Xixax Film Forum

Non-Film Discussion => Xix & Xax => Topic started by: Gold Trumpet on April 30, 2003, 07:35:07 PM

Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 30, 2003, 07:35:07 PM
OK, I'm officially jealous of Film Student and Moniker Jones. I also may be very bored too. But, anyways, ask me anything. I know there is the possibility of a million threads like these going to maybe pop up soon if more people jump on the bandwagon, but what the hell. Hey, I'm egotistical and cocky enough and labeled by many to be completely pretensious as well, so why not make a thread like this. So ask questions and be ready to be dissapointed in my answers.

And I don't know how to do that nice quote thing effectively, so pay attention in looking for responces. computer illiterate, i am I Am.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: MacGuffin on April 30, 2003, 07:42:03 PM
Ummmm....so, what are you wearing?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 30, 2003, 07:44:01 PM
green eddie bauer t shirt, blue jeans and some unkown skater like shoes.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Dirk on April 30, 2003, 07:52:34 PM
What kind of music do you listen to?

this is fun
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: RegularKarate on April 30, 2003, 07:54:01 PM
Where do you plug in?

Or do you run on batteries?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 30, 2003, 07:58:13 PM
dirk,
I have no preference. All kinds but I'm a terrible music fan in hearin everything so I usually go by recommendation. As much as I got pick on for liking these bands, R.E.M and U2 have been faves for much of my earlier life. Beck's Sea Change has gotten heavy rotation lately. OutKast right now are prolly my favorite band.

Rk,
Plug what in?

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: RegularKarate on April 30, 2003, 08:25:02 PM
yourself...

next question, do you ever read over your posts before you hit submit?  Was there ever a time that you did and just said to yourself "that's too long" or "My my, I might be taken more seriously, if I didn't take this all so seriously"
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 30, 2003, 08:39:02 PM
First: I run on my own batteries.

Second: When I feel I am getting technical and saying a lot or felt like I made a good post, then I do re read it over before hitting submit. I am always questioning my posts and really do hate the way I say most things here. Lot of the time it is the bad wording and the not get to the fucking point of it all. I then will see other people say what I said and be like, "Fuck, why didn't I think of that?" I'm really gotten into a way of writing where it is like I am talking, where I am just going off and can post long messages easily because it is all coming out so fast. And yes, I do think I am taking myself too seriously in a lot of posts. I usually don't realize this until after the post has been submitted and got all the feedback and I read it again and get mad at myself for how I presented what I wanted to say. My problem is that I am quick to say this is the best of this or that and really begin what I say with those kinds of things. I think I do well in explaining my reasons and sticking to them, but I hate how I always want to put it into a perspective that is ranking something with everything else in movie history from what I know, which is a knowledge limited anyways in a major way. Everyone here makes threads or have opinions with the greatest of and its ok, but I really say it in that official critic way. Its just that I grew up reading reviews from critics. Its not that I take any specific ideas from critics and apply what they said on a film as my own, but I have taken general knowledge and tried to use them and apply them my own way. Its ok for me to have that general knowledge of how to look at a movie to argue upon, but I need to stop labeling as a critic would and get very low key on that. And look, I already went off on a large paragraph of sorts without realizing it that much.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: BonBon85 on April 30, 2003, 08:49:44 PM
Do you go to UC Berkeley?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Dirk on April 30, 2003, 08:55:11 PM
What came first, the chicken or the egg?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 30, 2003, 08:56:34 PM
Hah, I wish I did. Life would be great for me there. I'm nowhere near there though, I am in Michigan in a city that barely has over ten thousand people and isolated from all major cities literally. UC Berkley would be better for me in getting into the movie businessand would have more films for me to watch period. Again, I really do wish I could be somewhere like that.

And dirk, umm.....my foot smashing the egg?

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pubrick on April 30, 2003, 08:57:04 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetSecond: When I feel I am getting technical and saying a lot or felt like I made a good post, then I do re read it over before hitting submit. I am always questioning my posts and really do hate the way I say most things here. Lot of the time it is the bad wording and the not get to the fucking point of it all. I then will see other people say what I said and be like, "Fuck, why didn't I think of that?" I'm really gotten into a way of writing where it is like I am talking, where I am just going off and can post long messages easily because it is all coming out so fast. And yes, I do think I am taking myself too seriously in a lot of posts. I usually don't realize this until after the post has been submitted and got all the feedback and I read it again and get mad at myself for how I presented what I wanted to say. My problem is that I am quick to say this is the best of this or that and really begin what I say with those kinds of things. I think I do well in explaining my reasons and sticking to them, but I hate how I always want to put it into a perspective that is ranking something with everything else in movie history from what I know, which is a knowledge limited anyways in a major way. Everyone here makes threads or have opinions with the greatest of and its ok, but I really say it in that official critic way. Its just that I grew up reading reviews from critics. Its not that I take any specific ideas from critics and apply what they said on a film as my own, but I have taken general knowledge and tried to use them and apply them my own way. Its ok for me to have that general knowledge of how to look at a movie to argue upon, but I need to stop labeling as a critic would and get very low key on that. And look, I already went off on a large paragraph of sorts without realizing it that much.

~rougerum
so what ur saying is:
"yeah i reread what i say but i just hav no control over my sentence structure. the excuses i tell myself are no different than anyone else's history with film, mostly i just can't CAN'T say things shorter. it might be a medical condition, a form of obsessive compulsive disorder if u will. unless i say everything like a textbook i will surely be misunderstood, and that's just plain nutty."
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pozer on April 30, 2003, 08:58:52 PM
I got two

1) what is The Gold Trumpet (forgive me if you've already explained before)?

2) I always haveta ask, what are your top 3 favorite movies?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SoNowThen on April 30, 2003, 09:00:15 PM
I got one for ya, GT:

Name the two movies where Nick Nolte quotes Homer (the Greek, not Bart's dad).
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 30, 2003, 09:01:05 PM
P, What I'm saying is that I am not imaginative enough to come up with sentence structure the way others around here do and am acting like I know everything on certain occasions when that is far from the truth. I'm still learning.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: BonBon85 on April 30, 2003, 09:04:45 PM
How long do you think it will be before every person on this board has their own thread?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: MacGuffin on April 30, 2003, 09:05:23 PM
Do you think this new avatar makes me look fat?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pozer on April 30, 2003, 09:08:47 PM
sorry to answer for GT, but I think it makes you look pretty damn cool
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 30, 2003, 09:08:47 PM
SoNowThen,
You got me there. I have no idea.

poser,
the name The Gold Trumpet comes from my all time favorite book, Foucault's Pendulum by Umberto Eco. I would say what it meant, but that would be giving away a lot of what that book stands for. I rather people discover the book instead by reading it.

3 favorite movies.........
I always say 2001 is the best I've seen, but I'd be lying if I say I can watch it like it is easy to watch. For right now, I think it stands as 8 1/2, Grave of the Fireflies, and Singin' In the Rain. I don't know, but for some reason I have a fascination for just directing musicals if I ever became a director and all three of those films deal with the main combinations I would want, as I see it now.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 30, 2003, 09:10:48 PM
BB,
Likely will never happen, but it seems like a great introduction to get to know someone.

Mac,
mysterious.......not fat.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pozer on April 30, 2003, 09:11:20 PM
that's cool and you got 2 of my faves, 8 1/2 and, well 2001 is in your top three as far as I'm concerned
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 30, 2003, 09:15:24 PM
haha, you might as well. I wish though more people would discover Grave of the Fireflies. I say that movie all the time in hopes to get it some general respect and a desire for people to go see it. I doubt I am succeeding, but who cares.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SoNowThen on April 30, 2003, 09:16:14 PM
Damn GT, I was counting on you.

Thin Red Line
&
The Good Thief.


But seriously, no one should've got that. I just saw Good Thief this weekend, and just began reading The Iliad last week, so I had a little advantage. It was a question for giggles. Oh well.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SoNowThen on April 30, 2003, 09:16:51 PM
Oh, and 8 1/2 fucking rocks!!!!!!!!! I love it.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: BonBon85 on April 30, 2003, 09:18:37 PM
I've noticed a lot of film buffs I know cite Singin' in the Rain as their favorite film. I think that it's interesting that it's named not only the best musical but seems to transcend the limits of the genre and is hailed as being superior to films of genres that are more traditionally celebrated (like drama). Quick - write one of your mini essays explaining why. (please)
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Dirk on April 30, 2003, 09:19:32 PM
Quote from: BonBon85I've noticed a lot of film buffs I know cite Singin' in the Rain as their favorite film. I think that it's interesting that it's named not only the best musical but seems to transcend the limits of the genre and is hailed as being superior to films of genres that are more traditionally celebrated (like drama). Quick - write one of your mini essays explaining why. (please)

She just wants you to do her homework, don't be fooled  :wink:
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: BonBon85 on April 30, 2003, 09:21:24 PM
Quote from: DirkShe just wants you to do her homework, don't be fooled  :wink:

haha, I wish I had homework like that - GT, feel free to take my calculus exam for me!
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Dirk on April 30, 2003, 09:25:43 PM
Quote from: BonBon85haha, I wish I had homework like that - GT, feel free to take my calculus exam for me!

I want you to give me the antiderivative of f(x)= 4x^2 - cos(x^2) + x
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: MacGuffin on April 30, 2003, 09:27:44 PM
Quote from: DirkI want you to give me the antiderivative of f(x)= 4x^2 - cos(x^2) + x

Please hold that question until the Ask BonBon thread is started.

GT, why is Dirk's avatar so damn hypnotic?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 30, 2003, 09:29:38 PM
SoNowThen,
Haven't seen The Good Thief, so stood no chance there. Haven't seen The Thin Red Line in a while. But like I said in the first post to this thread, my answers will be dissapointing.

BB,
It's citatation for being hailed as one of the all time great films because no film as clearly represents a genre as Singin' In the Rain does for the musical. Citizen Kane even represents a small portion to the colossal world that drama is now. Singin' In the Rain though feels like it had everything seen in musicals for the time and unlike a lot of musicals during that time, it as charming and imaginative today as ever. I think it has trasncended its genre by so clearly being the example of everything that genre can be. Still, in its outside comedy structure, it plays out like any other comedy would back then. The moments are in the executation though and the reason for this being so great is simply because most people feel that the musicals have to be represented in the pantheon of the all time great film world of sorts by some film, and this is the only reasonable choice.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 30, 2003, 09:31:30 PM
Mac,
because it is small, cute and doing the same simple movements over and over again.

I hate math with a passion.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: RegularKarate on April 30, 2003, 09:41:37 PM
What's the big deal about Grave of the Fireflies (I'm really askin' for it here, but I can't help myself)

I recently saw it and I liked it... but just didn't get the big deal.

Seems you kill a kid in a movie, everyone likes it.  It's almost like cheating.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pozer on April 30, 2003, 09:46:04 PM
why'd you haveta give away the killing of the kid part? I was gonna rent it tonite

just kidding, man. no big deal
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 30, 2003, 09:54:38 PM
RK,
I only liked it on first viewing too. I was dissapointed big time when I first saw it because the hype was so huge and it never paid off for me.

