I know many people here seem to have built little shrines to PTA but really he is not original what so ever. Maybe he is to those of you who have only seen, for the most part, post 1985 films, his films look arty but really little of it is pure PTA. Magnolia for example, the stories are pretty much identicle to Shortcuts, a film based on the short stories of Raymond Carver(someone who deserves ten times more praise then PTA, even if he is just a short story writer.) Also, with regards to his latest movie Punch Drunk Love, many of the shots are identical to some of the shots from movies such as Shoot the Piano Player, Taxi Driver, A Man and A Woman and knowing PTA probably many more. PTA is a lucky man though, he gets to make movies, and I do find them enjoyable but there needs to be some other forums for really great and important directors like akira kirousawa, aki kaurismaki, Jim Jarmusch, Troffout, Goddard. Anyways that's what I think, maybe some people agree with me.
OK, you win. He's not good.
aw
Godard
Truffaut
at least try and spell them right
btw, everybody steals from everybody
How bout checking out the rest of the board before you start spewing this cliched Tripe?
You're new...so obviously you're forgiven, but seriously, read a little before you post something like this... it's all been discussed.
Quote from: cinemascopethere needs to be some other forums for really great and important directors like akira kirousawa kurosawa
http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=72
Quoteaki kaurismaki
Nothing preventing you from starting your own thread.
http://xixax.com/viewforum.php?f=13
QuoteJim Jarmusch
http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=395
QuoteTroffout Truffaut
http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=966
QuoteGoddard Godard
http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=430
http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=339
...well, that last one's about Godard and Britney Spears aka Big Muffy
Wait a minute! PTA steals from other directors?!?!
That's IT. I'm OUT of HERE*
*-at least, until I come back at 4 p.m.
Die Stupid, Pointless and Ignorant Thread! Die!!!
I feel so used and betrayed. How could you PTA? *sniff*
Well, that's interesting
(equates to)
OH MY GOD YOU DUMB FUCKER!
PTA knows he "riffs" off of other directors, and he does it so that it's enjoyable on a different plane. Completely original movies probably wouldn't even strike your fancy, and look at all the stories movies are based on anyways, and before films were a solid artform, filmmakers stole from books! I could say "Scorcese's not that great" or "Kubrick Sucked" or "Shakespeare? Total Copycat!" all the way down the line to "we stole the idea for the microchip from that one original neanderthal who found out that a rock falling on your toes smarts" until we realize that there's still farther to go! "Humans stole their cell structure from ameobas!"
Oh, well, I guess we better go kill ourselves, we're not that great!
PTA movies are enjoyable to us, and not because we're film posers or we've just heard he's good, we've seen his movies and they make us like them, if that makes any sense! Why the fuck would we sign onto this website, so we can spend our time discussing movies as if they're great and spreading false opinions? Man, you really are a dumb fucker!
I mean, this is an immature thread to start, so get over yourself, rabble-rouser, or maybe continue by going into a church and saying "Jesus wasn't that great. He totally ripped off Zoraster." (look it up, dweeb)
As for Short Cuts, I watched it waiting for all the Magnolia parallels, and found myself reaching for them.
1) Most obvious: Catastrophy ending
3) Obvious:3 hours worth of film
2) Obvious, but 180º character difference: A cop
4) Intersecting storylines (thinner connections in Magnolia)
5) Suicides, one successful (Short Cuts) one not (Magnolia)
So is it really that much of a rip-off?
Good afternoon.
y'know, something tells me that maybe this newbie is just being sarcastic, and having a good joke at our expense...
we do take our pta love pretty seriously...
Quote from: cinemascopeAlso, with regards to his latest movie Punch Drunk Love, many of the shots are identical to some of the shots from movies such as Shoot the Piano Player, Taxi Driver, A Man and A Woman and knowing PTA probably many more.
...Ever heard of "imitation is the highest form of flattery"?
Quote from: SoNowTheny'know, something tells me that maybe this newbie is just being sarcastic, and having a good joke at our expense...
we do take our pta love pretty seriously...
But then again, maybe this newbie doesn't know he's walked into a den of wolves.... :twisted:
But seriously, this thread is rather pointless. It's no surprise PTA rips shamelessly from his forefathers; art is derivative so......
........whoopy-dee-doooooo! (translation: big fucking deal.)
How can you not love pita?
cinemascope, you're cool, you've got balls.
cinemascope:
Did you just start reading your film school books or something? Did your prof assign you to acost the first online message board that doesnt jack off Truffaut or Godard? If so, make sure you rent Citizen Kane, so you can be ahead of the game.
Truffaut is dead dude. We can't really discuss his latest work.
Quote from: cinemascopeI know many people here seem to have built little shrines to PTA but really he is not original what so ever. Maybe he is to those of you who have only seen, for the most part, post 1985 films, his films look arty but really little of it is pure PTA. Magnolia for example, the stories are pretty much identicle to Shortcuts, a film based on the short stories of Raymond Carver(someone who deserves ten times more praise then PTA, even if he is just a short story writer.) Also, with regards to his latest movie Punch Drunk Love, many of the shots are identical to some of the shots from movies such as Shoot the Piano Player, Taxi Driver, A Man and A Woman and knowing PTA probably many more. PTA is a lucky man though, he gets to make movies, and I do find them enjoyable but there needs to be some other forums for really great and important directors like akira kirousawa, aki kaurismaki, Jim Jarmusch, Troffout, Goddard. Anyways that's what I think, maybe some people agree with me.
i smell a rat, this post is not real
I know every one steals from everyone one but usually you want to bring something to the movie that doesn't make it almost complete deja-vu. For example, Quinton Tarantino, he sometimes steals directly from other movies, but he puts it in new context with new characters and makes a completely new movie. I'm also glad you guys can spell. I also didn't get the thing about truffout being dead and why that makes him any less important and has anyone seen Shoot the Piano Player. Also, sorry for not reading through all the posts about PTA. I didn't realize this has been discussed, it looked like all the forums where about how great he was. If you guys want to try and change my mind about pta you might think about listing some contributions or innovations he's had on cinema, just a thought though.
Quote from: cinemascopeQuinton
duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuaaaaaaaaaaade!
cannot take you seriously
Quote from: cinemascopeI also didn't get the thing about truffout being dead and why that makes him any less important and has anyone seen Shoot the Piano Player.
As in.. how much can you possibly draw from one movie?! There has been enough coverage of Truffout in not just this forum but many others on the internet (which is starting to catch on with the public)... We understand that he was influential.. we know he was great, but why do we need reafirming him... We have some great directors who are still alive.. why not concern yourselves with them?
Truffaut has made a lot more movies than PTA, there is a lot more to talk about. PTA has made 4 movies, fun movies, but there's not much to talk about.
