary Oldman style insanity and really changing the air in a room. So sort of disappointing he’s gone on to just be a fairly utilitarian, borderline bland leading man ever since.
But, yeah, there’s a bit in Thursday where he’s “forced” to have sex with Paulina Porizkova, and I was like, what’s the problem THERE, dude? I was gonna say it seems odd now that Eckhart plays the “bad” guy in tbat, but I guess it was hot off Company of Men.
Most brutally embarrassing QT ripoff:
ALBO GATOR! (Criiiiiinge.)
I like Jane and after the movies you mention plus Deep Blue Sea I thought he was going to be huge. Just saw him in some direct-to-cable generic action flick called Give ‘Em Hell Malone. Kind of full circle from Thursday. I recall a minor stink over that rape scene. Been a long time since I’ve seen Albino Alligator.
1) I love Lex’s fascination with THE NEXT BIG THING directors from the 90s. Most people have moved on but not LEX! HE REMEMBERS!
2) Now, Lex, don’t slam Carla Gugino ever. THAT IS ALL!
Nothing wrong with the occasional trip down memory lane.
Gugino isn’t sexy. Not even back in the SNAKE EYES days.
She reminds me of potato salad for some reason. And Italian chicks = NEVER hot. NEVER. Iron-clad rule of life.
Two words, Lex: Virna Lisi. But that was in the 60s, mostly.
Cadavra: What about the drinking in the ARTHUR remake, assuming they stay reasonably faithful to the original? Think that’ll be a test case for how much emphasis THE THIN MAN places on it? I have to say, I’m surprised it’s up for a remake, especially since they’re keeping the period setting. Jerry Stahl is supposedly going to somehow “contemporize” it while keeping it in the 30s. Maybe they’ll be doing heroin instead of booze.
I’ll be glad when that Arthur remake finally comes out, so I won’t have to sit thru the trailer (“At least something in this room’s attracted to you!”) anymore. That’s inching into Shutter Island/The Soloist territory in terms of getting hit with that trailer in front of EVERY movie I see.
Yeah I’ve always been confused as to how USUAL SUSPECTS is his least favorite of the crime movies made in his wake, since it’s pretty blatantly the most accomplished.
I love this topic. I can’t believe though you’re all forgetting TWO DAYS IN THE VALLEY, which has a terrific cast and I remember enjoying a good deal. The director’s only other theatrical movie was 15 MINUTES, the Deniro/Ed Burns thriller from the turn of the millenium.
I would totally go to a QT-rip off retrospective. I’m writing down the ones mentioned above I haven’t seen, and I’m going to seek them out. My favorite (other than SUSPECTS) is probably Roger Avary’s KILLING ZOE, although since he was a QT collaborator from the beginning it’s technically not a rip-off.
Actually John Herzfeld also directed the John Travolta/Olivia Newton-John 1983 flick Two of a Kind, which grossed $23 million.
Paul, a trip down memory lane is all well and good but for the most part, all of those people failed. We have QT and that’s it. Again, I commend Lex for remembering all of these people, who were responsible for half-way decent films, but ultimately failed.
Lex, you would like Italian women more, if they looked like… GIRLS… FROM NEW JERSEY!
That many of them failed doesn’t change the fact that it’s a fun discussion (for some of us).
To clarify, I meant after 2 DAYS IN THE VALLEY. It seems his work these days is mostly in television. One of the reasons I think this discussion is so fun because I love super specfic sub-genres of cinema that pop up, like the post-Farreley Bros, gross-out fad or this post-Tarantino, self-referencial ironic/indie crime one.
Another one I thought of was 3000 MILES TO GRACELAND which is interesting for a number of reasons: it stars two huge movie stars, is probably the biggest budgeted of the whole fad, had a weird post production history, was probably the last major movie in this fad, and just in general is a very strange studio (WB) movie. I like it, with the exception of an out of left field moment where David Arquette farts, which even for a movie that tonally off kilter, was too much for my sensitive disposition.
Love Killing Zoe; I think QT was an executive producer on it, and it was in production around the same time as Pulp Fiction; I remember being Captain Tarantino that year and declaring that Zoe was almost “every bit as good” as QT’s own stuff. Not sure I’d go so far today, but Jean-Hugues Anglade is phenomenal in that, Stoltz is in good form, whole thing has a more sparse, geometric Kubrick vibe than QT’s stuff… and Julie Delpy’s “on top” scene… that was coming after the ’80s when there was this obsession with DD Dolly Parton sized racks, which just isn’t my thing, so when Delpy showed up naked like THAT, it was like WHOA, YEP YEP.
Things to Do In Denver… is so fucking embarrassing; Maybe worse than ALBO GATOR, though both have that obnoxious deal where they try to top Tarantino’s dialogue by wholesale making up slang that DOESN’T EXIST, Walken running around yelling BUCKWHEATS! and Bill Nunn on about “fecal freakin’!” and everyone having some REALLY stupid name like Man With the Plan. Of course that stupid-name thing is a HALLMARK of Scott Rosenwhatever’s terrible writing, though DIAMOND DOG and CYRUS THE VIRUS in his next opus maintain some residual affection.
BUCKWHEATS!
I didn’t mention 300 Miles to Graceland because it’s not a ’90s movie.
Jimmy the Saint. Mr. Shhhhhhhh. Yeah that is one movie trying oh so hard to be super cool.
Paul, yeah yeah, but they are all such MEDICORE MOVIES! Oddly enough though, didn’t Danny Boyle win the NEXT QT sweepstakes?
Gary Fleder was kind of a hot-ticket A-list director for a while there– Kiss the Girls, Don’t Say a Word, that thing where Gary Sinise was a cyborg or something. (What WAS that called?)
Thought he was gonna be like The New John Badham for a time. But, yeah, another guy who mostly does TV now.
I think what’s interesting about 3,000 MILES is that it’s really at the tail end of the craze. Do Guy Ritchie’s movies count in this? What about REINDEER GAMES (1999) which was directed by an actual legend, and not a novice like a lot of these?
Avary keeps the Kubrick thing going big-time in THE RULES OF ATTRACTION, an incredibly underrated movie that is kind of a rewatch perennial for myself and filled with awesome, cinematic moments.
Biel, Bosworth and Shannyn Sossamon in their absolute YEP YEP prime. Also a Kip Pardue tour de force. Between Rules, Driven, and that scene where jailbait ERW and Nikki Reed are all over him in Thirteen, Kip Pardue had the greatest early-00s imaginable.
I often wonder what Kip Pardue is doing with himself just because… his name is Kip Pardue and he was supposed to be a BIG STAR!
“Gary Fleder was kind of a hot-ticket A-list director for a while there– Kiss the Girls, Don’t Say a Word, that thing where Gary Sinise was a cyborg or something. (What WAS that called?)”