The more I watched it though, the more transcending it became. (spoilers) The movie stopped feeling like a simple orphanage of children and their eventual death, but lyricism speaking of children caught in a world completely against them. The movie is focused on the feeling of this world that nothing really became simple for me. The words were simple and the actions like a simple Italian Neo Realist film, but the film was drowned in so much feeling and shown with an utter horror and beauty that I felt the movie was more rewarding with each viewing because this became even more apparent. The world is drawn so poetically, but yet so focused on the exact details. You wouldn't realize that when the little girl realizes something is wrong with her mom and is terribly sad and sitting by herself alone as the brother watches on helpess, that the sky is painted an ominiscient orange of warning like a painting and is so deliberately focused on the feelings of these characters that after first viewings for me, it was nothing simple at all. The film just continued to grow in power and still does that new feelings begin to arise on their death, like that it wasn't just of starvation, but of them giving up on trying to live. It is the most powerful movie for me in how it shows the world and details these sad deaths instead of just showing them.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 30, 2003, 09:56:09 PM
Poser,
their deaths are revealed at the very beginning.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: bonanzataz on April 30, 2003, 10:44:55 PM
Quote from: MacGuffinGT, why is Dirk's avatar so damn hypnotic?

I know it's not my thread, but I'm gonna say because IT'S PEANUT BUTTER JELLY TIME!
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: phil marlowe on May 01, 2003, 12:05:47 AM
got a couple...

- how many carat is your trumpet? i bet its just coated.

- are you somehow related to silver bullet?

- have you ever been so wasted on booze that your eyes start going blind?

- underneath. i mean, what are you wearing underneath?

- are you a goer?

- what kind of batteries do you use?

- what do you wanna be when you grow up?(you cant be bruce willis)
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pedro on May 01, 2003, 12:22:36 AM
What are your thoughts on Being John Malkovich?
Do you think that PTA borrows too much from other film greats?
What is the most moved you've ever been fron a movie?
What is the best acting performance ever?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: dufresne on May 01, 2003, 02:23:22 AM
how old are you?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pubrick on May 01, 2003, 05:28:26 AM
hav u ever done a conscious human female?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 01, 2003, 06:22:37 AM
phil,
(in order)
24 all the way
nope
nope
my naked self
yes
duracell
who said i wanna grow up?

dufrense,
20

P,
yep

Pedro,

Being John Malkovich is a wildly imaginative film, but it tries to extend a small idea out way too far that for a lot of the movie, you see the characters in stand still talking about nothing really important. It needed to be thought out more.

Naw. Steven Speilberg said he didn't find his voice til many films in and was very much directing under other people's direct influence. I think Paul did two films story wise like that, but he is running by himself now. And I don't mind that he uses many shots from other filmmakers because it seems for a director to get noticed, you really must do that anyways and not just shoot straight.

Prolly from watching Hillary and Jackie the first and still only time a couple years back. I've shed tears through many movies before, but that movie was the only movie I full out cried.

The last is hard. The most impressive from recent films is Jack Nicholson in About Schimdt. Ah fuck it, I'm not sure so I will cop out and give the mundane answer of Renee Maria Falconetti in The Passion of Joan of Arc.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: children with angels on May 01, 2003, 07:50:42 PM
Okay: how much does emotion matter to you when watching a movie?

I ask because there are many films that I absolutely adore simply because of the feeling I get from them. And I'm not talking here about those movies that conjour up nostalgic memories from your youth (like Land Before Time perhaps...) or those movies that you know are actually bad but you absolutely love for weird, totally personal reasons (American Pie for example - dont ask me to explain... ) I'm speaking about the potentially 'good' movies (in the sense of 'respectable', whatever that means) that you may be able to pick to pieces on a stylistic (or whatever) level, but you just don't... because, for you, they mean the world. Examples for me would be Man On The Moon (a very average biopic in many ways, but special for me because of Andy Kauffman), Vanilla Sky (I could tear it to shreds analytically, but - Goddamn - it makes me feel), or Before Sunrise (yes, it's cheesy, pretensious, other things perhaps - but it is wonderful...).

I guess what I'm basically saying is, to paraphrase my favourite movie - however overused it may be on this board: "what can you forgive?" Are your favourite movies those which manage to totally align the emotional AND the technical...? If so: you're lucky - a lot of my favourite films, I could not hold my head up and declare them in a room of cinephiles (becuase they have obvious faults which I am willing to overlook because they truly get to me)...

Anyway. What say you, sir?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Film Student on May 01, 2003, 10:45:03 PM
GT:

1. How old are you?

2. Do you think that computers have ruined the integrity of filmmaking?  

3.  Do you ever accidentally misspell rougerum, or is it like an automatic copy paste thing?

4.  How do you seduce (or attempt to seduce) a woman?  Do you pull out the italian neo-realist shit or do you work a clever movie quote into your come-on, like "baby wants to fuck" or something?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 01, 2003, 11:09:30 PM
Children,
I definitely understand your dilemma. My own progress seemed to be like pure fun movies, the reject all those by trying to go for all the acclaimed films even if you really didn't like sitting through, they were watched. Now, though, I am going back to more movies that I find of my own pleasure and tying it with both kinds of movies. I really think you just need to investigate movies more. I know little compared to other people and am glad I have been able to tie in the most pleasureful and pure best films into my own experience. I think the more you want to learn and do learn about movies and its history, the more things that are pleasureful that are to be discovered. I definitely have favorites though I wouldn't say were best anything, like Die Hard and The Crow and those are great films and I love movies that can execute well on that level. Then my real favorites on both levels are the three I named before and I still watch those three more than any others continually with the exception of the Miyazaki films. You can get to that level, just need to dig more and see how different movies can be.

FS,
1.) 20
2.) Not definitively no. I've heard arguments before the computer age of how the new generation knew very little about the history of movies and able to bring anything beyond their general film schooling. I think though the computer age is rolling with the death banner and trying to promote its bullshit cause as much it really can. I think at worst, it has already defined a generation of kids who want to be filmmakers in what they believe they should do in movies and that seems less to do with developing stories and more with the banal of movies today. But, that is completely general talk. 2003 looks to be a great year for movies and Blockbuster more and more is showing indie films and they are gaining steam in popularity for wannabee filmmakers. That's great, and I am glad two worlds exist in this, but it doesn't mean this computer age isn't rooted in missused bullshit. It is.
3.) I don't know if I ever really did misspell rougerum or not. Maybe spelling that is one of my few talents. I don't know, but I don't do any paste thing.
4.) I can never pull any lines to make myself look good at all. When I say it, even I am never believing it and it is rooted in bad approach anyways. I think maybe if I was overtly attractive like a model or generally an asshole, then I may do something like that. I guess nice and try not to pull anything on the girl and one hopes that she will be so confused by this grand new approach that she will trip over herself and fall to the ground, in turn hitting me and knocking me down also, and somehow in this weird incident, my dick lands in her pussy. "Oh, I didn't see you there, miss. Excuse me" But naw, I am usually very nice and respectful and mock all the guys I know who take command from a head twenty times smaller than their major one.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: children with angels on May 02, 2003, 07:24:24 AM
Sorry if this sounds a little uptight, it's just you interpreted my question in more of a condescending manner than I'd hoped... I wasn't asking for advice on how to get to the level you're on, GT.  I study film - I'm reasonably well-watched, I know "how different movies can be". I love 2001 and 8 1/2: they'd be up there for me near the top of a favourite films list... But they're not the ones that move me to tears. The ones that do that would be: Magnolia, Buffalo 66, The Ice Storm and Man on the Moon. I don't know your opinions on these movies (except Magnolia which you said isn't as good as PDL, right?), but I'm sure you - or indeed I - could make claims for all of them not being that special in terms of cinema as a whole: hell - they were all made in the last six years!

Is it a coincidence that two of your favourite movies are also seminal, defining works of cinema, or is it partly that which makes you love them (that's cool if so: I literally am just wondering...)?

Your examples of Die Hard and The Crow weren't really what I was talking about: they kind of have a get-out clause of being seen as, what is sterotypically called, 'bad movies': no-one's going to think you're judging them by the standards of 'high art'. Whereas: I say to one of my lecturers, "My favourite film is Magnolia", that movie gets judged alongside  the greats because it's somehow trying to be 'respectable', and I look like a fool who's never watched a film by Fellini. But what they don't see is that it really is the BEST film for me. In terms of what I want cinema to achieve: that is a perfect movie. And it makes me feel.

So if you watch a 'good' movie that makes you cry (Hillary and Jackie for example), totally totally gets you (therefore achieving precisely its intention) where do you begin to rate it on a list? Does it have to be able to stand up to analysis next to 8 1/2 in order for it to be one of your favourite movies? How important is emotion to you when watching a film?

Again: apologies if this sounds kinda pissed off - I'm not really: I just want to know what you think...
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ©brad on May 02, 2003, 08:01:15 AM
i'll join in here. my main problem with many film critics is that they always deem themselves more intelligent than the filmmaker. this is probably why i quarrel with GT a lot. Its that arrogant need to 'conquer' a film, to concentrate your efforts on pinpointing all the negative aspects of it.

children with angels made some good points on emotion which to me is the most important thing with movies. i could sit here and type out this long rant of things in, say, about schmidt that i thought were off or misconstrued, but overall I enjoy the film on an emotional level. seeing nicholson at the end crying was moving, so much that it made all my fussy complaints about the film seem irrelevant in retrospect.

gt i try to resist in your relentless attempts of trying to get me to argue with you because it really boils down to a difference of opinion, which is essentially undebatable. take ur view on the royal tennenbaums. you've criticized the movie for being too cute. okay, i think you're wrong and being a bit over-analytical, but how am i suppose to argue with that? i can't really put into words what the final long shot at the wedding does to me, but it does something profound. i read ur posts and wonder why you even watch movies in the first place. it doesn't seem like you get any enjoyment out of them. you start your posts with lines like this; "A while ago, I promised in a nameless thread I was going to bash this movie coming up. Well, for the most part, I will." what kind of shit is that?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: chainsmoking insomniac on May 02, 2003, 10:49:17 AM
Absolutely.  GT seems to bash every film that comes his way.  I don't understand this either.  GT, what movies do you like?

And the previous post brought up a really good point.  Even though there may be technical flaws, or problems with story, or whatever, doesn't it really boil down to how a movie 'hits' you?  I know for me, there are movies that I like alot simply because they leave me feeling refreshed and renewed....I don't know, I'm starting to ramble, and I'm not half as eloquent as the previous post.  Okay, I'm done.  :-D
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: children with angels on May 02, 2003, 01:16:11 PM
I'm not saying I think GT doesn't get emotionally moved by films (he does - he told us: Hillary and Jackie) - that would be ridiculously insulting. I'm just wondering what makes him say "I love that movie": is it the emotion or the technical/significance side of things. For example: from what I remember of your review of City Of God, GT, you made a very convincing argument for it being the most significant film for a long while based on its use of its various styles: I don't remember any comments on how it made you feel...

Again, I repeat: I'm not attacking your ability to feel emotion or calling you cold or some shit like that, I'm just asking: in your categorising of movies in your mind, if there was a film that you could totally completely relate to on a personal level (but un-noteworthy in terms of direction), and another which was the best example of cinematic technique you had ever seen (but didn't touch you so deeply), which would you reate more highly...?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SoNowThen on May 02, 2003, 02:16:44 PM
Hey, Children With Angels, I wanna respond to something you said a couple posts ago, but I don't know how to do the quote-from-before thing, so you'll have to bear with me.

