Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
21
This Year In Film / Re: First Man
« Last post by putneyswipe on October 14, 2018, 07:24:10 PM »
after this film we can all agree that he's this generation's Ron Howard right

I really don't see that at all, Howard is known for one of the most generic, least authorial big directors out there. There's a clear line running through Whiplash, La La Land and this with the portraits of obsessive perfectionists and the conflicts that creates in their personal life, whether artistic or otherwise.

I'd say so far (he's only made four features after all) homie is a crowd-pleasing journeyman much like Howard and that's rare among millennial directors. The thematic line you've ascribed to the films isn't true of his debut, Guy and Madeline on a Park Bench, and is only kinda present in La La Land. It's in Grand Piano, yeah, but not 10 Cloverfield Lane or The Last Exorcism II. The movies all vary in tone and style too. An auteur in the classic sense, this guy is not. But a) he's still young, and b) could end up a famous journeyman pseudo-auteur like Preminger or Zinnemann or somebody.

He's also like Howard in that his films aren't the least bit cool, which I don't mean as an insult. Ron Howard is a good director. He just tends to make movies for my aunt, you know what I mean? And they're pretty good movies! So far, I feel like Chazelle is the same. This isn't a problem to me. My aunt and I need movies to see.

I didn't say he was a "classic" auteur like Bergman or something, just that there were some authorial flourishes that were distinct from the archetypical director-for-hire, which Howard literally is. Is there anyone working in the studio system today that fits that classic definition anyway? PTA would have to cancel his membership to the Auteur club by that definition as his influences seem to vary wildly from film to film. I know it was meant to be tongue in cheek but the comparison seems disingenuous just so far to say that Howard has never even directed a film from a screenplay he wrote by himself, while every film Chazelle has made before this one had been solely written by him (I don't think writer-for-hire gigs are really relevant to the body of work). But who knows, maybe this is a departure and he never writes an original screenplay again.

As for the movie itself, I thought it worked best when it was building of those themes that were present in the previous films, but you felt a tension throughout between the directorial flourishes that Chazelle seemed to be trying to create and the more formulaic biopic beats of the script. By the end, I think I was wondering if the film had really given itself a reason to exist as we see images we have seen countless times that aren't distinct enough to resonate. Seeing the process of NASA leading up to the climatic mission was enjoyable but it dragged on about a half hour too long given the substance of the material.
22
This Year In Film / Re: First Man
« Last post by BigSock on October 14, 2018, 06:24:07 PM »
Really enjoyed this. Hits some standard notes along the way, but nothing too offensive. Where it needs to fly, it reeeeeeeally flies.

I like Chazelle enough, but view him more as an exceptional (and goddamn lucky) craftsman than artist. There isnít much poetry to his images, just relentless craft.

See in IMAX if possible!

Pretty much this! Chazelle is a mechanical technician, not much of a storyteller. But it's ok with a journey like this, as he just latches onto Armstrong's limited and submerged mindset. But yes, this had a homemade quality that usually lacks from these films
23
This Year In Film / Re: First Man
« Last post by eward on October 14, 2018, 04:10:36 PM »
Really enjoyed this. Hits some standard notes along the way, but nothing too offensive. Where it needs to fly, it reeeeeeeally flies.

I like Chazelle enough, but view him more as an exceptional (and goddamn lucky) craftsman than artist. There isnít much poetry to his images, just relentless craft.

See in IMAX if possible!
24
This Year In Film / Re: First Man
« Last post by BB on October 14, 2018, 10:55:39 AM »
after this film we can all agree that he's this generation's Ron Howard right

I really don't see that at all, Howard is known for one of the most generic, least authorial big directors out there. There's a clear line running through Whiplash, La La Land and this with the portraits of obsessive perfectionists and the conflicts that creates in their personal life, whether artistic or otherwise.

I'd say so far (he's only made four features after all) homie is a crowd-pleasing journeyman much like Howard and that's rare among millennial directors. The thematic line you've ascribed to the films isn't true of his debut, Guy and Madeline on a Park Bench, and is only kinda present in La La Land. It's in Grand Piano, yeah, but not 10 Cloverfield Lane or The Last Exorcism II. The movies all vary in tone and style too. An auteur in the classic sense, this guy is not. But a) he's still young, and b) could end up a famous journeyman pseudo-auteur like Preminger or Zinnemann or somebody.

He's also like Howard in that his films aren't the least bit cool, which I don't mean as an insult. Ron Howard is a good director. He just tends to make movies for my aunt, you know what I mean? And they're pretty good movies! So far, I feel like Chazelle is the same. This isn't a problem to me. My aunt and I need movies to see.
25
News and Theory / Re: Horror
« Last post by jenkins on October 14, 2018, 03:46:36 AM »
and really they lost longer than a well-produced drama. how easy it is to demonstrate that with the Universal classic monsters. probably a random person could name, oh, Citizen Kane and Gone with the Wind, but could also name Frankenstein, Dracula, The Mummy, The Wolf Man, and maybe the Creature from the Black Lagoon. probably that same person would shittalk the former and appreciate the latter, re drama vs horror. something inside of them would feel a link with Frankenstein which they wouldn't feel with Citizen Kane, and that's interesting.
26
News and Theory / Re: Horror
« Last post by polkablues on October 14, 2018, 03:37:19 AM »
I definitely agree in the case of the Conjuring films and its spinoffs. To me, the best, most lasting horror is always built off of a central metaphor, which the "horror" elements serve to give a face to, to externalize and exaggerate. The Shining has the specter of alcoholism and domestic abuse, The Descent is about grief and betrayal, Triangle is an absolute masters thesis on guilt and self-punishment. The Conjuring flicks don't really have any central metaphor (the core of their message seems to be, "There are scary things in the world, and you should always hire professionals to deal with them"), but they're still highly enjoyable, worthwhile horror films, simply on the strength of the aesthetics and the actual filmmaking craft involved. Even if you don't necessarily have anything to say, you can still make a good horror movie if the WAY you say it is strong enough.
27
News and Theory / Re: Horror
« Last post by jenkins on October 14, 2018, 03:23:02 AM »
i had the thought while looking at the box office success of the Conjuring series, which just found success with The Nun. and i've always dabbled in horror, you know, so i know that really the whole genre is predicated upon aesthetics. the creepy environment you know. you can't really create a creepy environment without having your production methods spot on. so there are a lot of nice looking horror movies that still never find critical appeal and yet endure within the genre, again for example the Conjuring series. it's really all aesthetics
28
News and Theory / Re: Horror
« Last post by polkablues on October 14, 2018, 03:17:14 AM »
I'm intrigued. In what sense?
29
News and Theory / Re: Horror
« Last post by jenkins on October 14, 2018, 03:09:44 AM »
i know it's outrageous supernaturalism and everything, as in i'm not negating that fact, but i was thinking the other day how entering the horror genre is a rather practical means of establishing aesthetic values
30
News and Theory / Re: Horror
« Last post by polkablues on October 14, 2018, 03:04:16 AM »


It's legit.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy