story telling

Started by blu, April 08, 2003, 12:14:37 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages1 2 3
User actions

blu

April 08, 2003, 12:14:37 PM
there are lots and lots of talented thinkers, but few who can relate their thoughts to a story.  so much is lost between the thought to the page and then so much more is lost from the page to your eyes.  don't just think someone can just dream and make real.  it takes strength and it's when you get weak, that's when the dream is lost.  pdl had some great thinking to it, but most was lost in transit.  granted there are some "ooooo's" and "gee that's swell" but, in telling the story, it lacked.  it's like being a vegetarian and explaining that by eating gummy bears.  gummy bears are made from animals, dipshit.

http://www.internationalrecipesonline.com/recipes/dictionary.pl?2979

neatahwanta

#1
April 08, 2003, 02:00:25 PM
eh?

blu

#2
April 08, 2003, 02:59:26 PM
i said the story wasn't told very good.  the ideal got lost in all the wit. witty, yes.  story, lost.  story told badly.  bad story line.  great sound and cinematography and actors, but story was sacrificed.

RegularKarate

#3
April 08, 2003, 03:14:19 PM
SIR!  Please put down the grudge!

blu

#4
April 08, 2003, 03:42:10 PM
there is no grudge.  it's just that some people, not just pta, think it is better to be  considered smart via insecurities induced by a cryptic story line.  you got people in the audience going, "why don't i get it?"  "i must not be creative enough to understand the rambling plot of a weak story line."  it gives the emperors new clothing a modern day twist.  after seeing the movie quite a few times, i gotta say the only thing special about the movie are the people and technologies employed, not some special vision or ideal.  that was lost.  lost in the pockets of a egoist rambling nonsensicle emperor who likes to walk around in the nude and laugh at the general populace while they exclaim how beautiful and visionary the clothing he is wearing is.  

i guess my question i was hoping to discuss here is are we telling a story with cinema or are we going for something else?  personally, i think we tell stories with film.  all else is jackass or advertising.

RegularKarate

#5
April 08, 2003, 04:27:14 PM
I can see how you could apply what you're saying to other films, but PDL is simplistic... There's nothing completely crazy in it where you could just say "I just don't get it" as far as the story goes... I mean people could possibly not understand why he chose to tell the story in the way that he did, but the story is pretty straight forward... Maybe you don't like it... that's fine, but it seems like you're accusing us of pretending to see something in it that we don't just so we don't look dumb in front of others.

We can do a lot of things with film... PDL tells a story, there's no denying that, but there are different ways of going about telling a story... why does it have to just be a straight forward story... if that's what you want all the time, watch more television.

SoNowThen

#6
April 08, 2003, 04:28:46 PM
Both must be equally great. I used to think story was the only thing that mattered, but after seeing Mamet direct (utter shit) I realized that you need great pictures and sounds to accompany the story. Hence, Paul Schrader scripts are better in the hands of a visual director like Scorsese (although I really like Schrader-directed films, they don't come close to Taxi Driver or Raging Bull).

That being said, I do agree that PDL didn't quite do it for me like Boogie Nights or Magnolia did. That seems to be a taboo thing to say around here, but that's what I felt.

As an after-thought: I read a PTA quote where he said "for better or worse, Magnolia will be the best film I ever do". I think that could be true.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

cine

#7
April 08, 2003, 04:28:54 PM
I'm just jumping in but I would say even "Jackass" has a story.. its a story of several jackasses doing jackass stunts. and its a funny fuckin' story.

I would revise your statement to "we tell stories with film, and put advertising in the middle."

atticus jones

#8
April 08, 2003, 04:46:05 PM
whats lost in the pockets of mos sprockets is the flo an the sho of how eye talkits...i wont alter my ego fo you an your needs yo...or preamble the ramble of dis jumble jamble manimal...the beast is brewed nude wit attitude that protrudes...the general pop u lace wit dis taste and disgrace i save face and embrace wit good grace fo all race...

i walk around...

itsa bitsa mitsa ditsa ifsa witsa spitsa hitsa yitsa shitsa twitsa mista...

bush whacker on a ritz cracker with a hamstacker and a montery jacker lyke a linebacker frumda greenbay packer mo bluer than blacker when i whacker and smacker...

non sense to those with no sense...

drop change in yo collar...

cha ching
my cause is the cause of a man who has never been defeated, and whose whole being is one all devouring, god given holy purpose

cine

#9
April 08, 2003, 04:48:28 PM
No offense but I feel more comfortable reading what you say when I pretend you're Mr. T.

Pedro

#10
April 08, 2003, 05:06:51 PM
keep them comin homy Bee, you smell like the see, we'll go slackin and jackin the Brothas who trackin, and set the world straight, appreciate, the linebackers, packers, whackerssmackerscrackers, till their down on the floor, askin for more, tellin em sure, feelin what day for, WORD sly devil.

Derek

#11
April 08, 2003, 05:07:27 PM
Quote from: SoNowThenAs an after-thought: I read a PTA quote where he said "for better or worse, Magnolia will be the best film I ever do". I think that could be true.

I think he has since ammended that view after PDL. Or so I seem to remember someone saying so. I think it was Greg.
It's like, how much more black could this be? And the answer is none. None more black.

aclockworkjj

#12
April 08, 2003, 05:32:54 PM
On  a serious note...or is this post just for jibberish?

I don't think the story of PDL was intended to be in depth....just like the love displayed, it was simple.  For the depth you had to look into Barry's character.  I would agree, the story wasn't anything spectatular, but I don't think Paul intended it to be.  The film flowed on many other things than the plot.  

The Mise-en-scene (look it up) value PDL had was almost as good as it gets.......

atticus jones

#13
April 08, 2003, 05:38:54 PM
paid po the womb brat,

turn the lights back on and take off your mamas shoes before i beat you lyke a slap child...

sin and file,

if mr t be thee auditory glee you need then read with speed my fertile weed seed inducing mind grow producing hell spell confusing rappa dappa liscocity...
my cause is the cause of a man who has never been defeated, and whose whole being is one all devouring, god given holy purpose

cowboykurtis

#14
April 08, 2003, 05:39:11 PM
I thought PDL was wonderful. I do think it was his worst film, however it did something that very few current films can do, it made me feel. i was fully engaged with the characters, and felt wonderful when i walked out -- i was so happy and couldnt say why. yes, teh screenplay is remedial from a traditional standpoint, by no means is it a masterpeice. i think his ohter film are on a whole different frequency -- but, he was trying something different -- and i thought it was breathing with life  and had a frenetic energy that jumped off the screen. however i must say the second time i saw it, i didn't feel those feelings again -- i became very aware of the "filmmaking" which ruined it for me. i see it almost like a magic act, the trick is never as impressive the second time.
...your excuses are your own...
Print
Go Up Pages1 2 3
User actions