Anyway, it regards what you put about trying to say Magnolia is the BEST movie for you, in a room full of people who will think you're dumb because you're not talking about Fellini. I just love what you wrote, it sounded really nice and honest, etc. I've pondered this lots, and I thought I'd share with you. I wanna say a big "fuck off" to anybody who won't accept a 90's movie as being worthy of "best of all time". My fav film is Magnolia as well. But interestingly enough, my number two is 8 1/2!! I absolutely love Fellini, but I must maintain that I think Magnolia is the pinnacle of filmmaking so far on earth. It's just so hard to try and justify newer films' worth vs older films (I hesitate to use the words "contemporary and classic" because they usually refer to pre and post sound films). Ummm, to complete my ramble, I just wanna say Thanks for putting what you did about Magnolia & 8 1/2.

Sorry for the tangent, GT.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SoNowThen on May 02, 2003, 02:18:40 PM
I guess what I was trying to say is that Magnolia SHOULD be judged alongside the "greats". And we gotta keep defending it.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SoNowThen on May 02, 2003, 02:24:03 PM
Well.... three in a row....

While I'm at it, I should say:

kudos to you, GT. You really inspire some heavy posts. I may not always agree with you, but you force me to think. Makes us all better for it....

So here's a nice question for you. You mentioned in another post that Red Desert is looked upon as a lesser Antonioni film. Please give your opinion, comments, etc. I was deeply moved by the film, btw.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 02, 2003, 03:15:16 PM
ChildrenwithAngels, good job on calling me out there. If you felt I didn't answer right or was being prickish, then definitely call me out on it and explain how I should answer your question. In answering your question though, I would still go for the more artistic level movie because even if I felt the movie was an advancement through style, I couldn't appreciate it for just that only. Somewhere in that film, I would have to be emotionall affected to really like it. The main example of a movie I couldn't get into though I knew it was groundbreaking, was Hirsoshima, Mon Amour. I just couldn't get into it because nothing of the story seemed inviting for it to be enjoyable as a viewing experience. Though I do love personal films that are only of personal experience, I would say the other is more important because it is obvious I am trying to make that kind of analyzing a priority for me, so personally speaking, something that would succeed on that level for me would be much more rewarding for me.

SoNowThen,
I was only reporting of what I heard from Antonioni experts and did say myself I couldn't really speak of an opinion because I had not seen the film and could enjoy it.

I do realize I am negative all the time, but it is for the purpose of pushing discussion. Discussion is only found when a disagreeing opinion comes in and others feel the need to say to that one person why it is good. More information comes out and people are able to voice their own views in saying. Thomas Jefferson was notorious for contradicting himself his entire life and was deemed by many historians as someone constantly searching for a discussion or argument in something. His great talent was writing, so it fits. Also, Kubrick was this way too. He was busy in taking care of advertisements for a certain film and someone came up and told him how good the film did at the box office and he should be happy. Kubrick looked at him and said, "Don't tell me these things. I can't do anything to fix them. Just tell me the bad." All in all, negative comments with reason is really what makes a discussion board a discussion board. If everyone came and agreed, discussion would be extinct and this place a bore. And also if you have read my comments long enough, I definitely enjoy movies as anyone else here.

cbr, In my review of Royal Tennebaums, what you said of my arguments were correct, but you failed to identify that I backed my arguments up with reasons and my argument was very much open for debate. Look at redlum, he made a great argument against me that made me concede on many things of my opinion. He argued with reasons and did fine. I don't mind if you look to films for enjoyment only, but there is a risk when throwing your hat into the middle of an argument. You are forced to back your opinions up. Actually, my biggest gripe with you is that you gave me a completely ludicrous responce in anither thread and I identified it and challenged you but you are still a no show on commenting for your words. Then there is also you being known for calling people some shit that makes them look dumb, but you never back what you say up at all. And before you ask for an example of when you did this, go to the thread in which ebes said what movies he thought were overrated and then your responce to it. I also remembering you and duck sauce getting in arguments over this too.

Disagreeing with me is great, but at least try to reason it out. And if someone says I make them think more, then even better. Best thing anyone can get someone else to do.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Mesh on May 02, 2003, 03:19:11 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
If everyone came and agreed, discussion would be extinct and this place a bore.

That's my biggest gripe about this place, having been here less than a week.  I plan to get negative on y'all's asses regularly.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on September 28, 2003, 10:34:41 PM
..What is your opinion of the film.......Outbreak
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on September 28, 2003, 11:38:39 PM
Randomly made up end all disease propelled, as usual, to a general thriller. Renee Russo headlines simply because her name allowed her to at the time. Dustin Hoffmann gives a performance that is another example of how he spent half his career being an actor and being Harrison Ford meaning that presence good enough. Harrison Ford here.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on September 28, 2003, 11:43:35 PM
Voyage to Italy (Viaggio in Italia) by Roberto Rossellini is it...
horrible (as than current italian critics thought of it)
or
masterpiece as Cahiers du Cinema called it.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on September 28, 2003, 11:53:20 PM
Never seen it. Did see the Scorsese documentary on Italian Cinema that lifts the name of movie and reviews it and says everything about it. Out of all the Rosselini films (and a lot were reviewed) by Scorsese in this documentary post Open City, this seeemed the most interesting. Its framework was already well known in Hollywood those days but something about the movie feels epic and touching in a way that feels like it may be unique. To give my best opinion, I'd really love to see this and have been looking for it for quite some time.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on September 29, 2003, 12:33:37 AM
I would say it lies somewhere in between those 2 contrasts.  It isn't horrible but it certainly has many Hollywood elements, gone is Rossellini's gritty documentary look.  I had a hard time finding any worth in the film until I read about it a little more and than noticed some important elements.

The ending is ridiculous and seems very out of place.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SoNowThen on September 29, 2003, 09:04:41 AM
Absolutely agreed. I could've been on board (it was almost faux-Antonioni most of the time), but that ending licked balls.

Why does Marty love that flick?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ©brad on September 29, 2003, 09:13:57 AM
Quote from: NEON MERCURY..What is your opinion of the film.......Outbreak

why must u bump up these cursed ask me threads?

and gold trumpet, puleease explain to me what the hell this means-

Quote from: Gold TrumpetDustin Hoffmann gives a performance that is another example of how he spent half his career being an actor and being Harrison Ford meaning that presence good enough. Harrison Ford here.

~perplexed and irritated
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on September 29, 2003, 10:06:30 AM
It means I really don't think Harrison Ford is an actor or a very good one at all. He's mainly in movies where he can get by with relying on star power only. Dustin Hoffmann, who has done half and half, does that in Outbreak, and of course, imo.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on September 30, 2003, 07:02:25 PM
Quote from: ©bee
Quote from: NEON MERCURY

why must u bump up these cursed ask me threads?

..I think thier interesting... :wink:



And I like GT's opinions on film....

Alright ..GT speaking of harrison ford..what about his fiolm(which I thought was quite good)...Pressumed Innocent>>?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: cine on September 30, 2003, 09:00:41 PM
Or, for that matter, Witness...
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on September 30, 2003, 09:03:26 PM
and lets round out the trilogy w/ Regarding Henry...... :wink:


..GT you got some criticism to fill.....
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on September 30, 2003, 10:12:28 PM
One must always claim exception to a rule when thinking of general ones. Actually, when I said that, I had Regarding Henry in mind because for me it was obviously an exception to the rule. Just Ford's face of fragility and his manner of walk and loss of intimidation was really rewarding to watch. Ford was able to adjust his bravado into a believable enough realm of fragility and he was able to keep it up through out the film.

Witness, though, I didn't buy his performance. It seemed  just a much slowed down performance compared to his others. By the end, when the film turned actual crime thriller, you saw him more active and realized he is best at the general. I didn't see him active to play anything really dramatic in the film. With the exception of the easy ending, the movie tried to play the dramatic.

I missed Presumed Innocent.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: cine on September 30, 2003, 10:17:26 PM
Fair enough. I've never really fancied him as an actor. He's REALLY funny when he's on Conan. He should do stuff like that in movies. He'll always be my little Indy.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on September 30, 2003, 11:24:15 PM
..alright got some more:

1.0  joe vs. the volcano
2.0  the insider
3.0  pi
4.0  midnight cowboy
5.0  uncle buck.. :wink:
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 01, 2003, 11:06:26 AM
1.0 - Haven't seen it yet. Do want to.  

2.0 - Excellent movie and prolly Crowe's most convincing performance. He goes for dramatic in a more realistic sense and pulls it off. With other movies, he's trying too much to be Hollywood leading man and failing to really charm on that level. Moments in the screenplay are heavy, but overall, a very good movie.

3.0 - Still holds up for me. Its an experience film of just going through this gritty filmmaking more than experiencing story, but it holds up. The points and themes feel taped on at the end. Maybe the film should have been more about the experience than it was and maybe as it gets older, it may smell of cliche more and be less effectful.

4.0 - Half and half for me. The movie, very much dated, has an odd place of significance in that its feel and tone feels completely unique. Like Pi, it was going for a different feel to shows its world. Also it may give Hoffmann's best performance. There are just so many things easily identifiable with the times in screenplay and everywhere else that can render it easily for the times and also make it dated.

5.0 - I watched it! Just because I thought the teenage girl was super hot, I watched it. Candy had funny moments in showing his insanity to other kids and all. It doesn't challenge you but just asks you to enjoy it and I did enjoy myself during the movie.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on October 01, 2003, 10:54:42 PM
..good mini-capsule opinions...

here are some more..

1.0  in the name of my father
2.0  trains planes and automobiles
3.0  the lost boys
4.0  dead poet's society
5.0  leaving las vegas
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 02, 2003, 11:24:30 PM
1.0 - Harder to remember. Its been a while. From what I remember, it was a decent story but the movie was so dominated by the acting of Daniel Day Lewis that I really stopped watching the movie watched him. The movie finished on predictable and easy going terms for its story (I still say this knowing it is based on a true story) but the movie was mainly for Daniel Day Lewis. I even felt missing something from one of the best now, Emma Thompson. Though she had dramatic moments, you couldn't help but feel her filling scenes to just build up the main ingrediant: Day-Lewis. Not such a bad ingrediant, though.

2.0 - Quite simply, it achieves the most laughs and sympathy in its third act than any other of similiar type around that time. This means the movie actually stayed interesting all the way through. Hard to do and result: very funny movie.

3.0 - Missed.

4.0 - Way too general. The feeling of it is great, but so mundane. If the cinematography, charm of Williams and that final shot weren't there, this be just another movie. So many sports movies and general pick me up movies can give name to similiar way of going for sentimentality. To put it simple, the attempts to get us excited by poetry and approaches it in the most simplistic way: "Open yourself up to new things". The time period suggests cliche (1940s private boys school) becuase it brings the level of personal freedom a state level. Not existing now. Instead of finding a storyline that suggest personal imprisonment with fears more complex and not so easy to define in a sentence, it just suggests that and offers answers worthy of simplicity like a gun fight in an old western, "stand up for yourself." It's all been done in such classical ways. The movie is so charming, still. Weir, as usual, color codes everything wrong with great cinematography and Williams is a pleasure pill. The last shot is beautiful in dramatic composition but brings up the rest of movie to pretensious levels worth choking over.

5.0 - Magnificent movie. One of the best of the 90s. Symbolism is heavy at times, but the poetry of filmmaking, tone and performance is of genius. Cage hasn't even touched similiarity of quality since. It reminds me of the filmmaking of City of God, but for depth. The movie is so rythmatic in trying to flow with the music on its soundtrack that even with the very powerful story, we are brought along on imaginative filmmaking as well. Great filmmaking usually suggests superficiality with 8 1/2 and City of God. The scene with Cage standing in line and imagining how he would swoon over the lady helping customers while being brought to his own miserable reality at the end of it is just an example. This movie is up there with Grave of the Fireflies in using all its resources to make a great film.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on October 02, 2003, 11:57:49 PM
Damn..GT i agreed w/everyhting you said about the last ones.... :yabbse-thumbup:

..alright

1.0  Jesus' Son
2.0  Legends of the Fall
3.0  Easy Rider
4.0  Desperado
5.0  Forrest Gump
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 03, 2003, 07:58:45 PM
1.0 - Not high drama in any sense, but very enjoyable to make a really good film. Its really more just the misadventures of Crudup's character and how enjoyable they are and he is. There is symbolism to something higher at the end, (ala Being There) but I only felt good from it instead of being moved for more art reasons. If I looked at in more art terms, I'd likely be crying out 'pretension'. It reminds me of why Mumford was so enjoyable because it had a charm of oddness that couldn't make you stop watching it. I think Crudup's character showing higher life at the end wasn't really good at art anything, but emotionally fit to what we felt toward him. Also, Jack Black gets the role that would sum up his future ones to come and yet this is the most rewarding of roles.

2.0 - Missed it. Do want to watch it because I believe Pitt is underrated.

3.0 - Very dated but admirable. In essence, the story is symbolism to the hippie revolution and its conflict with the rest of the country. Not really a great drama, but just experiencing this counter culture that was only coming to familiarity with people at the time. Its message and impact really is with that world. Other than that, we get some fine performances and a memory of a forgotten world. As a movie to be analyzed, its dated at best.

4.0 - Less severe version of Once Upon a Time in Mexico but with all the same problems in that it does identify itself as a B movie. Its just gloating you are a B movie with a big budget isn't much of anything. The movie shows off on elevated violence and fantasy gun play. It doesn't show it as continuously and as often as the third in the series, but it still does it to a point where the action scenes are too showy and extended to be good and suffer from lack of build up in story to make them more effective. Its easy to blow the world up and this movie tries to do that in conjecture with gun fights in a bar. I would have something more minimalistic in approaching action.

5.0 - I like it more than other people do. The movie can't really be believed or taken serious, but there is so much talent and fun in the filmmaking and story that it can be enjoyed to a great level. Most complaints come from this movie just beating out Pulp Fiction for best picture. I agree, it shouldn't have. It is enjoyable and memorable on terms of Back to the Future, though. Moments at the end were iffy for me on obviously being ploys for sentamentality. I have no problem with sentimentality and do think it should have been used at the end, just not maybe in a sequence of events lasting 20 minutes. Could have been restricted big time. Extending it so much just made it all obviously look staged in feeling.  

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on October 05, 2003, 12:54:02 AM
damn  man  good job..

you neesd to see legends of the fall its good.Quinn  does agood job also...

fire away:

1.0  dazed on confused
2.0  fargo
3.0  wierd science
4.0  terninator 1
5.0  spirited away
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 05, 2003, 02:26:17 PM
1.0 - Excellent high school movie in that the movie is just documenting and makes no attempts to elevate any matter of storyline to higher drama or invidividual concern. It just follows these kids over the course of a night and its filmmaking is well intentioned in a lot of it is filmed from far away so as it covers the entire scene and leaves it in our memory when we're done watching it. It shoots for the environment. The material is also well intentioned in that, without showing any ploys or trickery, basically sums up a lot of people we knew or could identify with at high school. P.S. It took me a while to rent this movie. The cover suggest some hippie/drug movie of sorts. So wrong.

2.0 - Always had problem with the Coens. With this, the Coens prolly attempt to go for their most organic story in building an environment and characters in the most fruitful of ways. The movie is also the Coens at their most heartbreaking in my mind drama wise, but they screw it up. They set the movie in Minnesota and purposely bring up the cliche goofy accents to a head. I live in an area like this and as all cliches go, they really aren't true. People that live in these places don't all sound like this at all. At best, a minority do. At probable, its more complicated where people have it to lesser/severer degrees and nothings comes off as simplisticly goofy like this. Its just the Coens doing this they add an element of farce to a very serious movie. Comedy can exist in dramas, but when organically coming out of the story. The farce here is its own layer and just takes away from the drama. Yet, with the complaints, its the Coen's best effort. Just a mixed one.

3.0 - Missed it. Soft spot for 80s comedies, but this one never interested me much.

4.0 - All in all, I like the first two Terminator movies. Missed the third. If I had it my way, I'd take elements of both two to make my perfect Terminator movie. I prefer the first in that it creates a more eerie atmosphere and world very much implanted in your mind of belonging to the monster known as the Terminator; the story is much more simple and for the effect of showing the monster, but yet it hits unnecessary melodrama at times by developing a love story. The second in this realm is too casual in showing the violence and the cute comments and just trying to go over the top. The second succeeds though in that it doesn't try to achieve melodrama as thoroughly. It does have moments of bad drama, but not as wide spread. I like the first more in that it has power in trying to create a world for the Terminator but I like the second in that it is trying to fulfil as an action movie more. Just a mixture of both is needed with the first being the overall better movie.

5.0 - The Japanese language version was the best movie of last year. The english dubbed version was just a good movie. To explain my general reaction to the japanese version, it was a masterpiece of power and mystery. The basis of the story is familiar in that it is Alice in Wonderland. The movie is so mysterious in that it shows this world without telling its secrets and never focuses on direct story. It tells the story of the girl, but shifts so much so mysteriously from situation to situation that things never feel wrapped up at all. The movie is made with so much brilliance and charm it just encompasses us and makes us only wonder more after its done. The english version tries to kill it all by explaining everything in crucial moments. If the japanese version hadn't existed, it'd be a good film only. The Japanese version of Spirited Away is one of my favorite movies.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ©brad on October 05, 2003, 03:21:20 PM
can't u take this to a pm?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: aclockworkjj on October 05, 2003, 03:25:37 PM
Quote from: NEON MERCURY3.0  the lost boys
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet3.0 - Missed.
that's a shame...that movie is great.  Probably the best of the "cor{e}y's" in my opinion.  The ode to Jim Morrison is great....the soundtrack is a cracked up, but still great.  Kiefer, Patrick....go figure.  Star (Jamie Gets or something, right?) is kinda sexy at times too...

GT....what's yer opinion on cigarette smoking in bars?...nay or ney?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pedro on October 05, 2003, 03:27:41 PM
Quote from: ©badcan't u take this to a pm?
They could, but I sorta like it when GT offends me...
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 05, 2003, 03:36:59 PM
I don't see the problem with its current status. At best, it gets two replies a day now. How innocent is that? Like any other thread with little interest for someone, its very easy to skip over when looking at a page of many threads.

And some people do read this. Pedro, the very best example of disagreeing with me and thinking I'm still cool, seems to enjoy the thread. Most people wanna kill me.  I must give him props. I figure two or three other people out there exist.

and Clockwork......Yay for sure. A health nut going to a bar for clear air is as logical as a gay couple going to Alabama for better human rights. You either are into the bar atmosphere or you're not. You know what you're getting though when you go. Also, second hand smoke CAN'T give you cancer. Watch Penn and Teller's "Bull" for that info.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: aclockworkjj on October 05, 2003, 03:52:31 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetHow innocent is that?
exactly man...carry on.  

Pass over it if you don't like it.

ps.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet......Yay for sure.
yer a good man. (https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fusers.pandora.be%2Feforum%2Femoticons4u%2Fsmoking%2Frauch20.gif&hash=39b0d42f0da7fdec104d7139470bce56d8652950)
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ©brad on October 05, 2003, 03:59:11 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
And some people do read this. Pedro, the very best example of disagreeing with me and thinking I'm still cool, seems to enjoy the thread. Most people wanna kill me.  I must give him props. I figure two or three other people out there exist.
~rougerum

no one wants to kill u.....yet.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on October 07, 2003, 12:10:14 AM
Quote from: ©badcan't u take this to a pm?

.. i thought abouthat but . ..from reading  many of GT's posts in the past alot of films he disses I like and I find him very opinionated and  he likes to discuss films  so I just ask him about random films that i like and see/read his opinions on them...and some of his critiques on certian films that I mention have/has changed or re-sparked my feelings for the films in question..

And when GT's replies its NO BS and very straightforward......


I apologize if this is a waste of space but I think/hope  some poeple will find it interesting.......


5 more:

1.0  Three Kings
2.0  The Thin Red Line
3.0  Big
4.0  Wall Street
5.0  The Wizard of Oz
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on October 07, 2003, 12:22:43 AM
L'Avventura
Rocco and his Brothers
American Splendor
Contempt
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 07, 2003, 08:53:29 PM
Neon:
1.0 - The moral center of drama in this movie ultimately is that these soldiers who are looting for their own good come to an understanding of the plight of the Iraqi citizens they meet and help them to the cost of the gold they stole. To be able to describe the movie as just that is impossible. The actual center of the film is filmmaking adventure on hand and constant innovation of everything filmmaker. Defenders of the movie cite that it may be the only movie (sorry Mike Nichols) to capture the spirit of the novel Catch 22. Roger Ebert was the main example. Though I do agree with this in a way, Catch 22 was driven by the idea it was ultimately showing all view points of WWII and the style drove the eccentrities of that. The style here is just for style. Nothing really drives it. To say it speaks for our times in film land and quick cutting, that would just rationalize. Besides the climate being Gulf War, it speaks for nothing significant really in our times. The heist and understanding of human suffering is both general stuff. Even M.A.S.H spoke on satire of war without this style and succeeded well for the most part. The film doesn't explore satire in our times of war enough for it to be called specifically one and its use of filmmaking understood.  The film isn't the masterpiece it is said to be. I tried to respond to on that level, but it is a fun ride in which to watch and George Clooney, as usual, provides a cool confidence no one today can grab.

2.0 - I'll speak on The Thin Red Line a lil later. I've only seen it once and that was a few years ago. I want to watch it again.

3.0 - Tom Hanks was the right guy for it. During his early years, his performances screamed youth trapped in man's body and completey uncomfortable. In all his other movies ( 1980s comedies) he seemed a bit off in that sense, but this movie he is quite right for obvious reasons. The movie does charm, involve and ultimately move us so it does its purpose. The romance between Hanks and the lady does suffer in believability. Hanks is so appealing, but not really as a mutual love interest for her; more just in a cute and charming sort of way. I guess the script in exploring him as man felt it had to touch on that because of how different it was from his life as a kid. It could have dug for better ways to separate Hanks from his kid friend. All in all, an enjoyable movie that still is fun to watch. The dance scene on the large toy piano in the toy store achieves dance better than any dance movie now. Unlike those, its characters charm you. That was one of the main appeals of the great old dance movies.

4.0 - Never seen it. Should have. Stone is usually a requirement but just got to it.

5.0 - You either love it or you don't. I don't. The appeal of charm just isn't there for me. I just don't care about these actors dressed up in costumes and giving children's stories to how bad their life is. I wasn't brought up on this movie (people who love it usually are) and I only discovered it when in late teens and skeptical as ever. I love the Astaire and Rogers musicals, but this movie never hooked me. Its so glorified children's fantasy I really never got into it. Unless you grew up with it, I don't see much charm to it. At least with the Astaire and Rogers musicals, the stories can be identified by adults and appreciated by kids with its comedy. This movie is just kid comedy in all its dated form.

Shaftr: Sad to say, I've only seen L'Avventura of the ones you mentioned. Almost caught American Splendor over the weekend but was too sick to go see it or even want to.