The Gary Sinise movie was called Impostor, and I think that’s what killed his career. The trailers made it look like such cheap, derivative Sci-Fi that the Showtime Outer Limits reboot was snickering at it.
Just to spite IO’s naysaying of this topic, I hope that Gary Fleder, Steven Baigelman and John Herzfeld all get together to direct an anthology flick starring Devon Sawa, Kip Pardue, Thomas Ian Nicholas, Matthew Davis, Claire Forlani, Dominique Swain, Shannyn Sossamon, Michael C. Maronna, Brenden Sexton III, Jason London, Jeremy London, Natasha Gregson Wagner, and Agnes Bruckner.
I was gonna add Johnny Whitworth from Empire Records, but he’s back with a vengeance thanks to his role as Not Matthew Fox in LIMITLESS.
Sorry…Double Post.
Dominique Swain!
Has anyone seen the classic NEW BEST FRIEND (2002) featuring Ms. Swain, Mia Kirschner and Taye Diggs? It’s basically a smuttier version of 2000’s THE IN CROWD. There was a time when HBO put them in constant rotation. They kind of blend together in my head, and are full of actors that would be perfect for the above mentioned anthology film (which I fully endorse).
I have seen it, and it is an OFF THE CHARTS boner masterpiece with hotter lesbian scenes than you’d ever expect name actresses to be doing. HOT AS HELL. (In Crowd was relatively PG-13 by comparison, though points for it being a Mary Lambert joint)
But back to New Best Friend, I believe once-ubiquitous Rachel True (aka the Black Ghosbuster of The Craft) is in the house too. And I believe Taye Diggs just kind of skulks around the thing like a buttoned-up dork as some kind of investigator, never really getting in on any of the action.
But Dominique Swain in Lolita and Face/Off — to say nothing of the SHAWN MULLINS ROCKABYE VIDEO– was near K-Stew levels for me.
Again I am not shitting on it. I just find it fascinating in a very sabermetrics sort of way. It’s the movie version of sabermetrics.
Ha yes! I think I’ve seen both multiple times, if I’m being honest. I would argue they’re part of the post-CRUEL INTENTIONS/WILD THINGS trashy, teen sex thriller fad, of which, of course, the direct to video (or DVD by this point) sequels to those two are included.
Off topic:
HOLY SHIT, Victoria Jackson is FUCKING NUTS.
Not only is she fucking nuts. She’s also fucked her face up with some weird facelifts. Seriously, what the fuck happened to her in Dennis Miller? How fucking mental did 9/11 make these two?
Dennis Miller made a turn for the right but is still basically the same act — the same person– as before. I wouldn’t paint the two with the same brush at all. In fact, I’ve always cynically wondered if Miller’s conversion to common-sense Republican windbag wasn’t some smart, calculated career move to fill a certain void that no one had yet seized upon.
But far back as his ’92 special, he’s stumping big-time for Ross Perot and Admiral Stockdale, so not like he was some firebrand leftist to begin with.
Hell, I didn’t even like freaking Clinton in 92 because I WAS A TEENAGE REPUBLICAN, but a lot of people liked the third party that year. So it would make sense someone like Miller at that time, would be for Perot.
Now, is it fair to paint them with the same brush? Probably not, but both of them seem to have radically changed on… 9/12/2001. Miller has admitted as much. Victoria Jackson seemingly changed as well. If only Ron Silver were here to smack them back into some sort of classy conservatism. If there is such a thing, but the conversion of these two SNL castmates to conservative firebrands creeps me out.
Love the casting of Ed Harris as John McCain in HBO’s Game Change.
The problem with Miller is not that he pitched right, but that he lost his sense of humor. One of the smartest comics of his generation was suddenly unable to construct a joke. During the 2004 campaign, he’d say, “I don’t know who Carol Moseley-Braun is, and neither does she.” Where’s the joke? That’s not a joke. It’s just a bland, generic insult. And inaccurate: she was already in the history books as the first elected Black female senator. And when Sonia Sotamayor was nominated to the Supreme Court, he responded by sticking a flower in his teeth and doing a deplorable Carmen Miranda impression, then added a crack about her housecleaning abilities. Nice.
As for Jackson, it’s my understanding that she’s always been a whack-job, but she kept it to herself until fairly recently.
Yancy: re ARTHUR–I haven’t seen him drink in any of the clips I’ve seen, which suggests that they’ve changed it to the world’s worst case of arrested development. We’ll hafta see.
Miller isn’t like a crazy, frothing at the mouth, Beck-esq weirdo. He’s just a run of the mill conservative, but Cadarva is dead on about the complete lack of actual humor in what he offers nowadays. I don’t know how many of you saw his last HBO special “All In” but it was basically just him telling the audience his political views with no real punch-lines or wit. There were a few amusing references and lines but it was a far cry from him back in the 90s, when he was really sharp and funny, whether on SNL or his HBO show.
Also, did anyone else occasionally watch his short lived CNBC talk show? The panel part of the show, competely ripping off Maher’s format, was actually solid but it had by far the worst, most strained, hackey monologue I think I’ve seen, night after night right at the beginning of the show. Just the worst, most lame jokes. Stuff Leno or Lopez wouldn’t touch on their worst nights. His “rants” were still solid but the monologue was honestly embarassing and uncomfortable to watch.
I’m with you hcat- the humor in DIE HARD you mentioned and just how *fun* and smarmy and awesome Bruce Willis was back then No one pulls that off today without seeming smug.
re: ‘the thin man’ debacle-in-waiting,
what on earth does “The new remake script will provide a contemporary attitude, but retain the period setting of the 1930s” mean? sounds like a bloody horrible idea, to be written by ‘bad boys II’ scribe no less. enter nick & nora: “don’t be alarmed, we’re wealthy inebriated caucasian sleuths!” (or is that from BBI, i think so. whatever, fts)
(i don’t think of bruce’s john mcclane as smarmy at all in mct’s original ‘die hard’, more a bit of a blue-collar work-a-day no-nonsense slightly-glum kind-hearted smart-ass just trying to survive)
damn i missed the edit window but i meant to say above that ‘smarmy’ is what harry ellis (hart bochner) has covered in ‘die hard’
When it comes to Die Hard. You folks pay attention to Leah. She knows what’s going on and is completely right about John in the first film. The fact that you.. folks… found him smug… confounding is the word that has the most results on the board.
gee thanks io. it’s a tradition in our house to watch ‘die hard’ every christmas eve come hell or highwater, so by now i know it by heart, word for word — post apocalypse i may have to resort to acting it out with some willing participant a la SW in ‘reign of fire’-style
(john mccee is a bit of smug prick in DH2, i’ve made my loathing of harlin’s sequel plenty clear before so i won’t rehash)
wow some weird box reorientation just happened in the comments mid-post. apparently now there are boxes
Leah, you have proven yourself extremely knowledgeable of Die Hard. I also dislike Die Hard 2 but for my own “WHY ON EARTH DID TERRORIST NEED TO BRING ATTENTION TO THEMSELVES BY CRASHING A PLANE BEING FLOWN BY FREAKIN COLM MEANEY? WHY DAMN IT” reasons. That right there takes me out of the movie every god damn time.
DH2 is a nasty little piece of work, and compared to the classic original is a fine example of the difference between a film made by a practitioner of action excellence and suspenseful storytelling at the top of his game (mct), and a mediocre shithouse director with a complete lack of feeling for character, the ability to build tension, the importance of story arc/emotional truth over ridiculous empty, nasty wise-cracking bombastic spectacle (harlin). blech.
i could write a dissertation on how ‘aliens’ in ’86, ‘die hard’ in ’88 and ‘hunt for red october’ in ’90 represent the holy trinity of the last great american in-camera action films before the advent of the CGI revolution starting in earnest with T2 in ’91 and going flat-out into the future with ‘independence day’ in ’96, but it would likely be boring as shit (needless to say kudos to the dynamic duo of mct and his photog de bont for being responsible for two of the holy trinity)
(the novel ’58 minutes’ on which DH2 is based is much better than the movie — yet again a story in which the daughter of the protag is in peril converted for the screen to wife holly. i have a habit of reading source material after i see a movie just to see from whence it came)
Actually, since starting in on the DIE HARD topic, I found out the original was MUCH darker and in fact the word “nasty” was used. McTiernan turned it down repeatedly because he found it to be a “nasty piece of work.” Interesting DH2 took that route full-on.
I also had spaced that McTiernan is in the pokey still. This Movieline piece made me chuckle:
http://www.movieline.com/2010/10/5-escape-tips-for-convicted-die-hard-director-john-mctiernan.php?page=1
Leah: Just curious. Did you read The Siege of Trencher’s Farm before or after you saw Peckinpah’s Straw Dogs?
re: die hard, my impression from everything i’ve heard/read from mct on the subject, the original screenplay(s) were far closer to the source material, thorp’s rather grim and extremely graphic ‘nothing lasts forever’ (quite a good book if you like that sort of thing), and had to be extensively retooled with a different sensibility before he would come on board.
joe: after. i saw ‘straw dogs’ for the first time waaay too young. i’m curious to see if the ‘straw dogs’ remake is more faithful to the ‘trencher’s farm’ novel, which is considerably different in both content and tone from peckinpah’s adaptation
Leah: I have often said that Peckinpah’s film actually was much ballsier than the novel. In the novel, David Sumner is defending himself, his wife — and their young child. And let’s face it — an audience would forgive a guy just about anything if he were defending a kid. But Bloody Sam didn’t make it that easy for us. Also, in the book, the mentally challenged guy that David chooses to defend DID NOT kill anyone. Which makes the moral question a bit trickier in the movie.
BTW: Over the years, I have heard first-hand from Elliott Gould, Donald Sutherland and Cliff Robertson that each actor turned down Straw Dogs before Dustin Hoffman came on board.
joe, from what i’ve read over the years (and i’m far from an expert on ‘straw dogs’ unlike i imagine you are) sam p. was working out some serious personal demons with his ‘dogs’ adaptation, with his controversial portrayals of both david and amy…i can understand why gould, sutherland and robertson passed to be honest, david’s choices/raw aggression as envisioned by peckinpah were a tricky proposition at best and could have been a disaster waiting to happen (sounds like sutherland’s experience shooting ‘don’t look now’ just a year or two later was significantly more pleasant at any rate. ha ha, couldn’t resist). did any of them mention regretting their decision to pass on the role? just curious
Just something about Leah’s DH2 slam: I have no inside knowledge on this other than some no-name dude on AICN years ago claiming he worked for McTiernan and McT was burnt out with minimal enthusiasm for film, which is such probable bullshit I probably shouldn’t be repeating it as fact. But while acknowledging that DH2 is mean and in many ways a perversion of the glorious original: I don’t think Harlin is really a shithouse director, and if you’ve seen him speak at Q&As (he did one for DH2 here last fall at the Egyptian) or on his commentaries, he’s a blast, very enthusiastic, a good-time guy whose love for what he does is extremely evident. Now, I’d agree his gruff Finnish frat guy sensibility PROBABLY wasn’t in keeping with the McClane ethos, but not knowing either guy from a hole in the ground and only going by their body of work, Harlin seems like a rowdy blowhard who relishes making B junk and filming hot chicks and big explosions; McTiernan just always comes off as some DEAD SERIOUS, grumpy, Robert Davi-looking Tom Clancy-type taskmaster. Honestly, if you’ve seen NOMADS, then you know ALL the great, funny, playful shit in his triumvirate of classics were courtesy their flamboyant writers and awesome DPs.
I’ve certainly liked a fair number of his 90s and 00s movies, but his particular lightning in a bottle had a (brilliant) three, four year run. Twenty years ago. That’s not to deny its greatness, but sometimes I see Die Hard fans acting like McTiernan is some STORYTELLING WIZARD who could tackle anything– Give him Bond! Give him Ethan Hunt! Give him Spider-Man! He’s the last guy who knows how to shoot action before Michael Bay fucked it all up!
Just some of these rallying cries seem overly charitable. Like, I’d like nothing more than for Peter Hyams or John Badham to knock one out of Fenway once again in their lives, but it is just possible McTiernan wouldn’t even muster the energy or remotely care if given another A-list turn.
VIVA LA HARLIN. DEEPEST BLUEST POWER. COVENANT POWER.
DRIVEN POWER.
Lex
Been looking for a link to this Sketcher’s commercial for you for a while:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Dse0Ue8X6s
Her name is:
Breana McDow
Oh my GOD.
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOK AT HER.
Too bad she’s wearing stupid-ass shoes.
No shit!! BMc in the house!! She deserves her own moniker. TOO HOT!
hey look, dipshits on parade
re: lex’s harlin idiocy
PUPPY POWER
what a load of horseshit. now you should launch into your “‘aliens’ is the shittiest of the franchise and NOBODY NOBODY NOBODY likes or watches it anymore, period” diatribe of nitwitisism and then browbeat anybody who disagrees with your crusade of abject foolishness, that would be the cherry on top.
anyway, who here claimed mct was/is going to be at the top of his game again? nobody.
speaking for myself, i clearly indicated that with ‘die hard’ mct was near the height of his powers. he’s clearly had a mixed-bag career after a legend sprint out of the blocks, so what? all you need is one, mct’s had 3. so it goes for probably the majority of good directors. ‘die hard w/a vengeance’ as latter day mct is lightyears more savvy, sophisticated, skilled and engaging an action flick than anything harlin’s ever pooped out, he isn’t fit to sniff mct’s skid marks.
and this gem:
“Honestly, if you’ve seen NOMADS, then you know ALL the great, funny, playful shit in his triumvirate of classics were courtesy their flamboyant writers and awesome DPs.”
oh really, you know that do you? you know no such thing, talking out of your ass yet again. were you on set during the filming of mct’s classic flicks to make such a ridiculous assertion? of course not, you have NO IDEA what you’re talking about, as usual. oh wait, you know it because you saw an INTERVIEW with mct once and he was grumpy! stick to making lists re: crappy 80’s movies that rotated on HBO when you were a teen, you excel at that.
harlin has never made anything even close to an action classic (let alone 3 for the ages like mct) -‘cliffhanger’ was as close as he’s ever going to get and that’s coated with cheese, not saying much. since then he’s made a couple fun, absurd b-grade mediocrities along the way and some serious big-time stickers, and then faded into obscurity where he belongs.
OBSCURITY POWER.
and ftr: contrary to your constant assertions, the personality or enthusiasm of a director as a good-time charley has NO BEARING whatsoever on the ability to direct a movie or the finished product of the movie itself, and that you think it does is just laughable. so harlin’s a fun, enthusiastic blowhard, yippee, good for him, so what? who gives a shit. pity none of that translates into actual skills.
What level of fucking meds are you on, crazy lady? Jesus Christ, how you can take such an innocuous posting and spin such a flurry of rage in response is truly a wonder.
And LORD RENNY has at least ONE IMMORTAL MASTERWORK I’d highly recommend you watch:
FORD FAIRLANE. DICE POWER.
And fuck it, I’m gonna DROP THE KNOWLEDGE, ALL APOLOGIES, COBAIN STYLE. GET READY LUSHNZ:
RED OCTOBER is a MASSIVE BORE. It’s BORING. It’s overrated. It’s drier than fucking Saltines. No action, NO SUSPENSE, NO IDEA what the motherfuck is going on AT ALL.
Die Hard, sure. Predator, eh, sure, but it’s a bit of a 3-star movie than got bad reviews at the time that AMAZINGLY has some IMMORTAL rep now. But it’s awesome.
RED OCTOBER though? Dry, sexless, confusing, dorky BOY SCOUT SHIT that was IMMEDIATELY obliterated by Patriot Games and Clear and Present; And I love Baldwin and Connery and Sam Neill are GODS, it looks great, it’s SOLID, it’s certainly not a “bad” movie…
But it’s geeky and ASEXUAL as hell, CONFUSING, NO IDEA what’s going on EVER in it, some total DORKFEST for just-the-facts-ma’am types. It’s the movie equivalent of doing 11th grade Trig homework. BORING MOVIE.
BASIC and ROLLERBALL and THIRTEENTH WARRIOR are ALL better movies than fucking RED OCTOBER. Die Hard 3 wipes the floor with it.
And news flash NZ LOON:
Being a GOOD TIME DUDE who likes PUSSY and BOOZE and GETTING WASTED absolutely makes for a GREAT DIRECTOR.
Maybe your PERSONAL GOD James Cameron should try being MORE HORNY AND WASTED AND GOOFY AND HILARIOUS. Because DIRECTORS SHOULD BE PUSSYHOUNDS, not SCIENCE GUYS.
Also just to annoy THE HEN OF THE HOT BLOG:
YAY DAKOTA. YEP YEP. GOD GOD GOD I LOVE DAKOTA FANNING. DAKOTA. DAKOTA POWER. LOOK AT HER. DAKOTA 4 EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVER
DAKOTA. DAKOTA. How do you guys get thru your days not thinking about LOOK AT HER
Seriously, I know at least one or two non-homos post on the Cold Blog:
You guys aren’t just HEAD OVER HEELS for DAKOTA?
GOD I am SUCH a DAKOTA FAN. Maybe even more than K-STEW
sorry did you say something? didn’t think so
I like Renny Harlin. Die Hard 2 isn’t as good as Die Hard but it’s hardly an abomination. It’s an entertaining sequel. Deep Blue Sea is awesome. A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: Dream Master is awesome. I haven’t seen The Long Kiss Goodnight since it was in theaters but I remember thinking it was pretty damn cool. Cliffhanger kicks ass. Mindhunters is a fun B movie. He’s made some duds, and recent stuff like 12 Rounds and The Covenant are lame, but I like a director who can assemble fun action or horror or action/horror flicks, and for a long time Harlin was such a director.
And talk about overreacting to a harmless post leah. Christ almighty.
THE EXCORCIST: THE BEGINNING is not worthless. It’s an okay studio horror picture, and a fascinating film school moment because the Harlin version sits side by side by the Schrader version, the same movie essentially made by two wildly different filmmakers.
The Schrader version is better and interesting, but hardly the lost classic many wanted it to be. It’s a good movie though, a supernatural drama basicallly. Harlin’s really is fine too, for what it is, though there’s one moment of violence that I thought almost pushes things in too nihilistic a direction and the CG is pretty shoddy and overly abundant.
Yeah Harlin’s version is watchable, in large part thanks to the great Stellan Skarsgard.
You insulted Gugino and Red October, Lex. SHENANIGANS UPON YOU SIR! SHENANIGANS!
Red October is incredible but I do agree that McT is well past his prime and has been since With A Vengence. Giving him a large budget picture when he gets out would be like handing your big comedy tentpole over to Frank Oz.
On another topic I was just watching a few trailers and really dug the one for Henry’s Crime. James Caan has always seemed to me to be a bit stiff in his comedic roles (even in Kiss Me Goodbye which I seem to recall a number of people really liking around here) but this one looks like he’s a little looser than normal. Watched Captain America as well, this just keeps getting farther down the list, not the comic purist that some are but Cap using a handgun is just blasphemous.
Driven was terrible. Classically, hilariously terrible. I knew I’d entered MST3K territory when the car flew completely out of the stadium. And the last two minutes of cheers and grins and everyone’s happy and it goes on and on and the music swells and swells… one of 2001’s worst, with I Am Sam and Ghosts of Mars, but I look back with fondness on how bad it was, kinda like Dungeons & Dragons or Sleepwalkers. And Harlin’s never recovered. (12 Rounds?) But he’ll always have a soft spot in my heart for Nightmare on Elm Street 4, Ford Fairlane and Cliffhanger. DH2 was weak, but I’ve never had a desire to watch a DH sequel a second time whereas I’ve seen the original 4-5 times.