Quote from: cinemascopeTruffaut has made a lot more movies than PTA, there is a lot more to talk about. PTA has made 4 movies, fun movies, but there's not much to talk about.
holy shit
The kid's got balls, you've gotta give him that....
Quote from: cinemascopeTruffaut has made a lot more movies than PTA, there is a lot more to talk about.
So, start talking about Truffaut. I gave you the link to his thread. No one is stopping you. Start a debate, or introduce us to something we don't know instead of telling us what to talk about and how to run our board with what forums we should have.
As I wait, I'll go delete the Terrence Malick thread, since he's only done three films so far.
Quote from: cinemascopePTA has made 4 movies, fun movies, but there's not much to talk about.
I, once again, invite you to read the rest of the posts... you will find that there is plenty to talk about... there is so much to talk about, in fact, that we filled up one entire message board and had to start this new one.
Is there a reason no one is giving me reasons to like pta, i'm willing to listen to why people think he's great, but I guess being able to explain why a director is good is hard for you guys, other than saying "he's sooo great, and so viceral and real, he speaks the truth and from the heart" PTA to me just seems like a trendy guy who thinks it's cool to be a film director.
It really is wierd that no one has written why he's great, that was originally my intention was for someone to write why he's good. I guess I could have said that staight out but usually peoples reaction to attacks on directors is explaining why the attacker is wrong, not saying-"Go AWAY-YOU DON'T THINK LIKE US- YOU CANT SPELL-TRUFFOUT IS DEAD-GO WRITE ABOUT TRUFFOUT IF YOU LIKE HIM SO MUCH-WE LIKE PT BECAUSE HE'S COOL"
i guess hes just not your cup of tea. no biggie.
send me a link or something from the pta forum giving some real arguments for reasons why pta is a good director, all i'm finding is trivia and news updates.
Quote from: cinemascopeIs there a reason no one is giving me reasons to like pta, i'm willing to listen to why people think he's great, but I guess being able to explain why a director is good is hard for you guys, other than saying "he's sooo great, and so viceral and real, he speaks the truth and from the heart" PTA to me just seems like a trendy guy who thinks it's cool to be a film director.
Where in the rest of this forrum that you obviously haven't read yet does it say that the only reason we like PT is because he's cool?
PT IS cool... there's no question about that, but he also knows how to capture a scene with his camera... he knows how introduce characters and situations... he knows how write diologue that sets itself apart from the rest... He puts details like no other in his films... you can watch his films over and over again and notice something new each time.
I could go on and on and on and on and on... and sometimes I do, but I don't really need to when there is an entire forrum dedicated to that right here!
Quote from: chainsmoking insomniacThe kid's got balls, you've gotta give him that....
It doesn't take balls to post something on an internet forum. Now if this guy were to say this at the PTA/NRA/Big Biker Guys club...
Quote from: cinemascopesend me a link or something from the pta forum giving some real arguments for reasons why pta is a good director, all i'm finding is trivia and news updates.
Quote from: aclockworkjj.watching Magnolia ...and one scence always sticks out in my head cause it's just that fucking great!! The scene I am speaking of is Phil's "This is the part in the movie where you help me out..."
Over and over, everytime I watch it, this scene constantly sticks out. Just the movie reference within a movie alone is amazing. Writing at it's best...cause it's very true, and Phil says it's true, and it is true. We all reference movies on a daily basis, but to see it in inside of a movie is something you don't see too often. What I like about Paul's movies (and this scene demonstrates it perfectly) is the way they are written and shot, often will make you forget it's a movie you are watching. Or at least you drift away at times. But the real life references you can make from Magnolia in particular are limitless....You can find yourself saying, "I know a guy like that...", "I have seen that happen before...", or even "I know how that character is feeling cause I have been there". Not taking away from other movies, but a movie that can make you look at your own life in many different ways, is truely the complete cinamatic experience!
Maybe I am just on a huge Magnolia high right now, but I am too broke to go out to lunch so instead I am spending it here....
reasons or arguments making him a great director, are purly opinion. What defines a "great director"?...surely not your textbook, cause there is a different one stating the exact opposite.
What makes him good: The fact that I was rammbling like a liitle girl, with a new crush....palms sweaty, all giddy...and this was all after watching magnolia, for the 4th time that same week (obessive like that schoolgirl crush), paul's movies don't get old to me, therefore, I think of him as a great director. But that's only an opinion.
(honestly I thought this thread was a joke when I first saw it...good luck though dude)
Quote from: RegularKarate
PT IS cool... there's no question about that, but he also knows how to capture a scene with his camera... he knows how introduce characters and situations... he knows how write diologue that sets itself apart from the rest... He puts details like no other in his films... you can watch his films over and over again and notice something new each time.
I could go on and on and on and on and on... and sometimes I do, but I don't really need to when there is an entire forrum dedicated to that right here!
Don't throw pearls to pigs , Regular Karate.....
Just agree ....yeah...PTA sucks, all his movies are copies, "Truffout" is better cuz he made more movies...whatever...
Quote from: cinemascopeIs there a reason no one is giving me reasons to like pta, i'm willing to listen to why people think he's great, but I guess being able to explain why a director is good is hard for you guys, other than saying "he's sooo great, and so viceral and real, he speaks the truth and from the heart" PTA to me just seems like a trendy guy who thinks it's cool to be a film director.
It really is wierd that no one has written why he's great, that was originally my intention was for someone to write why he's good. I guess I could have said that staight out but usually peoples reaction to attacks on directors is explaining why the attacker is wrong, not saying-"Go AWAY-YOU DON'T THINK LIKE US- YOU CANT SPELL-TRUFFOUT IS DEAD-GO WRITE ABOUT TRUFFOUT IF YOU LIKE HIM SO MUCH-WE LIKE PT BECAUSE HE'S COOL"
If you look back at your first post, you will see that your introduction to us is filled with arrogance, an insult towards us (yes, we have seen films made before 1985) and telling us how we should run our board. Not really the best way to get on our good side to answer your 'original intention'. The reason your are receiving sarcasm is because no one believes you are for real. This board is an offspring of an exclusive PTA board, so we've never had to explain ourselves and never had any non-PTA likers join us (not even Kevin Smith fans have bashed their way in), and is the reason why you won't find much PTA debate. Another reason you are not getting what you want is that we don't know you. The way you are coming across (with the continuing insults, this one about explaining being too hard for us) is that, even if we did give our opinions, would they really made a difference? Why should we waste our time because how do we know you are open-minded to listening to us?