L'Avventura may the one of the best examples of a movie absorded in its own world. The Apu Trilogy also comes to mind, but that movie doesn't have the depth of center in creating a new film grammar that L'Avventura does. The Apu Trilogy seems there more or less to capture a world and record it. The film grammar is set up for the film to be understood or felt as if observing a painting. Everything that is shown is for a specific reason. The movie doesn't have a general story with general approach and use this idea of film grammar as an excuse for its greatness. This movie is for the idea of film grammar alone. Looking at is as a painting, a scene can be felt and understood in so many ways. One example is the final scene, with Claudia discovering her flame Sandro has cheated on her in the middle of their own fling. She runs off and he runs after her. He finds her sitting on a bench and in the shot, in the far off distance, is a dorment volcano. Other object in the shot is a tree which has its leaves blowing from wind but no other signs of wind exist. The rest is a destitude environment. To observe the movie on its language, this scene would be understood in relating all the possible objects to the situation of the characters at hand. With the dorment volcano, a possible explosion happening between the couple. The blowing of the leaves restlessness in the couple at this time. Desititution in the environment could be the couple's depth as a couple.

This movie is so grand in achieving something new and using all the resources of a film for something new and continually intriguing it may be the very best film I've ever seen. Not favorite or anything else, but maybe the best in pure achievement.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ghostboy on October 07, 2003, 09:06:34 PM
You haven't posted anything in the Outkast thread yet...have you given the new album a listen yet?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 07, 2003, 09:18:29 PM
Ah yes. I definitely have listened to the album. well, at least dre's disc. Haven't got to Big Boi's yet that much. Let's just say Dre achieves genius for most of it and I'm still trying to get off the initial kick of hearing it even if listening to it for a few weeks straight. I'm hoping soon to comment and analyze the whole thing on that thread. Expect me to drag myself to Big Boi sometime before the end of the decade. Not that I dislike Big Boi, but Dre does indeed something wonderful.

General complaint, though: Dre, like most hip hop artists trying to be soulful, tends to talk too much about how they are different from general hip hop instead of showing it. They should leave classification up to us. They are spending too much time on acting as critics without much to back it up. Dre, though, for most of the album, does back it up.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on October 07, 2003, 09:19:35 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet

L'Avventura may the one of the best examples of a movie absorded in its own world. The Apu Trilogy also comes to mind, but that movie doesn't have the depth of center in creating a new film grammar that L'Avventura does. The Apu Trilogy seems there more or less to capture a world and record it. The film grammar is set up for the film to be understood or felt as if observing a painting. Everything that is shown is for a specific reason. The movie doesn't have a general story with general approach and use this idea of film grammar as an excuse for its greatness. This movie is for the idea of film grammar alone. Looking at is as a painting, a scene can be felt and understood in so many ways. One example is the final scene, with Claudia discovering her flame Sandro has cheated on her in the middle of their own fling. She runs off and he runs after her. He finds her sitting on a bench and in the shot, in the far off distance, is a dorment volcano. Other object in the shot is a tree which has its leaves blowing from wind but no other signs of wind exist. The rest is a destitude environment. To observe the movie on its language, this scene would be understood in relating all the possible objects to the situation of the characters at hand. With the dorment volcano, a possible explosion happening between the couple. The blowing of the leaves restlessness in the couple at this time. Desititution in the environment could be the couple's depth as a couple.

This movie is so grand in achieving something new and using all the resources of a film for something new and continually intriguing it may be the very best film I've ever seen. Not favorite or anything else, but maybe the best in pure achievement.

~rougerum

The film's style is very similiar to Sleeping Beauty, the disney animation.  The background is set up very specifically and everything is there for a reason; the actors just act with the landscape in the background; but really the movie is about the landscape.  This might not make sense, but it does in my head.

Did you notice the slight nipple slip when Claudia discovers Sandro with that girl, the girls nipple shows.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 07, 2003, 09:27:59 PM
Quote from: SHAFTRDid you notice the slight nipple slip when Claudia discovers Sandro with that girl, the girls nipple shows.

Shit. I missed it. My favorite Antonioni nipple tease came in La Notte with Jeanne Moreau in the bathtub. When I first saw it I was infatuated with her but hadn't seen many of her movies so a nipple peak was a major breathrough. I've seen more of her films and know more about her career and found this is nothing unusual for her at all. Still, the way it is shot, how we shouldn't be seeing it is all the more enticing.

Interesting idea on The Sleeping Beauty reference. I've never seen it.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ghostboy on October 07, 2003, 09:30:55 PM
Sleeping Beauty kicks ass. Wonderful use of the 2:35:1 ratio, which if I'm correct wasn't used again in animation until that lame horse movie from Dreamworks.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on October 07, 2003, 09:34:13 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet

Interesting idea on The Sleeping Beauty reference. I've never seen it.

~rougerum

you haven't seen Sleeping Beauty?  It is great, animation is amazing; it is very undisney like considering the main characters rarely speak (infact not at all the last half of the movie).  I haven't see La Notte; I havn'et seen anyother Anonioni films actually; Red Desert is probably next.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on October 08, 2003, 08:32:14 PM
good job on three kings..

1.0  training day
2.0  one flew over the cuckoo's nest
3.0  Wonder boys
4.0  straw Doogs
5.0  the score
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 09, 2003, 05:41:19 PM
1.0 - Missed.

2.0 - Truly a cookie cut out story if there ever was one. Not unique in 1975 and still as ever present. Still, the general handling and Jack Nicholson make it work. Nicholson is as good as they could have got to play the part and his personality of juvenile destructiveness in this world is not only exciting, but by far charming. Of course the general idea is that constricting rules and borders are bad for everyone. No shit. You care about Nicholson and resent Nurse Ratched. As events build, you get involved and care more and the entire infirmary where these bozos hang out become your own walls. The major scene that should have been done without is the fishing scene. It takes away from being in this environment and ultimately trapped in it. Also, many characters are reduced to stereotypes of buffoons and act too goofy for their own good. The acting in the infirmy is odd, but yet quiet and appealing in a way and they grow on us. Everyone I went to high school with has seen this movie because they were forced to at High School. Some enjoyed it and some didn't but it feels like the perfect place in which to show the film and appreciate it.

3.0 - Symbolism is cliche and imo, usually very destructive. It reduces films down to jigsaw puzzles of what meant this or that. Personal interpretation is hardly used but recognition of a symbol and its place of meaning in our society. Symbolism is everywhere but with film, given the limitations of canvas, is even more destructive. For the potential of a novel, film in pure mass can only speak in sentences of one vowel. Symbolism in tradition of what is used in literature furthers reduces the film. In Wonder Boys, this symbolism is everywhere. Its a canvas where quick thinking and reasonable logic of the world can have you pin pointing everything down to a T. Hardly anything is subjective, its all a tightly wound story that pushes from point to point in what it wants to get across. The movie though, is very good still. It has not only a good and entertaining story, but that story is still interesting in the third act. It doesn't slack. The performances are also very fine and much of the writing punctual and effective. I wouldn't elevate it to the status of greatness that some people are giving it though.

4.0 - Before, I didn't like this film that much. My initial opinion was that it was just a good story only waiting for the awaited violence in style of Sam Peckinpah. With the Criterion release and much discussion on the commentary giving much light to the film, I am showing much more respect and humility to being wrong. Its not just the mere case of Hoffman, quiet and shy, standing up to bullies and tormentors of his family, but of him and his wife and tormentors who rape her. Two rapes of the wife are shown; the first one is caused by the wife's own naivety of her sexuality and also her desire for one of the men in that she is bored of her husband and excited by them. She holds back but when intercourse is happening, she goes with it. The second rape is an actual rape. Another man forces it upon her and she disagrees the entire time and the first man, who performed consentially with her the first time, is forced for territorial reasons of who associates with, to hold her down as his buddy does rape her. In the entanglement of the wife losing feeling for the husband and growing feelings of sort, if just sexual desire, for one of the tormentors, casts a captivating story. Its not directly love, but a definite sign she is not secure in her marriage. All possibility of finding love with the man she cheated on her husband with is lost when he is forced to assit in an actual, brutal rape. Its never answered if it is love and all senses, could just be growing up on her part. The finale, with the expected violence, isn't much of a win for Hoffmann. He does stand up to the tormentors, but must deal with his wife and everything new she learning about herself. I speak at length because in what could be seen as a dragging movie, an interesting idea does show itself. The movie though is still filled with faults. The violence at the end doesn't really speak for the pysche of being raped as the wife was and instead follows through on the physical intimidation faced upon by Hoffman, the lesser of interesting ideas. The film keeps a good tone of realism and pace through out the movie, but bare hands the material so easily that instead of creating an atmosphere for characters, it creates an atmosphere for just a situation bound to happen. We know what will happen. Its just a matter of when. All in all, a truly mixed film.

5.0 - Its more interesting to note the actors (Brando, De Niro, Norton) and their places in this movie. Brando is not active (his film career at the moment) but sits on the sideline and is a reminder of past greatness (his own film career) to De Niro's character. De Niro is getting older and wiser but still active and cunning. The only thing of note to him in his personal life is that for once he has a black girlfriend in a movie (his real life preference). Norton is the up and commer looking to greatness. (his role requires him to play a mentally challenged, the cliche role of actors wanting to be great. Also, Norton is being advertised as the actor of his generation. *Cough* Sean Penn, anyone?*Cough*) The movie really isn't very good nor delves into anything at all. All actors look and dress as if they had just gotten onto set and the storyline is a just another in the long line of heist movies. An intricate and complicated heist is expected. This one really has nothing in the air to really distance itself from the others or give any special attention to.


~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on October 09, 2003, 07:08:51 PM
..good one for strAw. dogs

here we go...

1.0  Far From Heaven
2.0  Black Hawk Down
3.0  Jacob's Ladder
4.0 The Salton Sea
5.0  Affliction
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 11, 2003, 08:03:12 PM
1.0 - The role of the artist here. Roger Ebert best described this movie in saying it was the 1957 film never made. Todd Haynes, a gay man, drew inspiration from his hero Douglas Sirk and made a movie about the pressures of gays as if Sirk would have made it for the time period. Thing is though, that like Stanley Kauffmann's criticism of the book "In Cold Blood" that "it wasn't writing, it was researching", the same can be applied to here. Haynes is using a very important issue now close to him and making a Douglas Sirk film from it. He is losing all idependence from this action. Camera shots, style of acting and structure/influence for going about the script is meticiously researched in conjecture with Sirk's body of work when making melodramas. Haynes is researching much of the film. Specifics of storyline of course are his, but he has severe limits in what he wants to achieve. Limitations are on everything. I don't see the point in what Haynes is trying to do. He could speak for these issues in the 1950s without duplicating another man's work. Even better, he could speak for these issues now and with the ever present media trying to validify these relationships, he could dig deep to show what is still disconnecting them from much of the public now. Haynes tries to honor one of his hereos in the most flattering of ways and pays for it.

2.0 - There is something greatly rewarding, but also damaging in the pure realism of combat in this movie. Now, the movie has been understood as operating for the realism of combat mainly instead of some story. It doesn't really attain that realism. To attain it, the first 45 minutes leading up to the battle are unnecessary. It just tries to paint an atmosphere to get us to identify with these kids. Don't need it. The actual people going out there and fighting and us identifying all our shared identity to what war means to us already does that. Also, the face count is pretty high. So many soldiers in that first part that besides recognizable faces from other works, its really hard to identify with anyone. The the end, the moments of recollection after the war. Again, in the face of painting realism in war, not needed. Commentaries from random soldiers try to paint spefic thoughts and reactions into our heads of what went across their mind and how they are. And yet again, not neccessary. Our history with the identity of war and just watching the physical push of war in this film would have allowed us to understand the soldiers in our own way. The ending commentaries feel likes notes of drama at the end so the film can end on a good musical note attempting to create purposeful higher drama. The scenes of war, which take up most of the movie, are excellent though.