Red October was great. So were Patriot Games and Clear & Present Danger, but that doesn’t subtract from Red October. But wow, I look at McTiernan and wonder what happened. Rollerball sucked, Basic sucked, and then he can’t get a job again? Or maybe he just didn’t want to do John Cena movies before he went to jail, I don’t know.
“it’s a tradition in our house to watch ‘die hard’ every christmas eve come hell or highwater.”
Coincidentally, every Christmas Eve we watch HELL AND HIGH WATER.
MEDIOCRE JOKE.
Hcat, that Captain America trailer is bringing the geeks together because it’s tremendous. Cap also used a gun in WWII. The whole reason he only used his fighting skill and shield after the war had everything to do with the war. Much like Bats and the Tenth Doctor, they have held guns in their hands at various points in their history.
12 Rounds is a terrific goofy 80s-style action movie. Ir’s one of Harlin’s best. Also in McTiernan’s favor, I like Basic AND Rollerball. His only real disasters are the HORRIBLE Medicine Man and maybe Last Action Hero, though I seem to remember liking the latter once upon a time.
One thing I’ve always enjoyed is how Harlin’s two big 1990 Joel Silver movies (DH2, Ford Fairlane) look NOTHING like any of his other movies. All his stuff has this rusty, aqua-and-grey, blue-tinted grim, sludgy look with a few burnished, sun-scorched day scenes. DH2 and FF, however, are all golden and magenta with popping primary colors and neon and that early 90s Fox look. It’s as if Silver, like Bruckheimer seems to, had some checklist of visual signifiers and stock images and color beats his directors were obligated to hit.
My problems with 12 Rounds are John Cena and the rating. That guy can’t act to save his life and a movie like that should be R. Nice to see Aiden Gillen though.
I remember liking Last Action Hero quite a lot, considering the reviews, though it’s probably been at least 10 years since I’ve seen it.
Don’t fuck with John Cena HE’S A BAD MAN!
“C-E-N-A. Come off the DOME like EV-ER-Y DAY. Come at ya from both sides like LESBIAN THREEWAYS. WHAT?”
CENA POWER.
I won’t fuck with him. When are Cena, The Rock, and Goldberg going to team up for a B-action movie?
Oh, and Harlin’s totally death-metal Exorcist prequel is WAY better than that Schrader thing. Harlin’s had a feel of genuine evil– it’s a mean, unclean movie that plays like some queasy Morbid Angel video from 1993 where it just gets under your skin whether you’re religious or not.
Schrader’s version is just a bore, and that fey balding guy at the center of it taunting Skarsgaard is just so annoying and unpleasant to look at, it undermines the whole movie. What were they thinking with that dude?
I like the wacky DEEP BLUE SEA, and I guess some of Harlin’s other stuff is okay, but I hold a grudge. Back when his production company was doing some low budget indie stuff (like RAMBLING ROSE — bet some of you didn’t know THAT!), he expressed interest in a script of mine that a director had optioned. Harlin had director approval, and even though my guy had made a couple of good indies with respectable casts and some notable music videos, Harlin vetoed him and the deal went away. Sure, I know if Harlin had been truly over the moon about my script, something would’ve been worked out, but I prefer to remain bitter. 🙂
Isn’t his next project back in his native Finland? Passion project, or has Hollywood finally written him off entirely. After seeing THE COVENANT, I’m thinking the latter.
yikes, ftr in hind sight considering what happened in japan, i regret using the insensitive idiom “hell or highwater” to make my point in the first place (or is that a proper idiom? at any rate)
(“And talk about overreacting to a harmless post leah. Christ almighty.”
christ almighty lord on high jesus of nazareth, doc paul, are you lex’s echo now? boo hoo, did somebody dare to disagree with of your inane little outfit who makes a career out of bellowing ludicrously OTT outlandish gibberishtic nonsense all over the blog 24/7? spare me your hypocritical righteous indignation)
renny harlin is a MEDIOCRE director who makes mediocre-to-shit movies. funny how that works. mct’s filmography complete with a couple real stinkers blows harlin’s middling career out of the water any day of the week.
harlin’s one-note ‘exorcist’ attempt gets under my skin about as far as a cotton ball would do, with about as much creeping ‘genuine evil’ at work as said puff. because like all mediocre, middling directors with heavy hands and limited ability, vision and flair, harlin’s understanding of using character development, building tension and frightening imagery IN SERVICE of a good story – rather than as an end unto itself – is limited. mediocrity is cutting even genuinely intense images together and thinking it’s the same as telling an effective, compelling tale. (it’s not)
(oops, meant to say, i may be the only person on earth who has a soft spot for ‘kiss goodnight’ but that doesn’t mean harlin’s a good director)
The Hot Blog: Where Renny Harlin PISSES PEOPLE OFF!
Oi crikey and how der doo… was havin a bit of a chin wag with big jim, rip roar ya doo, psycho-doo.
I hate men and i’m old and my vagina has dust on it, howdee dooo crikey coo, (ftr that’s a big puff doo-hoo rikey doo psycho-dooo). i’m a lesbian and i eat more clam than the jolly rancher. dobby doo, taking the wee nipper to see some weepy-woos because that’s what man-hating overbeating mommies do when they want to make sure their nippers grow up to have issues.
psycho-dooo, i want to suck mct’s cock but excuse me paul if i don’t cheerlead your little chin wag doo
oh and i’m an alcoholic part-time lesbian and full-time luish whose hubby rightly left me.
zoody-zoooooo
Was always a fan of Harlin, and that includes Cutthroat Island. Genuinely enjoyed 12 Rounds, and the guy even wrote me a thank you email in 2009 after I mentioned it in a year-end blog post (a minor thing, but it was a nice and unneeded gesture). As for the rating issue, the film plays like a hybrid of Speed and Die Hard 3. Having watched Speed recently (still holds up as one of the best action films in modern history), that one could have easily gotten a PG-13 purely by toning down the language, but neither 12 Rounds or Speed are huge body-count movies. And you can tell that DeBont was forcing himself to include the opening and closing murders (the building guard and Richard Schiff’s train driver). to ‘spice up’ a movie otherwise lacking in hard violence.
All of this is a little ironic, since Harlin used to specialize in obscenely violent action/horror pictures. Everyone knows Die Hard 2 and its plane crash, and others have brought up the cruel violence of Exorcist IV. But let’s not forget Long Kiss Goodnight, where bad guys walk into a bar and literally guns down every innocent bystander in the place out of laziness. And Cliffhanger is a much bloodier and meaner movie than it arguably had to be, to the point where it just barely got an R. When your Nightmare On Elm Street sequel qualifies as one of your kinder/gentler films, you know you’ve got a thing for gruesome violence.
Hell, Ford Fairlane is unbelievably mean and really did not have to be that way, but that’s why they Koala didn’t die!