Now all the contempt for Truffaut because this prick undermines PTA's work compared to Francois. I can enjoy both of their operas personally. I was explaining to a woman the other that I do prefer the Whopper, but I will also eat a Wendys Cheeseburger any day of the week. This woman (it coulda been a man actually, with the mustache.. maybe it's a new fashion for women) was offended and told me she prefers to stay at home and cook because she doesn't want to drop dead at age thirty from heart disease from eating that garbage. Fair enough, you eat at home, I eat at Burger King.. I don't have contempt for your 'home cooking', why do you have contempt for my favorites? thanks though, that was pretty insulting. I know she didn't mean to insult me, but it hurt because she basically told me I was going to drop dead from heart disease. You've insulted my favorite value meal, and my health, don't even think about inviting me over to try one of your great "home cooked meals" so I can see what the fuss is all about. I never talked to that woman again.
cinemascope,
I can identify with your position even if disagreeing. My opinion is usually in the minority with agreeing with people. I don't mind if you dislike PTA, but you don't really bring any good criticism against him at all. First, you give argument to how you can pin point many shots from his films that are rip offs of others, films from people like Godard and Scorsese without realizing their cinema was encorporating nearly all realms of cinema into their own personal concerns. Godard with criticism of film and Scorsese with general encyclopedic knowledge of film. All this means is that they both took shots and specific filmmaking techniques from other filmmakers. Scorsese was most accused of lifting Ophuls and Welles and bringing a story narrative that was a cross between Cassavettes and Kazan. Everyone back in his early beginnings identified his filmmaking through his knowledge of film history. Its just that this argument explains nothing about talent in PTA and actually explains the typical for filmmakers in most of its history.
Then you cut into his use of narrative from Short Cuts because of similarities. Again, what does this explain in PTA's talent or lack of? Because structure and similiarity resides in a previous work you can say it is bad? Both Short Cuts and Magnolia are similiar, yes, but that explains nothing about how good each film is. With further thought, the lines of similarity between films and other films and even more so other books and narratives has to be so intertwined in similiarity that with any dime connection, you can sue someone else for plagiarism. Another film that is similiar to both Short Cuts and Magnolia is Kieslowski's Red, but no one accuses that film of anything. Its similiar in outer markings of what its purpose is, but the style and taste is of course different. This holds true with PTA and Altman.
I'm not going to defend PTA because you really have yet to give any argument against him. I don't mind getting into this kind of argument. Actually, I love it, but what your arguments smell more like rationalizations.
~rougerum
I would love to argue this guy into the ground but really.. whats the point? We're all dumber for listening to him because he's ignorant, uneducated, and many other negative qualities that make up the quintessential jackass. I really don't know what else to say about it. Everybody and their mother has put in their two cents (I already did briefly earlier) on a guy who has too many stupid things to say. Why must we waste our time with him? Will somebody just please sacrifice him?
What makes PTA great?
For one thing, he gets great performances from actors. Has Mark Wahlberg ever been better than he was in Boogie Nights, or Burt Reynolds either? Tom Cruise gave his best performance in Magnolia. Adam Sandler, not known as a serious thespian, gives a performance of unexpected depth in Punch Drunk Love.
Of course, how do you "prove" that PTA is good with actors? You either enjoy the performances in his films, or you don't. But a more objective measure is the willingness of A-List actors (such as Cruise and Sandler) to work on PTA films for next to nothing. In today's greedy Hollywood, that in itself is notable. In fact, the only two times Cruise has worked for scale is for PTA and some guy named Kubrick.
PTA is still young, and young artists display their influences more prominently. Quite often, artists, filmmakers and composers will do parodies or rewrites of existing materials, or outright copies, simply to learn the craft. PTA did Dirk Diggler Story in the pseudo-documentary style of Spinal Tap, but when he finally turned it into Boogie Nights, he was more influenced by Scorsese and Altman.
Another measure of PTA's talent is the extent to which I get emotionally invested in his characters. Boogie Nights starts out in a light-hearted way, and touches upon the campy elements of the porn milieu, but as it goes along, it gets deeper, until we feel compassion for all of the characters. As much as I enjoy Tarantino's work, his characters never inspire pathos. For me, the scene in which Julianne Moore goes to a custody hearing and cannot escape her dark fate is truly moving. It is truly a "Wages of Sin" moment that shows what a high price these people pay to be in this business. Ultimately, Boogie Nights is a serious, moral film that shows the high cost of the lifestyle -- along with its flashy fringe benefits.
Stylistically, Boogie Nights is a cinematic tour de force, but it is also more than just a flashy exercise in style -- all of the characters are drawn with depth and sympathy, and seem like fully-breathing, lived-in human beings who happened to step into camera range. Like Midnight Cowboy, Boogie Nights shows that even the lowliest of human beings have dignity.
PTA's cinematic skills and empathy for all of his deeply flawed characters is on display in Magnolia as well, on an even broader canvas.
In Punch-Drunk Love, we see the anxiety and uncertainty and first tentative steps taken by a recluse who wants and needs love. Here is a film that is sensitive to all of the aggravation and fear and joy of falling in love. Not since Cassavetes in his prime has there been such a complex look at romance.
Certainly, no new filmmaker can match PTA for ambition, sense of scope, mastery of technique and ability to work with actors. But hey, that's just one person's opinion.
This thread makes me feel better. There's someone that got his ass kicked on the board more harshly then I did.
Why, what did you do?
Quote from: CinephileI would love to argue this guy into the ground but really.. whats the point? We're all dumber for listening to him because he's ignorant, uneducated, and many other negative qualities that make up the quintessential jackass. I really don't know what else to say about it. Everybody and their mother has put in their two cents (I already did briefly earlier) on a guy who has too many stupid things to say. Why must we waste our time with him? Will somebody just please sacrifice him?
Just because you don't agree with his opinions doesn't mean that he isn't worth debating with. Personally, I STRONGLY disagree with him, but this isn't the way to deal with that. Take a stance like GT. what he did in his respsonse sums up a lot of what I dig about him....He argues decently....even if I totally disagree with him (as i often do...) he still proves himself well...
It's weird...one of your worst enemies here is Pantalones....he has been criticized in the past for doing exactly what you just did. Personally attack someone because because he disagrees with an opinion someone has...
that's as serious as i'll ever get
CONAN should be before Jay Leno. I don't know, I guess I didn't post anything good, so I got made fun of and shut down.
Quote from: Pedro the WombatQuote from: CinephileI would love to argue this guy into the ground but really.. whats the point? We're all dumber for listening to him because he's ignorant, uneducated, and many other negative qualities that make up the quintessential jackass. I really don't know what else to say about it. Everybody and their mother has put in their two cents (I already did briefly earlier) on a guy who has too many stupid things to say. Why must we waste our time with him? Will somebody just please sacrifice him?
Just because you don't agree with his opinions doesn't mean that he isn't worth debating with. Personally, I STRONGLY disagree with him, but this isn't the way to deal with that. Take a stance like GT. what he did in his respsonse sums up a lot of what I dig about him....He argues decently....even if I totally disagree with him (as i often do...) he still proves himself well...
It's weird...one of your worst enemies here is Pantalones....he has been criticized in the past for doing exactly what you just did. Personally attack someone because because he disagrees with an opinion someone has...that's as serious as i'll ever get
I see exactly where you're coming from. The thing is.. I love PTA and people like GT summed it up perfectly.. whats the sense in a guy like me reiterating what he just put? Personally I just don't like the idea of a guy like cinemascope starting this huge decision thats comparable to --as we've briefly touched on in this thread-- saying Scorsese ripped off people like Cassavetes and Kazan and a lot of the Italian cinema. Well, no he didn't.. he took his influences and made his own style.. and people like us love it. Now this guy is coming in here saying "Why's he so great? He copies.. Truffaut is better" and all that shit.. its annoying and a waste of arguing with. What's the use?
If you'd like me to explain why *I* feel PTA is a great director then okay.. fine.. to please the few of you who actually pleaded that justification from me then fine. I love PTA's films because they're ALIVE. In Boogie Nights, you're just welcomed to Horner's world of the pornography biz and you're sucked right in. And the music helps to just grasp you like a claw and you're hooked for however long the film is. That's what happened with me and Magnolia. I was literally on the edge of my seat in the theatre for the 3 hours and a bit that it was on and just GLUED to the screen. The film is so alive and free.. absolutely compelling.. and when Melora Walters smiles with Aimee Mann singing "Save Me", I sunk back into the seat and thought, "That was cinema at its fucking best." The direction of the scenes, the characters, the dialogue, the suspense, the soundtrack, and that CLIMAX. Whatta climax. And you don't see unpredictable climaxes like that in the cinema, do you? (unpredictable when not knowledgeable about exodus 8:2) That's cinema at its best. Boogie Nights. Magnolia. PTA made it. Not Truffaut or Godard or Altman or Scorsese or Demme or Tati or any of them. Paul Thomas Fuckin' Anderson. And I didn't even scratch the surface on how he revived the classic romance in PDL.. its so beautiful I could cry when I watch them kiss in those heavenly closeups. That's film for ya. No matter HOW much he uses from other films.. he puts it together into a PTA picture and makes magic with the chemistry of the actors/actresses and the flowing of the dialogue, action, etc. That's all PTA. That's all I want to say about PTA right now. Perhaps now you see why I got so offended by the guy asking "What's so great about him?" Folks, if we HAVE to we can just refer to the Tomatometer for Boogie Nights and research the 95% of critics who felt Boogie Nights was a great movie. A masterpiece of modern cinema, I'd say and so would many others. Ah I'm done.
Yeah, according to Rotten Tomatoes, the critics love him.
Hard Eight 74% | 82%
Boogie Nights 95% | 100%
Magnolia 85% | 81%
Punch-Drunk Love 81% | 81%
Overall % | Cream of the Crop %
uh, why are so many ppl taking this guy seriously? mac, u are making great points and hav totally defeated him intelligently..
..but really, he's clearly stupid. three pages is way more attention than he deserves.
Cinemascope,
I'm quite eager to hear your arguments against PTA. I think the life blood of message boards is dissent and conflicting views (that's what makes them interesting and this is how people learn differing views). However, you still haven't brought up any valid arguments other than that he uses shots and story structure from other director/writers, which those director/writers do too. Art is derivative. Everything's been done, to coin a phrase. The key is using what's been done before in such a way that it engages the audience. Now ask yourself this question: does PTA succeed in this? When you're watching his films, do you turn them off because they're boring? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you do. Unless you really do turn them off (and please tell me if you do) how can you possibly say with a straight face that PTA has failed in achieving audience interest?
Quote from: MacGuffinQuote from: cinemascopeTruffaut has made a lot more movies than PTA, there is a lot more to talk about.
As I wait, I'll go delete the Terrence Malick thread, since he's only done three films so far.
Booyah!!!
Mac: 1
Cinemascope: 0
Is this guy the new mutinyco, or what? Totally trendy to rip on a well-respected director, I see.
Quote from: cinemascopelook at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me look at me
Quote from: everyone elsefuck off
Quote from: chainsmoking insomniacCinemascope,
I'm quite eager to hear your arguments against PTA.
well im not.
here cinemadope, i got a redirect for u-
//www.aintitcoolnews.com
ull fit in great there. ppl will really care what u have to say. i wish u luck.
Thank you soixante for your intelligence and willingness to communicate. I personally don't give credit to directors for actors work. I think actors genious is their own. I also don't know Tom Cruises taste in movies so his willingness to work for scale is sort of irrelevant. I also don't dislike pta's movies, I enjoy them, but I still don't think they are up to par with other great directors, I just gave Truffout as an example. All the character stuff of his shows some literary talent however I don't see character development having anything to do with cinema. The one thing though you mentioned about anxiety I agree partly with but for me what I thought was well done was the use of score and sound design to create the anxiety with the sisters, too bad he cut out the rest of the sister scenes. I still say Tarantino has much more ambition(sold scripts as a video store worker vs getting money and distribution from sundance, not that sundance is easy to get money from for me though it's a lot easier to give up on film when you make shit for cash and not even in the industry) and is a much better director, also, if it weren't for Pulp Fiction Boogie nights would never have been produced, not that that has anything to do with anything, just something interesting. Seeing the latest stuff you guys wrote I'm just going to leave you guys alone,this stuff is too time consuming.
Quote from: cinemascopeI don't see character development having anything to do with cinema.
Hmmm.... figured you for someone who read a lot of film books, now it seems that you don't even have that going for you... well, enjoy yourself somewhere else... or stay and explain yourself... either way
Ah well. He asked for replies of content to actually discuss PTA's work and got it (in forms of giving PTA merit and breaking down his arguments). Now he is saying is overwhelmed and going to bow out. With his last post, he really hasn't added anything. He replied to some minor quibbles but didn't go into explaining anything about the main points. It all refers again to "I just think his films are fun and not up to par with other great director" or something along the same lines. Its his decision, but this really looks bad for him if he isn't going to cough up and get down and dirty in some discussion.
~rougerum
Quote from: cinemascopeI personally don't give credit to directors for actors work. I think actors genious is their own.
A director is one who directs. He directs his actors in which direction to take the character and that reflects upon the story. Talk to any actor, and they will say that they have to respect the director in order to have freedom with their character. When they are 'in the moment', actors have to rely on their directors to tell them when they have gone to far or not far enough, for, when it comes to the editing time, it's the director who will cut their performance together.
Quote from: cinemascopeAll the character stuff of his shows some literary talent however I don't see character development having anything to do with cinema.
Without character development, there would be no story in character driven screenplays/movies. For the characters' 'arc' should drive the story. They have to learn a lesson, or have a change of heart, something that will take us along on their journey (look to Truffaut movies for this example too - Jules and Jim, 400 Blows, etc.). And because we will know what they seek, we, as the audience, will feel for them if they reach their goal, or not achieve it in the end. It's because we have invested our feelings and emotions that we empathize with them. And, in the end, isn't that what makes great cinema?
Quote from: cinemascopeI still say Tarantino has much more ambition (sold scripts as a video store worker vs getting money and distribution from sundance, not that sundance is easy to get money from for me though it's a lot easier to give up on film when you make shit for cash and not even in the industry) and is a much better director, also, if it weren't for Pulp Fiction Boogie nights would never have been produced, not that that has anything to do with anything, just something interesting.
Tarantino got something from Sundance too. "Res. Dogs" was a accepted for their workshop. And if you want to talk about PTA stealing from others, I suggest you watch Ringo Lam's "City On Fire" and see how "Res. Dogs" is a bigger rip-off of that film, than "Magnolia" is of "Short Cuts". Also, the character names for "Res. Dogs" are lifted from "The Taking Of Pelham One, Two, Three" and the suits are taken from John Woo's "Better Tomorrow" movies.
No wonder I didn't want to waste all that space arguing points about PTA. The man wasn't worth anything and I am now stupider for taking the time to read what he's had to say. Shame on me for that and fuck you, 'scope, for being a pussy about everything. Tuck your tail between your legs and take off for good. Good riddance to you, fuckface.
Well, at least cinemascope got everyone talking. This thing has turned into 4 pages!
shut up filmcritic.
..Filmcritic your funny..in that anoying younger brother way.. :wink:
i actually think you need this board and this board needs you .
my 2 sense on this topic
Fanboy reaction-he is the perfect director. he can do no wrong all of his films will replace citizen kane as "the greatest film of all"....
a rational film buff reaction=he is great . and something to look forward to with each film...he may "borrow" certian ideas from others but who doesn't??.
in the end he is creative and imploys his "touch" to his films .....he is one of the promising talented directors from the post 90's..era
my reation=i obviously like this guy .or i wouldn't have received an e-mail notifying me of this board since the old one is defunct. so i think he's creative, talented, original, and knows how to flatter to the point of not being over saturated.........
EDIT: what do you mean by "not that great"..like a McG great or a Tarantino great or a kubrick great?????
IMO the greatest director in film history will be DARREN ARONOFSKY..his name has that "ring" to it also.
Well, I'm glad that you're amused, Neon. :yabbse-undecided:
Sigh...these kinds of posts are so exhausting. And ultimately pointless
it is my goal in life to get Conan an oscar, and by God i will do it. you heard it here first, commence anticipation
Quote from: cinemascopeIs there a reason no one is giving me reasons to like pta, i'm willing to listen to why people think he's great....
well, well, well... finally something to talk about on this section, ok
do you want to know why people here loves PTA??
anyone can say something definitive about it darling, the reason why you like a filmmaker, a painter, a singer, a band even a writer is so personal, because art
is personal.
In my case i love PTA for details, i love where he put the telephone in the Barry Egan's flat, i love the way he used the music in Magnolia, i love his characters, i love how he treat them,i love the woman in red walking in the supermarket, i love his
phone conversations , i love the way how he moves the camera in this or that scene... details that kind of little things i like to see in a movie...
Now he's not original for you, great! who is on these days???
Tarantino?? mmmm.... is your opinion
maybe you expect originality in movies but i think you'll suffer so much because these days originality (and i mean
real originality) is so hard to find, boy.
Quote from: cinemascopePTA to me just seems like a trendy guy who thinks it's cool to be a film director.
I disagree with you, but i understand you say something like that, because you never had a real interest to follow him, and that's not a crime, maybe the 'crime' is say that to people who really knows the fascination PTA has for movies.
To me this is funny. there's been 60 replies on this thread thus far and 'scope only posted 6 times, with really nothing intelligent to say. so many of us fought back (including me because others wanted me to echo other peoples feelings so i didn't look like Pantalones or something) and for what? this ignorant kid wasted all of our time. Just wait. I think he's going to start up a "What's the big deal with Scorsezee?"
Quote from: Cinephile"What's the big deal with Scorsezee?"
HAHA
yeah. Who Got Da Lighter?
We Don't Need No Water Let This Motherfucker Burn
P.S. the thread not the kid
I just wish some people here were more respectful towards other member's opinions.
Quote from: Ricard L. BefanI just wish some people here were more respectful towards other member's opinions.
Did you read his posts? They were filled with insults towards us. You don't get respect unless you give it.
Quote from: MacGuffinQuote from: Ricard L. BefanI just wish some people here were more respectful towards other member's opinions.
Did you read his posts? They were filled with insults towards us. You don't get respect unless you give it.
I wouldn't be surprised if Ricard is either cinemascope or a friend of his.
Quote from: CinephileQuote from: MacGuffinQuote from: Ricard L. BefanI just wish some people here were more respectful towards other member's opinions.
Did you read his posts? They were filled with insults towards us. You don't get respect unless you give it.
I wouldn't be surprised if Ricard is either cinemascope or a friend of his.
Well his signature is his name, so that's funny.
You know, I think 'scope took his own life and was reincarnated into Ricard L. Befan. Thoughts?
Quote from: MacGuffinDid you read his posts? They were filled with insults towards us. You don't get respect unless you give it.
In my opinion, some of the reactions to his first post were uncalled for.
Quote from: CinephileI wouldn't be surprised if Ricard is either cinemascope or a friend of his.
Indeed, I've known that guy since I was a little kid... :roll:
Quote from: tremoloslothWell his signature is his name, so that's funny.
I can't see why.
Quote from: CinephileYou know, I think 'scope took his own life and was reincarnated into Ricard L. Befan. Thoughts?
Great assumption! :-D
Now, seriously... It wasn't my intention to offend anyone. I just stated my opinion in what I think was a respectful way. And I didn't deffend cinemascope either (could you see that?). All I said was that "I wish that some people's reactions were more respecful". For some reason you immediately thought I was referring to you... :shock:
quote, reply, copy, back, quote, reply, paste, copy, back, quote, reply, paste. submit.
or..
quote, reply, submit. quote, reply, copy, back, edit, paste, submit.
Quote from: Pquote, reply, copy, back, quote, reply, paste, copy, back, quote, reply, paste. submit.
or..
quote, reply, submit. quote, reply, copy, back, edit, paste, submit.
Actually I just replied to each post separatedly. I don't know how they ended up in the same post.
i edited them into one post because we don't like ppl to hav more than 2 posts in a row especially when they are only one minute apart.
i was explaining how to get many individual replies in one post.
Quote from: Pi edited them into one post because we don't like ppl to hav more than 2 posts in a row especially when they are only one minute apart.
Oh thanks, it's much better that way :)
Quote from: Pi was explaining how to get many individual replies in one post.
I know how to do it, but the other way was faster (although I didn't know it wasn't allowed), sorry.
I was gonna propose that we discussed PTA's weaknesses as a director, if he has any...I spent five minutes thinking of something I didn't liked from any of his four features and I couldn't think of anything...The guy's fucking cool as far as I'm concerned...but it would be nice to see if someone has anything to say on this...
Well I've got nothing negative to say. He's a master at his craft. Plain and simple.
naw, I changed my mind, PTA isn't that great.
BIZZARO-ANTIDUMBFROGQUESTION STRIKES!! BADBYE!
Quote from: AntiDumbFrogQuestionnaw, I changed my mind, PTA isn't that great.
BIZZARO-ANTIDUMBFROGQUESTION STRIKES!! BADBYE!
Uh-huh........
Quote from: Pquote, reply, copy, back, quote, reply, paste, copy, back, quote, reply, paste. submit.
or..
quote, reply, submit. quote, reply, copy, back, edit, paste, submit.
damn that shit is too hard for me not to screw up....I just open 2 tabs (or windows for u IE whores) one with the reply and the other with the actual posts, then apply the same simple copy and paste. Mines more of a:
quote, reply, new tap same place, quote, copy, switch tabs, paste, reply, swtich tabs, quote...etc.
...and i just realize my way is probably much more confusing.
Quote from: aclockworkjjQuote from: Pquote, reply, copy, back, quote, reply, paste, copy, back, quote, reply, paste. submit.
or..
quote, reply, submit. quote, reply, copy, back, edit, paste, submit.
damn that shit is too hard for me not to screw up....I just open 2 tabs (or windows for u IE whores) one with the reply and the other with the actual posts, then apply the same simple copy and paste. Mines more of a:
quote, reply, new tap same place, quote, copy, switch tabs, paste, reply, swtich tabs, quote...etc.
...and i just realize my way is probably much more confusing.
Hey, I just learned how to do quotes! Thanks, Pedro! I can shed my Luddite T-shirt now!
You guys are pretty scarry but there's a movie I think you PTA heads would like to see that is coming out soon. It's called Wonderland and it Stars Val Kilmer and it takes place in the early 80's in the same area Boogie Nights was done, but this is about a true event. The director of this film is James Cox, and NYU alumni who graduated a year early(or dropped out) due to an offer to make a feature film based on the strength of his jr year color sync. Things went slow for his professional directing years however, but recently he's teamed up with his college friend who collaborated and acted in Cox's Atomic Tobassco, to write and help act in this new feature about the different takes of what happened on the day of the Wonderland murders. This film promises to be great and has something for everyone, a ture Don Quixote.
Quote from: cinemascopeWonderland
shoulda listed to Mac...
http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=272&highlight=wonderland
Yeah but it doesn't talk about the director, this guy is fucking the man. It's like Roshomon vs. 80'sPorn. James Cox also made one of the best student short films ever and this looks to be a lot like it.
Also PTA is not as good as James Cox.
Quote from: cinemascopeYeah but it doesn't talk about the director, this guy is fucking the man. It's like Roshomon vs. 80'sPorn. James Cox also made one of the best student short films ever and this looks to be a lot like it.
Also PTA is not as good as James Cox. Watch the trailer and think of that.
Quote from: cinemascopeTruffaut has made a lot more movies than PTA, there is a lot more to talk about. PTA has made 4 movies, fun movies, but there's not much to talk about.
Quote from: cinemascopeJames Cox.
He's only done two films.
And another point for Mac. 'scope, I think you're in the negatives now. That's not so good.
Seriously though, I don't know why you're not posting about other directors on another thread right now. You say we're 'scarry' yet you're the one who seems to be getting his jollies out of staying in this thread and getting verbally raped for trying to trash PTA more as an artist. You've went from saying people like Truffaut are better than PTA to watching a film trailer and saying the director of it is obviously better than PTA. Seriously man, you're fucking around just to be an asshole. Fuck off already.
Quote from: Find Your MagaliHey, I just learned how to do quotes! Thanks, Pedro! I can shed my Luddite T-shirt now!
i'm not pedro.
Quote from: cinemascopeYou guys are pretty scarry but there's a movie I think you PTA heads would like to see that is coming out soon. It's called Wonderland and it Stars Val Kilmer and it takes place in the early 80's in the same area Boogie Nights was done, but this is about a true event.
Oh awesome... since we all know the only reason people like
Boogie Nights is because it was set in the 80s... :roll:
I think one has to feel violated to be verbally raped. I thought it was scary that people felt the need to keep coming back to this "thread" as you guys call it, and checking up to see what's the lates assault on PTA. It's like you can't tell the difference from PTA and yourself so you get all pissy really easly. Also, i never said if a director has made a couple movies they're not worth seeing.
WHY WON'T THIS THREAD JUST DIE?!?!?!? :evil: :evil:
I was on culturevulture.com today, reading some reviews. Generally, they have some good stuff. But I got bored and decided to read the Magnolia and PDL reviews. Their reviewers sounded like this cinemascope joker. I guess that where we see unbelievably raw and heartfelt emotion and search for goodness and truth in even the strangest of situations, other people only see loud soundtracks and Scorsese shot-rip-offs. I don't know why there is this dichotomy...
We love PTA 'cause he writes stories that tow the line of realism but leave room for movie magic, he envelops them with a quick wit and boyish sense of humor, he casts interesting actors to play in them, and he happens to have a kinetic style that invokes similar legendary directors from the past (who were also dogged by critical response that they too were all style and no substance, at some time). He also happens to be a young man who still has room in his heart for naive romance and complete life-enveloping dedication to cinema. He, like Tarantino before him, made it cool to be a movie geek again. Before DVDs really took off.
Damn it, his Boogie Nights commentary taught me how to direct a film. I owe this man a HUGE inspirational debt of gratitude. If you don't like his films, like someone once wrote about Fellini, then I pity you. You are missing out.
BRAVO!!!
This SoNowThen guy seems like he gets the point, even if he doesn't realize it. Also I love Jacques Demy, I don't want people to think I don't believe in naive love stories, other than that feel free to think what ever you like about myself, some anonomys "prick"/Andy Worhal enthusiast who just wants to see how much attention he can create and how it evolves. Who here thinks Ron Sheldon is a genious. I do, much more than PTA ever will, dead serious about that.
Quote from: cinemascopethis guy is fucking the man.
Damn!!! I am also fucking the man. Looks like the man is a two timing bastard.
Quote from: cinemascopeWho here thinks Ron Sheldon is a genious. I do, much more than PTA ever will, dead serious about that.
Ok, so here's the thing. Now you're just fucking around. Really. Post somewhere else about something else instead of coming here to blatantly trash PTA just to piss people off. Do it. Post something different somewhere else. I dare you.
by the way, is it just me or does this guy's.. tone.. seem a little different? i'm pretty sure he's just somebody from around here...
or somebody that used to be around here
Hey, one or the other. He just seems to be fooling around with what he says. It's like pointlessly toying with us. I think the thread should be deleted entirely but it took up a lot of people's time...
all of this...nonsense...aside....eh....PTA is pretty damn great though...
I mean, c'mon, he's made four of the best films ever made. A true artist..
First, this thread was criticism against PTA. Then a general bad reaction to the guy for being so blanketing in his assault. Then the guy demanding for "actual argument. Actual Argument. Guy debating only minor criticisms of his post. More criticism of how everyone is just bashing the guy. The guy revelling in his new fame for bashing PTA and posting off that. Other minor stuff.
I looked for merit in what the guy said, I really did. I can identify with his position. Its just that when he seemed to get some meaty replies, he backed off completely and only replied like he could see half the posts. I, personally, saw so many holes in his arguments that are so general they could be attributed to problems of directors he says PTA is minor when compared to. Nothing really summed up a full thought out opinion on why PTA, himself, is a poor director.
~rougerum
yeah....fuck um
admins...permission to ruin this thread?...as you all know I can...
yeah....fuck um
Quote from: poseryeah....fuck um
the admins?...no dude, that's gross. They are all dudes...I tell ya thou, if I had to pick...a goatsed fat guy in his mid 30's. :wink:
Quote from: MacGuffin
Without character development, there would be no story in character driven screenplays/movies. For the characters' 'arc' should drive the story. They have to learn a lesson, or have a change of heart, something that will take us along on their journey (look to Truffaut movies for this example too - Jules and Jim, 400 Blows, etc.). And because we will know what they seek, we, as the audience, will feel for them if they reach their goal, or not achieve it in the end. It's because we have invested our feelings and emotions that we empathize with them. And, in the end, isn't that what makes great cinema?
That's what has made 'great' Classical Hollywood cinema, but what about films that aren't out to hook you into that kind of identification? That are 'great' on an aesthetic, cinematic level? I would say that Punch-Drunk Love is great because of its style, not because of the characters, who really are rather thinly drawn. The emotional engagement works in a way that is not at all similar to what you describe. I think cinemascope, serious or not, might have been trying to suggest that stylistically PTA's movies are nothing special, but he would be wrong about PDL. The whole reason it's difficult is because it doesn't do what you are saying and people are therefore clueless when it comes to reading it.
Quote from: budgieI would say that Punch-Drunk Love is great because of its style, not because of the characters, who really are rather thinly drawn.
I'm pretty sure I agree with that. But is Barry really thinly drawn, or is he just alien? I think his character is actually thick (though not consistent), and only easy to identify with in strange undefinable ways.
Quote from: Jeremy Blackmanand only easy to identify with in strange undefinable ways.
yes,...I dunno if being thin (or thick) is a bad thing though. I know myself, found at least something about Barry which holds true of me. And I don't think I am the only one either. Developing him in a thin incosistant way helps him to be more identifiable. He is very vulnerable, as we all can be. That I think is easy to identify with...and that's not necessarly a bad thing either.
I don't know how Barry could be thinly drawn. I've seen all of Sandler's work and usually his characters do the same things. This time around it was moving. Sandler had more layers in PDL. It's hard to identify with a guy who has 7 abusive sisters, when you think about it... not many of us know what thats really like but we can imagine that its shit. When he spontaneously breaks things, I felt that worked because of his pent up rage. I know people like that. That can just snap to release anger and such (not that they've smashed my windows in or tried to destroy my bathroom). I felt Egan had a lot more depth here compared to his other pictures, but even aside from his other work, I found it wasn't thinly drawn at all.
It wouldn't have been as thinly drawn out if PTA had kept all the sister sequences in, honestly I thought he should have kept those. The characters are the only thing I liked in PDL, cinamticaly, specifically the compositions are all blatently ripped off.
shut up now...
PDL is there for substance...ah fuck...ok, here goes...
scope I said this awhile back:
Quote from: aclockworkjj....a challenge to all you folk...make a thread, that captures hearts alike, and has meaning (in this forum, and relevant to it)....I will be the judge....convince me....and I will send you a present worth your time.
I think you have done this...congrats....pm me with shippin' info, as you deserve my prize.
Quote from: pLasmatroNAcockwookie DJ, will you ever shut the fuck up? Stop trying to be black as Justin Timberlake tries to be. Step off, let the real niggaz in and please shut the fuck up.
great post...will your 5th post be equally as good? go 4 it real nigga.
Quote from: cinemascopecinamticaly, specifically the compositions are all blatently ripped off.
But isn't the skill in how things are juxtaposed. Isn't the movie
about meetings?
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanQuote from: budgieI would say that Punch-Drunk Love is great because of its style, not because of the characters, who really are rather thinly drawn.
I'm pretty sure I agree with that. But is Barry really thinly drawn, or is he just alien? I think his character is actually thick (though not consistent), and only easy to identify with in strange undefinable ways.
By 'strange, undefinable' I assume you mean, emotional. Which may be strange to you? Do you find your own identification with Barry strange, Jeremy?
As for 'alien', ditto. I recognize him, and I have smashed a window.
What I am implying of course (as you are too I think) is that his character is drawn in the subconscious rather than on the paper, where he is hardly delineated, and only with a fine line. That is, not as is usual with 'narrative' film of the sort churned out in the mainstream. It means that you will only identify with Barry if you share some of his psychological traits, or perhaps if you can own them. To a greater or lesser degree, you may need more information than is given, which isn't much. I would say that actually all of PTA's work is like that, it's very much dependent upon you recognizing his way of experiencing people, very idiosyncratic and really quite narrow-focused.
Does that mean he's not a great filmmaker? I wonder how everyone here will feel about his movies in 20 years' time, or even less? Will you still recognize Barry then? Will he?
What is remarkable about PTA is the way he does tap into the psyche, in movies where that isn't a usual approach (rom com, for instance). He's using abstract visual style to do that more and more, but the area he's really developing, surely, is sound, which no one talks about. The firecracker scene in BN is by far the most remarkable, Claudia's smile only packs its punch because of the level of the soundtrack, and PDL is exemplary. He's not the only person to experiment, but he's maybe unique in that he's doing it with melodramas and comedies (normally dependent for their pull on characterisation and plot), and at least on the fringes of the mainstream (even if he is heading towards being pushed into arthouse).