3.0 - Missed.

4.0 - Within moments of the film starting and of seeing Val Kilmer's face, we know he hides something in him that drives him. The movie doesn't really explore this at all. What specifically drives him to go through this weird world of going between drug lords and cops is unkown. Only at the end is it revealed. The most sad and devastating to this man is shown in a fashion to make it a good tool of revelation within a movie. We aren't given weight to feel his story pushed through this world. Most of the movie is actually just light weight because of it: weird wonderings through a drug crazed world mostly noted only for weirdness. To learn his condition and to show a story driven by it would be most satisfying.

5.0 - The scene is magnificent. At the end, (spoiler) after everything has come to a head between the father (Coburn) and son (Nolte), it ends with Nolte finally losing it and killing his father in the barn. He burns the barn with his father in it and sits inside of the kitchen to rest. He sits by the window and the burning barn outside is in plain view. Its a crystallized shot that conveys the very dominance, meanship and power that these two actors have in the movie. Everything about their dominance in face and truth in sadness expresses fully for both actors if really only one is in the shot. Coburn is conveyed through the flames. The rest of the movie is dissapointing to the strength of these two actors. Pain lives in this town between these two men, but the screenplay feels casual in moments not necessary and even have hints of another genre in it (crime mystery). There is even narration by William Dafoe's character that makes the story feel more formal. Its powerful because of the actors and who they represent and should have had a better vision, a more narrowing vision on them controlled by a director willing to bring a better atmosphere. For too much of the time, Schrader is just shooting the screenplay. This movie needed a specific talent in which to give the movie its unique flavor so the actors could have been better rewarded.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on October 13, 2003, 10:22:13 PM
..

1.0  amores perros
2.0  grand canyon
3.0  (for halloween)..the exorcist4.0  alice in wonderland
5.0  boyz in the hood

*bonus
your thoughts on Aronofsky...

enjoyed your previous thoughts on 1.0 and 5.0
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: GodDamnImDaMan on October 14, 2003, 12:06:34 AM
Dear Mr Trumpet...

   I dink it's phunny how you call yer cock a gold trumpet, me on the other hand call mine "Big Red"
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: modage on October 14, 2003, 06:58:10 PM
when did you stop going \to movies to enjoy them, and start going to critique them?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 14, 2003, 07:31:38 PM
Modern age:
I still go to movies to enjoy them, its just I critique as well. Case in point, I went with a friend to see Kill Bill and through out the movie, I was nudging him and saying things like, "That's fucking awesome" and laughing out loud all the time and just smiling though out. After getting out of the movie, he asked what I thought and I just went into a 20 minute explanation why the first part needed to be dumped completely and every other critique that ran through my mind. He knew how I was, but still kinda amazed: "What the fuck? You looked like you enjoyed that movie more than anyone else in the theatre and you criticized like half of it." I was kinda like, "Well, yea, I always do that." Its just I do both.

But I got serious with movies around summer time of '99 and slowly molded into what I am now and am continuing to change even. Its just, I guess, am not really impressed with movies today.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: godardian on October 14, 2003, 08:21:19 PM
Progressing with Todd Haynes: Have you ever seen Safe and/or Velvet Goldmine?? I think Safe is his best film (and one of the best American films ever made)... Velvet Goldmine is flawed but still very worthwhile, I think.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 14, 2003, 08:50:48 PM
Godardian:
Sadly, no. None are at my video stores. Safe is on a decent number of times on tv on Starz: Cinema, though. I'll keep an eye out for that one and watch it the instant I see it. Velvet Goldmine is harder, but IFC shows it every now and then. I'll do the same for that.

To compensate, because I do feel a lil bad for not catching at least Safe since you recommended it before, I'll rent The Cook, The Thief, His Wife, and Her Lover. I know you talked about it highly before and its actually available to rent here. I'll post my review around the weekend. Way too busy to do so before. I'm still trying to formulate something for Neon and reply to my fights everywhere on the board.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: godardian on October 14, 2003, 09:01:52 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetGodardian:
Sadly, no. None are at my video stores. Safe is on a decent number of times on tv on Starz: Cinema, though. I'll keep an eye out for that one and watch it the instant I see it. Velvet Goldmine is harder, but IFC shows it every now and then. I'll do the same for that.

To compensate, because I do feel a lil bad for not catching at least Safe since you recommended it before, I'll rent The Cook, The Thief, His Wife, and Her Lover. I know you talked about it highly before and its actually available to rent here. I'll post my review around the weekend. Way too busy to do so before. I'm still trying to formulate something for Neon and reply to my fights everywhere on the board.

~rougerum

I know, they really keep you scrambling around here!  :)

It will be interesting to hear what you make of Cook, Thief, etc.

I ordered two Stanley Kauffmann books today.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 14, 2003, 09:15:56 PM
Quote from: godardianI ordered two Stanley Kauffmann books today.

Excellent! Which two?

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: godardian on October 14, 2003, 09:20:56 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: godardianI ordered two Stanley Kauffmann books today.

Excellent! Which two?

~rougerum

an old one and a new one: Living Images and Regarding Film.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 14, 2003, 09:28:15 PM
Good choices. I have Regarding Film, obviously. Living Images, I think, is for movies from the early 1970s. I really want that. Besides Regarding Film, I have the books that cover the entire decade of the 1960s.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: dufresne on October 14, 2003, 10:45:20 PM
i'm interested...

1 - Bringing Out the Dead
2 - The Shawshank Redemption
3 - Falling Down
4 - The Mack
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on October 14, 2003, 10:48:05 PM
GT you 've become quite popular....

don't let it go to your head tho.. :wink:
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on October 14, 2003, 11:09:28 PM
Lets talk Jean Renoir...

which do you prefer Grand Illusion or Rules of the Game? and why?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 15, 2003, 12:14:22 AM
Quote from: NEON MERCURYGT you 've become quite popular....

don't let it go to your head tho.. :wink:

Don't worry.....I was in about three good debates today and took minority view point in every one of them. My known existence continues.....

Shaftr: Grand Illusion simply because it coneys everything that is admired about Renoir. Also, more importantly, it has everything that distinguishes Renoir from others: his unique ability to feel for his characters. His personal identification for the characters in his films and the humanity he can show is legendary. Though Grand Illusion has conveyed messages and meanings, its story is so focused for its characters and their situation that all known meanings can be seen as ideas we hold in our own life. Innocence is the first and associated with the old guard in the film, the two who see not only see honor in death during war, but who see an enemy as a man of respect as well. The idea of honor and being a gentleman at all costs and sticking up for your fellow man can be seen as virtues more for childhood and in stories shared to us of the past. Added upon this the foot soldiers under capture trying to find any way to bring to life their own home outside the war: the mock play in which men dress as women and significance in that women are hardly seen anymore. After escaping, the feeling of nostaglia with the woman and child the two escapees meet and one falls in love with but know they must end up leaving. All these things coney things we believe in. The story and focus of the soldiers going through all this makes it only more true. Rules of the Game, though excellent in its own way, has Renoir at comedy and performing along more traditional methods. His compassion of closeness to characters is drastically reduced. Social classes is in observance so of course, generalizations between the classes are made. Its a grandly well made film, but it has its place and no doubt beneath Grand Illusion. The chase scene at the end, the time given to that extensive chase made me realize the full distance between the films. Its such an extensive and entertaining scene. Thing is, it could be achieved by other filmmakers. Grand Illusion can't. And for the times, Rules of the Games proves to be an exciting and fun comedy.

And I will get to dufresne. Just those kind of questions require a lil more time.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Teen Wolf on October 15, 2003, 05:58:23 PM
1)You mentioned favorite films. Do you have any favorite directors?
2)What do you think about The Wild Bunch?
3)What do you do?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 15, 2003, 08:06:36 PM
Neon, Only seen 3 of the movies you mentioned. I'll get back to you shortly on Arnofsky and The Exorcist. For now, make due with Amores Perros and Boyz N the Hood:

1.0 - Stanley Kauffmann actually hit the perfect reason why Amores Perros works so well with the first paragraph of his review to “The Dreamlife of Angels”: “How did he do it? The question persists after “The Dreamlife of Angels”. Not one story element is fresh, the theme is familiar in any purview of modern society, yet this French film is completely absorbing, almost rudely poignant. How did the director, Erick Zonca, do it? The answer is both simple and deep. He paid no attention to predecessors or echoes: he just wanted, overwhelmingly, to make this film. If he worried about familiarity at all, he clearly felt that his conviction would overwhelm reminders of other films. He was right.”

With Amores Perros, stories are told in very cliche, very known story elements of grabbing attention: young man wants make girl happy when being mistreated by cruel husband. Outcasted man wants his family back when he was taken away from them years ago because he went to prison. His daughter doesn’t even know his existence. Model loses leg in accident and in an ode to Edgar Allan Poe, obcesses about her dog being trapped under the floorboards. We want the good guy to get the girl, we want the outcasted man to meet his grown daughter and fuck, we want the model to get her dog back. All simple devices made powerful and effective because the story is unflinching in believing everything about this story though it is run of the mill. The difference between this and Dreamlife of Angels is the velocity of violence preevelant in the movie. The movie doesn’t obcess over the editing possibilities of showing a car crash. Like its unflinching study of the characters, it doesn’t hide around the violence. It attacks it. And given the story, the experience is that more powerful.

Boyz N the Hood tells a very modern story in a very classical way. The performances, locale, dialogue are believable as realism to this world. Yet, the story rides on elements of classical tradegy. Laurence Fishburne’s character can rest in Greek tradegy and using Oedipus the King as grounds for example, he moves between the character of the old wise man and the chorus. The purpose of these two characters is that they examined and identified the story and placed it into a perspective of understanding, even as the story was still unfolding. You know what happens in Greek Tradegy, its all about getting there. Though you don’t know exactly what will happen in Boyz N the Hood, Fishburne’s character puts it all into black and white terms and in terms of realism and “anything possible happening”, he nearly destroys. His character is so frequently on screen and so frequently putting it all into a bigger picture for Cuba Gooding Jr that his fate, by the end, does rest on whether Cuba Gooding Jr. will choose the path he has laid out for him with the end drive to find the men who killed Ricky. Finally, his commentary in front of the billboard in laying out a bigger picture problem and given an opinion runs exactly in the style of a chorus commentary for the overall story happening. Then another tradegy, Shakespearan tradegy, pops up at the end. It all becomes fatalist with Ice Cubes lifestyle and position of his brother Ricky. With hindsight bias, we learn for dramatic effect, it makes more sense for the tradegy to happen with Ricky because he did have the future. Not Ice Cube. What really dresses the Shakespearan tradegy is all the conveniances at the end right before the death: Ricky and Ice Cube’s character have their biggest fight and Ricky gets his SAT test scores back, showing he passed and could have gotten a life out of that violent world. All to make the ending more dramatic and monumental to these characters. Choosing this position of telling the story is a decision, though. The film is very good still and effect of the end death very powerful. The performances are rich, especially with Laurence Fisburne and the movie is very entertaining to watch. On choices, though, I’d have told this very modern story with a modern approach to equate the times in which the problem is happening. Just my preference.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on October 15, 2003, 08:10:44 PM
i'll play...I'm thinking of starting my own Ask Thread or maybe SHAFTR Says...
but I feel the interest would be low.