Sucker Punch reviews have been pretty brutal, Mendelson’s was somewhat positive.
I’ve had a bad feeling on that since I heard about it. Part of it was how much I hated Watchmen.
Paul is very light weight, but surprisingly enjoyable. In fact, Blythe Danner cracks off some of the film’s best lines.
Paul is not lightweight because of the Wiig sub-plot alone. The dismissive nature of that statement is just, shameful. Shameful, Hoppie. Shameful.
Now with Sucker Punch, that film is not for everyone. It’s most definitely not for critics, who most likely lack the that particular piece of grey matter to get it. It’s not that Sucker Punch represents a brilliant piece of cinema or anything, but it just seems most critics do not come equipped with the ability to process these films.
You’re easily placated, IO.
The more control Snyder has over a project, the higher the odds for a bad outcome. I was originally sold on him for Superman because Nolan controlled the pen. Now that’s passed, and after witnessing Sucker Punch (To The Audience), Superman is in Singer-like trouble. He better be flying within the first 15 and then fight five villains non-stop, or Legendary better prepare to use TDKReturns money to balance the checkbook.
Dude should have taken on Wonder Woman.
Leah mediocre to shit for Harlin’s entire output? That’s so off base it’s not even funny. Artic Heat is a terrific B movie that showcases a young pup director with uber talent to burn. Remember seeing it on first release and thinking that this guy is going to go a long way.
Cliffhanger features set piece action that shames McTiernan and co. For all its godawful dialogue that film is one mother fucking solid A Class action number. None of his films are perfect but I don’t think you can dismiss his entire filmography as mediocre to shit. Just on this blog alone shows you that people have really enjoyed his films. Though I agree about DH2. I got a fucking migraine during that film that I couldn’t shake for days. Just wrong every step of the way, though who knows how much of it got twiddled by the studio every step of the way.
Martin, when you stop being a repcon, then you can bring up the word PLACATE. Until then, you know jack shit about me, and seem to have missed my point all together. Critics see flicks like Sucker Punch and they do not connect with the material.
Sure, it could be the writing, the acting, or the directing that sucks in these films, or it could be the films are what they are, and we have a bunch of people reviewing them that are missing that certain something that gives them insight into films like Sucker Punch.
Again, Sucker Punch could be shit, or it could be a film that works on some level that most critics today seem not to have. Time will tell of course but after the last 8 years of films that have all sorts of deep shit going on, and having critics dismiss it right out of hand. I’ve pretty much grown frustrated with all critics when it comes to most genre films.
Oh yeah, the geek critics are the fucking worse because they are horror fans, and I will leave it at that for now.
so what’s the rationale JBD, that people can’t enjoy stupid mediocre movies? that would rule out most movies (plus, there’s no accounting for bad taste, as they say). of course the interpretation of the medium is inherently subjective, but there’s also a universal pecking order of truly talented action directors who transcend standard convention (mediocrity) as acknowledged by general industry consensus involving many factors over time, and renny harlin is firmly bottom tier.
specifically, harlin’s filmography is one silly, one-note heavy-handed (often stupidly violent) flick after another. i already mentioned earlier that ‘cliffhanger’ is as close to a classic action flick as harlin has ever made, and it’s stupid as all hell. i have it on VHS and my boy watched it what, a few months ago toward the end of last year, and it’s just as silly and overwrought as the day i first saw it, probably more so now because stupid tends to marinate and multiply exponentially over time.
to say the action in ‘cliffhanger’ outdoes mct’s action at its finest in ‘predator’, ‘die hard’, ‘red october’ (and perhaps even ‘DH w/a vengeance’) is a HUGE call that i don’t agree with at all, because to say it yet again, action is not the goal, action in a GOOD movie SERVES the story rather than IS the story, which is what separates a good action movie (die hard) from a mediocre one (die hard 2), and good action directors from middling ones. and what separates mct from harlin.
there are tons of somewhat entertaining disposable action moves wherein action rather than a compelling story becomes the endgame, harlin being a practitioner of such — and relatively few action movies wherein action effectively SERVES the story, enhances the story, thus creating a movie that rises ABOVE convention and mediocrity. and therein lies the rub.
yes, ‘cliffhanger’ has some decent set-pieces and the hanging about on cliffs is really quite effective, pity the story is a silly heavy-handed cheese fest. ultimately good stories are what count, and what separates the middling from the outstanding.
so in closing as i’m out of time, i can and do dismiss harlin’s entire filmography as a mediocre-to-crappy dag-fest.
‘deep blue sea’ is just a laughably absurd but admittedly fun b-movie with the WORST (cg) sharks in the history of sharks, a competent mediocrity that perhaps could have been a classic of the genre if it wasn’t directed by a one-note practitioner of silliness with little ability to convey nuance and create the emotional core required to transcend mediocrity. i have a soft spot for geena and sam l. jackson and fox and bierko in ‘long kiss’ like i said, mainly because of the cast and their chemistry and some fairly decent action, but the film-making is strictly standard convention and i think that’s being kind.
i stand by my assertion that nothing in harlin’s career rises above thoroughly middling convention/mediocrity. that doesn’t mean people can’t enjoy his efforts, as i have on occasion.
uh oh i think i killed it
well i didn’t get to finish my already long-winded mediocrity spiel before, so to be a completest in my own mind i may as well quickly let the air out of my sails entirely before i hit the hay:
there’s a litmus test, a reason why action films such as die hard, raiders of the lost ark, terminator/II, the matrix, aliens, predator, blade runner, mm/road warrior, lethal weapon, etc etc ‘insert classic action here’ are rated time and time again as modern classics of the genre — and why ‘driven’, ‘cliffhanger’, ‘cutthroat island’, ‘insert harlin’s ilk here’ are NOT — and that is the powerful connection audiences had, and continue to have, with the iconic characters and lasting themes of this first batch of classic films, and their impact on wider popular culture.
the modern classics give birth to action icons such as john mcclane, sarah connor/the terminator, indiana jones, neo, ripley, the predator, jack ryan, mad max, riggs and murtough, etc – characters with whom people connect and about whom they care, characters that people remember, that stand the test of time, forged by virtue of imagination, vision, flair and deft hands.
there’s a reason why gabe walker is not a beloved action icon, or morgan & shaw, or carter blake, because nobody remembers or gives a shit about these characters and the silly movies they were in, people walk out of the cinema never to give harlin’s one-dimensional leads a second thought.
and that’s why harlin isn’t anywhere NEAR in the same league as the real deal action directors of the modern era who’ve honed iconic characters using imagination and subtlety via stories exceptionally well told.