Quote from: budgieBy 'strange, undefinable' I assume you mean, emotional. Which may be strange to you? Do you find your own identification with Barry strange, Jeremy?
I hope not, but it may be true. I definitely identify with him, but I'm sure that there's more beyond the surface. I can pick apart the movie without finding it. And doesn't that prove that it's subconscious, like you said? I recognize him too, but I can't find him. Maybe he's only alien in that he's so close.
The first time I saw the movie, it was Barry that wouldn't get out of my head. I was shaken. I had to see the movie again a few hours later. Barry will live forever under my skin.
yeah, at first I was like, PTA is great, then after reading your thread, I was like, PTA is not that great.
It's like deja vu. Every day I come to this message board, and I see at the top of the list, this thread, and every time, I think "Why won't it just die?"
the structure of PDL, sharp focus on Barry and thin focus on everyone else, I think has to do with the film creating a structure similiar to the Chaplin and Keaton films. Both films were basically portraits of one character, with all the others acting as tools to heighten the main character in some way.
Anderson, on character portraits, seems very much to work as a natural director in just observing the actions of a character, higher meaning or not. Boogie Nights was more flushed with symbolism and overt references. Magnolia strayed more but still had it. Punch Drunk Love is him at his most natural because if being able to be referenced, none of the actions say to speak for anything specific. They are just what the character does. His portrait. The great actress Louise Brooks always gave the reason for not writing an auto biography because it would force her to condense her life into something meaningful and understandable. Serious portraits, as she said, made the character even more confusing at the end. Punch Drunk Love is tidy at the end, but only in Barry finding love. He is, still, mostly a mystery.
~rougerum
Quote from: rustinglasscinemascope, you're cool, you've got balls.
i agree with 1/2 of that statement
QuoteWe love PTA 'cause he writes stories that tow the line of realism but leave room for movie magic...
The nail.
On the head.
You hit it.
Hard.
More than anything else, you just summed up what PTA is all about for me personally.
Quote from: LinkIt's like deja vu. Every day I come to this message board, and I see at the top of the list, this thread, and every time, I think "Why won't it just die?"
i was gonna lock it but then budgie started talking. and i can't interfere with that, it's a very rare thing.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpetthe structure of PDL, sharp focus on Barry and thin focus on everyone else, I think has to do with the film creating a structure similiar to the Chaplin and Keaton films. Both films were basically portraits of one character, with all the others acting as tools to heighten the main character in some way.
Punch Drunk Love is him at his most natural because if being able to be referenced, none of the actions say to speak for anything specific. They are just what the character does. His portrait. The great actress Louise Brooks always gave the reason for not writing an auto biography because it would force her to condense her life into something meaningful and understandable. Serious portraits, as she said, made the character even more confusing at the end. Punch Drunk Love is tidy at the end, but only in Barry finding love. He is, still, mostly a mystery.
~rougerum
Yes. Absolutely. Good post, and I agree 100%.
Just wondering...How can anyone believe that PTA ''ripped off'' the compositions in Punch-Drunk Love? From who and what????
Truffaut for one...
but I think that's cool.
Quote from: finlayrJust wondering...How can anyone believe that PTA ''ripped off'' the compositions in Punch-Drunk Love? From who and what????
From Greg's site:
When Barry is running away from the brothers in their truck, PTA stages the shot EXACTLY like the opening of Truffaut's "Shoot The Piano Player" (side tracking shot of character running through shadows). LENA is also the name of the love interest in Truffaut's film as well...
that was me who emailed that in to Greg
(not the Lena bit, tho...)
so what if he borrows shots here and there... EVERYONE borrows from Meliés, Porter and DW Smith anyways, so whats the point?
I think that cinemascope should change his name to troublemaker.
Quote from: SoNowThenthat was me who emailed that in to Greg
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fhomepages.ihug.co.nz%2F%7Ephil%2Fwanted%2Fobe.gif&hash=e61074279b8f00834b45b63be21e5a88f67056fd)
AWESOME!!!
I knew if I waited and waited it would happen....
:wink:
btw, I think we should change the name of this thread to "PTA is not very food..."
Quote from: SoNowThenbtw, I think we should change the name of this thread to "PTA is not very food..."
Too funny. Good one!
Quote from: SoNowThenbtw, I think we should change the name of this thread to "PTA is not very food..."
beats duck sauce's "Lakers are going to rape everyone this year" title re-imagining.
Jeez, I say we all huff some crack and forget all about this silly little debate. We all know PTA is a brazen and original and innovational filmmaker, so let's just whip out our pipes/jam a few rocks in and light that baby up! C'mon people, this is common sense.
debate? this thread is nothing more than yet another shrine to pta, just like every other one one in this pta director section. its been 8 pages of ppl praising him, all b/c one insignificant new guy makes one trifling remark about the man himself that got everyone all pissy. the thread title should be 'pta is very food.'
Shrine. Debate. Whatever, this fucking thread is getting on my goddamn nerves. A bunch of regurgitated crap.
Everyone Go Watch A PTA Movie Right Now!
Quote from: filmcriticDie Stupid, Pointless and Ignorant Thread! Die!!!
i think if i were to lower my standards and become a film critic i would talk like this guy
ebert and Alguien" MEMO TO TROY MILLER , HEY YOU COCKSUCKING FAGGOT WHO FORCED ME TO SIT THROUGH DUMB AND DUMBERER, I HOPE YOU NEVER FUCKING DIRECT AGAIN AND THE FARRRELLY BROTHERS BOTH GET THE CHANCE TO PEE IN YOUR MOUTH, I HOPE YOU DIE DIE DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, ok and our next flick is swat, a film i thought was fucking great............. "
Quote from: poserEveryone Go Watch A PTA Movie Right Now!
I got mine:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.amazon.com%2Fimages%2FP%2F630214888X.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg&hash=45f32bb1d836c27dc5d597c988277f0c52b6263e)
Quote from: MacGuffinQuote from: poserEveryone Go Watch A PTA Movie Right Now!
I got mine:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.amazon.com%2Fimages%2FP%2F630214888X.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg&hash=45f32bb1d836c27dc5d597c988277f0c52b6263e)
he stole most of his ideas for hard eight ( no i wont call it sydney) from harper valley PTA
Quote from: PQuote from: SoNowThenbtw, I think we should change the name of this thread to "PTA is not very food..."
beats duck sauce's "Lakers are going to rape everyone this year" title re-imagining.
I dunno, that was my favorite one of all time...