1.  ...and God Created Woman
2.  Elevator to the Gallows
3.  Do you think Valim / Malle should be included as New Wave directors?

and the following...
1.  In the Mood for Love
2.  Flowers of Shanghai
3.  The Wind Will Carry Us
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 15, 2003, 08:18:28 PM
Teen Wolf:
1.) Well, I think Michelangelo Antoinoni prolly achieved the most of any film director. I very much emulate the style achieved by Kurosawa. Hayao Miyazaki is a proven master at almost every type of film he touches. Fellini is realiable for his great touch, even if making some bad films with it. Paul Thomas Anderson has some of the best handling of dialogue. David Gordon Green is excellent, but needs to be more daring in the future. I'm not sure, thats all off hand I got.

2.) Its been a while since I've seen this movie. I need to watch it again.

3.) Just college student and stock clerk at a Produce Market.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 15, 2003, 08:31:22 PM
Sadly Shaftr, I've only seen one of the films you mentioned.

And God Created Woman was really created just for a reason to put Bridgitte Bardot in a film. It was her first and the director, Roger Vadim, of course was having an affair with her or about to. Not sure which. The movie is a very dry exploration of sexual obcession. The film is so conventially filmed that nothing personal really is achieved. It seems like it has the widescreen/color use to just showcase the locale and of course, Bardot. The story offers no air of believability and everyone is riding through this affair based on looks. Bardot, in all interesting for her here, shows only a minor scene of not very revealing nudity. The shot lasts a second at best and has her naked, but showing nothing major. From what I heard of later Bardot films, this scene is easily discredited of any worth.

I'd put Vadim and Malle in there. Malle's The Lovers was released in '59 and in my readings, sparked US success due to its controversy mainly. I've not seen the film, but all critical readings and a biography of Jeanne Moreau, did bring interest to France due to controversy. I want to see the film just to follow Moreau. But the point is, that along with Breathless and others, films by these men were impactful during these times. It may be true they were not necessarily born out of the movement, but did make impactful French films during the movement to keep it going.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on October 15, 2003, 08:40:30 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetSadly Shaftr, I've only seen one of the films you mentioned.

And God Created Woman was really created just for a reason to put Bridgitte Bardot in a film. It was her first and the director, Roger Vadim, of course was having an affair with her or about to. Not sure which. The movie is a very dry exploration of sexual obcession. The film is so conventially filmed that nothing personal really is achieved. It seems like it has the widescreen/color use to just showcase the locale and of course, Bardot. The story offers no air of believability and everyone is riding through this affair based on looks. Bardot, in all interesting for her here, shows only a minor scene of not very revealing nudity. The shot lasts a second at best and has her naked, but showing nothing major. From what I heard of later Bardot films, this scene is easily discredited of any worth.

I'd put Vadim and Malle in there. Malle's The Lovers was released in '59 and in my readings, sparked US success due to its controversy mainly. I've not seen the film, but all critical readings and a biography of Jeanne Moreau, did bring interest to France due to controversy. I want to see the film just to follow Moreau. But the point is, that along with Breathless and others, films by these men were impactful during these times. It may be true they were not necessarily born out of the movement, but did make impactful French films during the movement to keep it going.

~rougerum

Bardot married Vadim when she turned 18, after AGCW they divorced.  Some say it should be included b/c not so much stylistically but the importance of Bardot's impact on viewers and her frank sexuality.  Also the on location shooting.  Bardot is nude quite a bit but always the viewer is blocked from seeing anything.  I did read that there is a scene where you see her bare breasts but it was edited for the US version, so I"m not sure which version I saw.  

I saw Contempt first so the opening Bardot scene in that film now has even more significance after watching AGCW.

I have also read about The Lovers but have not seen it.  although a vhs dub of a print, I did enjoy Elevator to the Gallows, the score is by Miles Davis.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 15, 2003, 08:49:22 PM
Quote from: SHAFTRBardot married Vadim when she turned 18, after AGCW they divorced.

He married her that young? Reason enough to wanna be a director.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: godardian on October 15, 2003, 08:53:41 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: SHAFTRBardot married Vadim when she turned 18, after AGCW they divorced.

He married her that young? Reason enough to wanna be a director.

~rougerum

He then married Jane Fonda... did he direct Barbarella?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on October 15, 2003, 09:00:05 PM
Quote from: godardian
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: SHAFTRBardot married Vadim when she turned 18, after AGCW they divorced.

He married her that young? Reason enough to wanna be a director.

~rougerum

He then married Jane Fonda... did he direct Barbarella?

yes, and ...And God Created Woman in 1987...a remake of his own film.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 16, 2003, 04:41:32 PM
To finish with Neon,

I think with the The Exorcist, a lot of good basis for a scary movie is covered. The plot begins slowly (kinda usual) and ends in a very a minor tone - with the priest just giving up his own life. His death happens in a very earthly way. This kind of end preserves the tone and atmosphere of the film, the best parts. There is a sense of memory and very specific detailings in remembering the bedroom to where it all happens. The movie is finely lit and brings so much of the drama to this one room that it creates its own world within it. Some of the horror is hoakey now, but a good deal of it lasts in creepiness. I really don't take the movie serious beyond that at all. The manages to explore a supernatural idea within some bounds of realism and is able to create a lasting memory.

To talk about Darren Arnofsky, one must always talk about his style. There are a lot of problems with it that show both films he has made with it already being dated. I suspect they will both only continue to get dated. The main problem is that his style isn't so dominant, but that it is so dominant in trying to tell linear stories - very straight forward stories. He doesn't use the style as its own platform.

A lot of older films that were experimental in style are outdated because in their attempts to tell general stories, the filmmaking landscape changed and another popular style introduced. Its just in this wave after wave, Arnosfky's first two works will look as high points of a style and considering they will be a style outdated, will look even more outdated as general films. The idea Arnofsky should have went for in using his style would be to base stories off it, not style driven by general stories. Easiest example is Stone's Natural Born Killers. The story is cliche and it seems as intended to be, but the films speaks as an expression of a certain style; a flood of imagery reminscient of absract art that may have blended surrealism with expressionism. Stone starts from the style and delves. Arnofsky starts from the story and delves into style to lift the story.

To comment on both films, Pi holds up best. Everything about the film, in comparance to Requiem, suggests it is more unique. Black and white, reliable as ever to hold up in this department, is in play. The film is shot cheaply and the guerilla style complements that more. Also, the cast is unkown. Everyone in Requiem can be referenced to something else. The characters are Pi are more seen as characters. But, both films to me are still effective. Requiem is intensely scary for drug abuse and Pi is absorbing for the world shown. Both films will date big time though as time goes by. The Ellen Burstyn story in Requiem is already goofy: The nightmare of bland tv taking over this woman's life in "nightmarish" proportions and how to convey her struggle, the film continually uses odd extreme close up shots of her face twitching or snapping to see something. Its just all so goofy and obvious and its original idea is just bland itself.

Arnofsky says he is going to abandon this style for his next film. Let's hope so.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on October 16, 2003, 09:35:28 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetTo finish with Neon,

The Ellen Burstyn story in Requiem is already goofy: The nightmare of bland tv taking over this woman's life in "nightmarish" proportions and how to convey her struggle, the film continually uses odd extreme close up shots of her face twitching or snapping to see something. Its just all so goofy and obvious and its original idea is just bland itself.

~rougerum

I always thought that, that was the low point of the film for me.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 16, 2003, 09:42:39 PM
Dufresne,
From what I remember of Falling Down, the general body of the film was rolling out of scene after scene of Douglas' character taking out all his frustations. This is the body of the work to the film. To give credit to other scenes, there are ones that attempt to go into explanation of what caused him to snap in that traffic jam. Those scenes are attempts at validity only. The movie is for the endless scenes of physical frustation showed by Douglas when it should have been a study of what brought him to that point.

Bringing Out The Dead is similiar. One after the other, with frenzy speed, the madness of a paramedic's job is shown. The madness is shown with scene after scene of dismal life in NYC and his frustations in dealing with it. Another movie of obvious comparison is Taxi Driver. Both movies show loneliness and frustations in NYC and have extremes in scenes; where Bringing Out The Dead keeps the frenzy to the duty of a paramedic, Taxi Driver is everywhere, from a first date at a porn, an attempted assination, rescue of prostitute and shoot out with pimps and crew. The main difference between films is in the approch to the storyline. Where Taxi Driver is slower and trying to catch an atmosphere for Bickle, Bringing Out The Dead attacks in hope to capture the madness of its life. It does so in the wrong way. One problem is that it just feels like a piling upon of random scenes. All the scenes are interesting just in their own measure. Besides it being of paramedics, they really have little strand of linkage in tone and atmosphere. They derive from themselves instead of from the character. To analyze the scenes of the paramedic racing down the streets at swirling speed is to witness, technically, a brilliant scene worthy of a music video. R.E.M.'s "What's The Frequency, Kenneth" is perfect for it. The movie will move immediately from that amazing pace to purposely, a slowed pace as the Cage's character reminisciences about the girl he lost who still haunts him. Out of the pace changes and tones just getting mixed up, a scene like this where dramatic weight is suppose to be given to justify the madness around him. Its a poor attempt. Its just feels like a punctual note of the director telling the audience to feel something. The scenes where the story is able to slow down and find room to breathe in something organic are too short and far in between to really discredit all the mess in the film.

To compare the book against its novel (which I read), not much really is all different. The craziness of duties and jobs all in this paramedic's life there and the movie closely follows the novel. I was knit picking scenes to find differences. The major change though is loss of tone in narration. In the novel, with all the variation of stories he tells, he feels to be still telling it from the same voice. The writing is consistent and develops a tone that lasts through the novel. The novel isn't great, but where was adaptation on this part? Scorsese replaces tone with modern day filmmaking trickery.

How can The Shawshank Redemption really be criticized? Its understood to be excellent entertainment and it is. When you may think parts travel too long in dialogue overly preachy of something nostalgic, you are warmed by it still. Everything is so inviting in this movie. I will say, the part that does bring it to the class of "classic" it has achieved likely came with the idea of adding the surprise ending of Robbins breaking out. Its a ploy used that sorta reverses the rest of the movie and makes you see something of trickery going through with it. Its just with this last sentence, I still say it positively. I was charmed the entire way through.

I missed The Mack, though.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 18, 2003, 07:34:46 PM
These two were asked of me before and I can finally comment:

The obvious movie to compare Legends of the Fall to is A River Runs Through It. Both star Brad Pitt and both utilize Montana beauty and tradition. A River Runs Through It is an accomplishment. It evokes the spirit of nature along with the family tradition. The story is nostalgic and not the best accomplishment of nostalgia, but the pace and focus do it well. Legends of the Fall is no such matter. From the beginning, a love story is in effect. A love story of all the usual trappings: betrayal, lust, desire and fate. The problem is that the movie sends this story so deep into the absurdities of bad romance fiction that it has no sense of placement for this world. The movie is slower to begin, but starts running through all the cliches of romance and go so deep that it chronicles Pitt's entire life in romance novel absurdity. The normal ending would be to have ended with one of the very early betrayals: Pitt gaining the girl or just losing the girl. And to explain the idea of romance novel in effect here, everything is mirrored by loss, betrayal and lust. And of course, social aspects of the time are observed in very amatuer ways. The only use is just to tie it in with the general love story only. It must be said that Anthony Hopkins is excellent while Brad Pitt is only adequate.