(and now i’ll lay off poor harlin who is really just one of many so-called modern action directors who suffers the curse of being unremarkable and one-dimensional)
HARLIN POWER.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD GET SOME NEW MATERIAL POWER
Sorry to have drawn your ire again Leah. Not trying to make enemies here. Just think that was an awfully innocuous post to have gotten you so worked up. But whatever. I’ll just ignore you and your lengthy tirades from now on.
This weekend is perfect for a Renny Harlin film festival. I’m thinking Mindhunters, Deep Blue Sea, A Nightmare on Elm Street 4, and Cliffhanger. Good times. Nothing wrong with making disposable but entertaining action movies. I wish a few more directors were capable of that. Speaking of such, watched some of the awesome Predator 2 last night. Stephen Hopkins is now directing episodes of Shameless and Californication. For shame. Get him another fun B movie.
Yes if critics don’t like Sucker Punch it couldn’t possibly be because it’s an awful mess. It’s because they couldn’t process it. Of course, it blew Captain of the Zach Snyder Cheerleading Squad Devin Faraci’s mind, but that’s hardly a shocker. I think Martin said it well when he stated that the more control Snyder has, the worse the outcome is likely to be.
A Harlin festival is nothing without The Adventures of Ford Fairlane.
BOOTY TIME!
If I have time I’ll make sure to squeeze Fairlane in there.
On a more serious note, Cliffhanger is a genuine oddity with a multitude of charms. An absolutely terrific opening scene that the mundane rest of the movie never lives up to, John Lithgow hamming it up even by his own standards, a delightful gaggle of early 90s bit part players. And Janine Turner when she was still kind of pretty and not insane. I like it.
Oh yeah, and it has the most bizarre intercutting of completely unconvincing, poorly lit sets and location shots EVER.
Michael Rooker, Leon, Rex Linn, Ralph Waite, Bruce McGill, Zach Grenier. Now that’s a supporting cast. I think it holds up pretty well.
What are the chances Harlin’s 5 Days of August actually opens in the US before it hits DVD? It stars Val Kilmer, and lately two out of every three movies Kilmer does go straight to DVD. It also has Dean Cain, king o’ crappy straight-to-DVD movies.
Cleaner was straight-to-DVD, wasn’t it?
Yeah Cleaner went straight-to-DVD. Seems likely that 5 Days of August will as well.
Paul, Sucker Punch could be horrible, but I am still apprehensive to take the reviews of this film with anything more than a grain of salt, because as a group they seem to lack the ability to take films like this seriously. They can take a drama seriously, even if it’s far-fetched, but you throw in some genre elements, and they start complaining about Scott Pilgrim having to fight all seven exes.
Critics simply, geek critics included (geeks are still the worst and Farci liking this film leaves me apprehensive since he thinks The Human Centipede is IMPORTANT FILMMAKING), miss things in these films time and time again, and that alone has made taking their word on a genre film impossibly hard for me.
Scott Pilgrim has a rating of 81% at RT. I assume most critics liked it. Even if they didn’t, it hardly means they didn’t get it or couldn’t process it. I think that’s a really lazy and simplistic argument.
It’s lazy and simplistic to you but I wouldn’t take your opinion on a genre film either. Some folks and most critics you simply cannot trust about most genre films. If you, I don’t know, really enjoyed these movies and felt that time and time again these films that you liked were slighted inane and myopic commentary. You would feel the same.
Seeing as you don’t like most of these films, go out of your way not to see them, and then get pissy at me for enjoying them. Makes me care very little about how you feel about an opinion I have held over for over a decade.
Oh yeah, remove Edgar Wright from SP and add another director without as much love, and that rating is much different. You just keep going on about RT being a valid way to judge criticism. It’s cute.
One last thing; you don’t want any enemies but you respond the way that you do. You should maybe re-evaluate that tone of yours. If you want to avoid having enemies on the board. Hell, I don’t blame Leah for going off on Harlin because he so fucking sucks. His films succeed despite him.
Back to the same old IO. I am not being pissy at you. You are so damn defensive, and you are being extremely condescending and talking straight out of your ass. I love genre films. I’m a huge horror nut. Critics hate horror movies, but I don’t think it’s because they don’t get them or can’t process them. Different strokes for different folks.
Doesn’t an 81% mean that it was a critical success? Do you consider SP a critical failure? Critics love Edgar Wright as much as fanboys and, what, gave SP a pass just because he directed it?
Take your own advice man. You piss and moan about people being mean to you here but you are a straight up jerk above. I am not attacking you. I am expressing my opinion. You are such a delicate flower.
Paul wrote; “Yes if critics don’t like Sucker Punch it couldn’t possibly be because it’s an awful mess. It’s because they couldn’t process it.”
That’s being pissy. Also, critics hate horror films because mostly, they are god damn awful. Being a geek and being a horror nut are two different things. Being a geek means that you are usually down with female empowerment. While being a horror nut usually means you enjoy watching females get senselessly murdered. Aww… horror… what a great genre.
Me being obviously silly aside, Horror is horror. I don’t even consider it a part of genre but that could be just me. Still, most horror films are pointless, while most other genre films are trying to state something that’s usually missed by critics but easily received by the audience.
One last thing: you are being condescending to me. It’s not the other way around because it’s my opinion, I explained it, and you still found it pointless. If that’s just not being mean for the sake of being mean, then I don’t know what it is. The fact that you think I am a delicate flower, after the way you responded to Leah’s rebuke of you, is pretty god damn funny.
Speaking of SUCKER PUNCH…I had a twitter argument/discussion with some fellow writers who think Snyder is an auteur. To me, that’s just plain silly. Yes, he has a visual style all his own but all he’s really doing is bringing comic books to life. Granted, SUCKER PUNCH is his own, obviously. Plus he shares no thematic elements in his films, etc.
Thoughts?
(**note: I generally like Snyders films and don’t think saying someone is NOT an auteur is like, an insult or anything. Nor do I think being an auteur is all that important)
He sure does have some passionate fans, but I think that’s just plain silly.
According to the LA Times Sucker Punch and Wimpy Kid Part 2 are tracking neck-in-neck, in the $20 million to $25 million range. If Wimpy Kid comes out ahead or close, would that be an upset, or is it not fair to compare the two?
No thematic elements, Don?
SPOILER:
With the exception of Legend of the Guardians, all his movies are about a bunch of heroes with the odds stacked against them who are completely screwed in the end. With the exception of Dawn of the Dead, they’re all about the nature of story-telling/myth-making and how it diverges from the actual reality of same (you could stretch and make a case for DOTD in that it departs from Romero canon by having zombies run, but that would be pushing it). He has also now made three period pieces that don’t adhere to any kind of realism as regards those periods.
SUCKER PUNCH is a LOT like Watchmen in its creation of alternate history, reappropriation of song cliches, and undercutting of superheroics with dark and perverse subtext. Unfortunately its story isn’t nearly as good.
Does anyone know if they are selling each of the SUCKER PUNCH one-sheets separately? Specifically the Vanessa Hudgens as Blondie one?
http://marketplaceadvisor.channeladvisor.com/storefrontprofiles/DeluxeSFItemDetail.aspx?sid=1&sfid=29421&c=699809&i=260104305
Anybody know a place that can turn an image from a movie poster into a pillowcase?
Can’t help you there, but surely it can be done.
Snyder is an auter and Sucker Punch is tremendous. It’s story is pretty sad but it’s a good story nonetheless. I am also happy that the Pixies may be getting some cash from this movie.
Any band that allows their song to be used as narration for a scene or theme deserves zero respect along with the cash.
Snyder an auteur? Didn’t realise auteur meant pilfering ideas from everyone else.
Career over.
i waited for hours and hours for DP to post a review of Sucker Punch..but i had to go to other sources…so the movie reviews are pretty bad .
also i don’t like this song … this is the same song used
in fight club ? time for Brad Pitt to hit somebody..
Where Is My Mind? – Yoav ft. Emily Browning – Sucker Punch Soundtrack
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZMrp8yDM78
Spirit, that entire post is just ninny. Totally ninny. It’s good to know that there’s a horror nut and a butt-rocker on this board. This really is the movie equivalent of rock n roll PARKING LOT!
“Didn’t realise auteur meant pilfering ideas from everyone else.”
You’re not familiar with Quentin Tarantino? Or George Lucas?
Here’s why Snyder’s an auteur: if you knew nothing about Sucker Punch, watched it sans credits, and I asked you who the director was, it’s a pretty solid bet you’d guess it on first try.
Are we all clear on what “auteur” means?
(no. no some are not)
Yes LYT and both of those guys aren’t auteurs.
i think there should now be a one hundred comment dust-up over exactly what an auteur is, and who qualifies as one
Russ Meyer = yes
George Lucas =no
LYT = 100% wrong. Sarris = 100% right
Don’t get ne started Leah
the misuse of that term by lazy web critics is a personal peeve.
Apparently every new young director is an auteur.
JBDFTW
i myself have a theory (sadly way way sillier than truffaut’s) that the definition of ‘auteur’ will have to evolve/adapt if the notion/concept of an auteur is going to ‘survive’ – for want of a better word – in the modern era and into the future, given the rapidly changing and quite radically different nature of film-making now than when the concept grew out of the new wave and solidified into the culture and vernacular to describe the directors of singular vision and ability.
movies were simply made differently then, creative control was more centralised, production was simpler, fewer fingers in the pie, and emphasis in post p was mainly on completing in-camera effects shots and editing. but now as we move into the ‘digi-age’ and we are apparently digitised, film production technique has changed (and likely will continue to evolve with technology, at least until the apocalypse, then it’s back to acting it out around the fire). in general with today’s increased emphasis/reliance on post prod/cgi/vis effects/compositing, large-scale filmmaking in particular is a more fragmented, time-and-labour intensive process; big productions tend to rely more and more on unit/assistant directors to handle action/green screen/effects work (which still often requires major commitment/performance form the actors) — even the very nature of film photography itself is changing with the proliferation of the digital medium altering production techniques, and emphasis now on post p enhancements such as lighting and digital clean-up, basic things that used to have to be achieved in-camera becoming less important.
anyway such a shift in the paradigm as it were is bound to impact on the very notion of the god-like overload auteur responsible for bringing their singular vision to the screen thru force of artistic vision, it’s simply become less practical. with more diffuse achievement from different sources required to combine to create the finished movie, this inevitably means diluted directorial influence. what this means for the future of auteur-ism, i have no idea.
(i almost called it ‘autism’, that would have gone down well. i realise i’m not the first person to propose/ruminate over the concepts above and combinations thereof, i’m not a big reader of the auteur critic wars or about the subject in general, so every single thing i’ve said here now may have already been said ad nauseum, not trying to be original just giving my individual take from my perspective. it’s a strange time. also i typed this fast whilst having a black russian so apologies for typos/run ons to anyone who reads it)
“the very notion of the god-like overload auteur responsible for bringing their singular vision to the screen thru force of artistic vision”
If that’s not the definition of Lucas’ role making the prequels, I don’t know what is. Whether or not the final product is deemed good isn’t the issue.
Seems to me “auteur” as used here just means a distinctive director YOU like. What was that about bullying again in that other thread, Don?
I’ve done my four years at film school, but let’s just take the Dictionary.com definition, shall we?
“a filmmaker whose individual style and complete control over all elements of production give a film its personal and unique stamp.
“a director whose creative influence on a film is so great as to be considered its author”
Tarantino = yes, Lucas = yes. Lloyd fucking Kaufman = yes. Snyder…best argument for no is that he usually makes adaptations and tries to be literal about it, thus rendering someone else’s vision.
I remember seeing the trailer for “9” (the animated film, not the musical) and it said, “From Visionary Director Shane Acker.” And I thought, “WHO??” When I got home, I looked him up: this was his first feature! He’d made three shorts, one of them an early version of “9”–and on the basis of this he’s a “visionary?” As it happened, “9” turned out to be a pretty good picture, but hardly a work of genius.
Note to Hollywood: terms like “auteur” and “visionary” may not be self-applied.
LYT-
I don’t mean to be bullying or angry. If we were hanging out we’d just be talking. Sorry if it comes off otherwise.
The simple and obvious fact that Snyder adapts material without changing ANYTHING about it or adding his own touches to it (and he does this proudly) makes him NOT an auteur. Snyder’s unique stamp is bringing other peoples art work, themes and stories to life.
If you read Daphne Du Maurier’s THE BIRDS it’s premise is adapted by Hitchcock but the rest of it bears little resemblance to the source material. Kubrick turned novels he was adapating inside out to make them fit HIS vision. Zack Snyder is a tracer or the guitar player in a cover band.
Four years at film school? Case closed then.
Pop culture xeroxing is not a personal vision.
I guess many producers to be called auteurs as their stamp is stronger than their directors.
You have your understanding and I’ll have mine.
I would think you could make a strong case for Sean Penn as an auteur.
Not that I’m defending Snyder, but as David O. Selznick once explained his success, “People expect the book.” Deviating too much from the source material can lead to big trouble, unless it’s fairly obscure (a la THE BIRDS). Believe me, if Warners had futzed around with the Potter books, the films never would have achieved the level of success they’ve had; ditto Jackson and LOTR.
Where is this blog’s contact us page because i cant seem to see the page, maybe the blog owner should make it more easier to view.
Swindon chairman suggested PDC tried o defuse a row between Leon Clarke and the fitness coach and was trying to get Clarke down the tunnel to deal with it behind closed doors. However it all kicked off in the Tunnel instead!!!