The best part of The Thin Red Line is superficial. In the band of soldiers trying to capture an enemy ridge, they face a long day of massive explosions and suicidal missions to get past it. All that press forward die. At the end of the day, a group is still surviving and when given direct orders to procceed, they refuse because of all the blood loss. At best, this and the excellent direction of movement into this fog of explosians and gun fire give the ridge a level of fear. The next day when things have calmed, a very small group tries to sneak its way in there to take the ridge. The pacing and details of this expendition are great. The build up makes it better.

All the rest really is quite bad. All through out the movie, from the laughable situation of the main character living with natives to the travels of war, the movie makes a point to identify the shortcomings of war and the immense powerlessness of the common soldier. Its not evoked through action or drama at all, but molded through over voices identifying differences and lines of dialogue specifically questioning it all. And this never stops nor lets up. From the line of dialogue with the main character and native person: (if memory serves correctly: "War not important. Babies are important." Then to Sean Penn acting as guiding voice of question all through it: "You really think one man can really make a difference in this mess?" Sean Penn, genius he is, has really no character here at all. Not many do. The idea is to see all the soldiers, all the voice overs, as the doubts of one man. The doubts of humanity struggling through war. The movie never really accomplishes it. It just airs itself out with dumb symbolism: Interaction with natives at beginning means the peace humanity should be have. Common man is defenseless and marched to death in war. War makes one lose himself and the things at home, the example in the movie being the wife of the main character and flashback scenes of her showing happiness in his life. Before the movie has any chance to build on anything, its just gives up with repeated "deep" scenes of characters we only saw moments ago. Drama to evoke anything is non existent.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: godardian on October 18, 2003, 07:46:53 PM
For the record, I found Ellen Burstyn's bit of Requiem for a Dream to be quite compelling mainly because she was able to bring across the naivete degenerating into desperation of her character... Probably my favorite part of that film, actually.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ghostboy on October 18, 2003, 07:58:24 PM
As the most objective (at least vocally so) film buff on this site:

Do you ever -- or have you ever -- ignored a film's defaults simply because it effects you on a personal level? Can you even do this, when you're so stridently on point about your objections? And if you can't, do you sometimes wish you could?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 18, 2003, 08:03:53 PM
Quote from: godardianFor the record, I found Ellen Burstyn's bit of Requiem for a Dream to be quite compelling mainly because she was able to bring across the naivete degenerating into desperation of her character... Probably my favorite part of that film, actually.

It's weird....I think a lot of people prolly classify us in the same category of liking and preferring movies they may think more artsy or whatever, but I feel we really have two different tastes in movies as anyone else who'd think I was different than the normal film goer just wanting a good ride.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: godardian on October 18, 2003, 08:26:03 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: godardianFor the record, I found Ellen Burstyn's bit of Requiem for a Dream to be quite compelling mainly because she was able to bring across the naivete degenerating into desperation of her character... Probably my favorite part of that film, actually.

It's weird....I think a lot of people prolly classify us in the same category of liking and preferring movies they may think more artsy or whatever, but I feel we really have two different tastes in movies as anyone else who'd think I was different than the normal film goer just wanting a good ride.

~rougerum

Yeah... no way you could assume that just because two people love movies passionately, they're always going to passionately love the same ones, or for the same reasons...

I can see where one could find the Burstyn sections of Requiem to have faults... I really don't think it's a perfect film. But I do think it's moving, even very moving in parts, and any flaws (an assaultive, "rollercoaster" quality that could be called garish if one didn't care for it) that might mar the Burstyn sections also apply to the rest of the film. She did have the one most emotional (for me) line, where she's talking about how she's going to be on TV and people are going to like her. There's plenty of primal emotion and vulnerability in the film, but I think that worked a lot better than, say, Marlon Wayans (very) vaguely longing for maternal love. There's something so elemental about it, wanting to be liked. Jim Kurring saying "I was afraid that you might not like me" to Claudia in Magnolia works the same on me.

I think the film does with its dizzying, assaultive style what Moulin Rouge failed to do with similar but badly executed conceits, and I think that this hyper style is more consistently carried off by Aronofsky. Of course, everyone knows I can't stand Baz Luhrmann...

Okay, carry on GT. I don't mean to hijack your thread!
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: molly on October 18, 2003, 08:34:11 PM
what do you (anybody) think of Black Hawk Down?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 18, 2003, 08:35:35 PM
Quote from: GhostboyAs the most objective (at least vocally so) film buff on this site:

Do you ever -- or have you ever -- ignored a film's defaults simply because it effects you on a personal level? Can you even do this, when you're so stridently on point about your objections? And if you can't, do you sometimes wish you could?

I am pretty easy to be charmed and led through an enjoyable movie. When the movie is just trying to be enjoyable and charming, I can usually be a fan boy only. I liked Seconhand Lions because all it wanted to was charm me. It did. I also have a major soft spot for the 80s comedy Better Off Dead. Its just both these movies only wanted to charm and entertain. I love them if they can work for me on that level. Its just a lot of genre films are trying to be more: If at the end of a comedy, a major dramatic note happens or an action films asks to be melodrama with the end as well. They are trying to be other things and force me to look at them in that way and say if they worked or not. Usually they don't but Die Hard is so good and entertaining that with the airy end, who cares. No action movie is as entertaining as Die Hard so others also have favorites of mine to live up to. Its kinda tough. But I do think overall I like where I am in judging movies.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ravi on October 18, 2003, 08:36:15 PM
Quote from: GhostboySleeping Beauty kicks ass. Wonderful use of the 2:35:1 ratio, which if I'm correct wasn't used again in animation until that lame horse movie from Dreamworks.

A Bug's Life and The Iron Giant were 2.35:1.  I think Titan A.E. was too, but I can't recall.

GT, I'd like to hear your further thoughts on the Apu Trilogy, specifically about each film and also the trilogy as a whole.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 18, 2003, 08:38:52 PM
Quote from: mollywhat do you (anybody) think of Black Hawk Down?

from page 7 of this thread:

Black Hawk Down - There is something greatly rewarding, but also damaging in the pure realism of combat in this movie. Now, the movie has been understood as operating for the realism of combat mainly instead of some story. It doesn't really attain that realism. To attain it, the first 45 minutes leading up to the battle are unnecessary. It just tries to paint an atmosphere to get us to identify with these kids. Don't need it. The actual people going out there and fighting and us identifying all our shared identity to what war means to us already does that. Also, the face count is pretty high. So many soldiers in that first part that besides recognizable faces from other works, its really hard to identify with anyone. The the end, the moments of recollection after the war. Again, in the face of painting realism in war, not needed. Commentaries from random soldiers try to paint spefic thoughts and reactions into our heads of what went across their mind and how they are. And yet again, not neccessary. Our history with the identity of war and just watching the physical push of war in this film would have allowed us to understand the soldiers in our own way. The ending commentaries feel likes notes of drama at the end so the film can end on a good musical note attempting to create purposeful higher drama. The scenes of war, which take up most of the movie, are excellent though.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: godardian on October 18, 2003, 08:42:18 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
I am pretty easy to be charmed and led through an enjoyable movie. When the movie is just trying to be enjoyable and charming, I can usually be a fan boy only. I liked Seconhand Lions because all it wanted to was charm me. It did.

Yet another example of where we can differ. I hated Secondhand Lions, not because of the terms it was made on, but becaues I felt it failed on those terms; to me, it felt labored and charmless.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: godardian on October 22, 2003, 07:43:55 PM
I received my Stanley Kauffmann books today... idly flipping through Regarding Film (I'm far from a cover-to-cover purist for these kinds of books), I landed on his glowing review of Sister, My Sister on page 75. This is encouraging; I also love that movie.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 22, 2003, 09:44:03 PM
Well, Godardian, lets hope your enthusiasm extends beyond just one review. SoNowThen can't stand the man. Hopefully you won't join his club. And don't worry Ravi, I haven't forgot about you. College is killing me now and I'm searching for time to watch The World of Apu. The other two have been well in my thoughts. I've just never seen The World of Apu, yet. I hope to comment very very very soon on them all.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on October 26, 2003, 10:03:22 PM
what is your fav. film art poster...
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 26, 2003, 10:14:00 PM
Quote from: NEON MERCURYwhat is your fav. film art poster...

I'm not good with old original film art posters......so I usually go with Criterion. My favorite two from Criterion are actually posters that have little to do with the tone or purpose of the movies. They just are very good posters imo. The first link was actually my avatar on the old board. The second is my desired avatar for this one:

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005B1ZK.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00008RH1H.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on October 26, 2003, 10:15:47 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: NEON MERCURYwhat is your fav. film art poster...

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00008RH1H.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

~rougerum

I'm watching this tuesday.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on October 26, 2003, 10:16:16 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: NEON MERCURYwhat is your fav. film art poster...

I'm not good with old original film art posters......so I usually go with Criterion. My favorite two from Criterion are actually posters that have little to do with the tone or purpose of the movies. They just are very good posters imo. The first link was actually my avatar on the old board. The second is my desired avatar for this one:

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005B1ZK.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00008RH1H.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

~rougerum

.. 8) ..
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: aclockworkjj on October 26, 2003, 10:17:33 PM
I remember an image of that picture I threw together...I still have it laying around here somewhere.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 26, 2003, 10:20:40 PM
Quote from: aclockworkjjI remember an image of that picture I threw together...I still have it laying around here somewhere.

I do too......in exact way and size I want it to be as......I just can't get it to jpeg file at all. As much as I try, I am only left with bitmap and my computer won't allow me to change it at all. Its annoying to death.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on October 26, 2003, 10:23:47 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: aclockworkjjI remember an image of that picture I threw together...I still have it laying around here somewhere.

I do too......in exact way and size I want it to be as......I just can't get it to jpeg file at all. As much as I try, I am only left with bitmap and my computer won't allow me to change it at all. Its annoying to death.

~rougerum

here you go

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.spacestar.net%2Fusers%2Fklumley%2Ftob.jpg&hash=424293f5501c6b5f3809e6744b10824bd9148c39)
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: aclockworkjj on October 26, 2003, 10:29:43 PM
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geocities.com%2Fjjlast1%2Fkiro.txt&hash=bbe739888aa7f9a2e1c9a6366cf478348c871465)
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 26, 2003, 10:34:33 PM
Thanks for the attempt both guys. JJ was present at my original thread requesting the fine print taken off and only picture left, but many thanks still Shaftr. Also, JJ, picture still too big under XIXAX regulations to allow me to avatar-ize it.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: aclockworkjj on October 26, 2003, 10:40:07 PM
try now.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: GodDamnImDaMan on October 26, 2003, 10:42:25 PM
yes try now
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 26, 2003, 10:47:29 PM
Still no go. Official message blocking me is that the pic has to be less 320 pixels wide and 240 pixels high.

Yo, God Damn.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: aclockworkjj on October 26, 2003, 10:48:34 PM
clear yer cache.  or reloaded the image. it's 170x240
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: GodDamnImDaMan on October 26, 2003, 10:50:48 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetStill no go. Official message blocking me is that the pic has to be less 320 pixels wide and 240 pixels high.

Yo, God Damn.

~rougerum

yo!
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on October 26, 2003, 10:50:59 PM
yes, it's the same size as the one i posted.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 26, 2003, 10:51:17 PM
Quote from: aclockworkjjclear yer cache.  or reloaded the image. it's 170x240

english?

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on October 26, 2003, 10:56:44 PM
..I can hear the piano "almost there" music they play in baseball films when the hero hits a homerun at the bottom of the 9th and the ball goes in slo-motion over the fence....

.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: aclockworkjj on October 26, 2003, 10:57:07 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: aclockworkjjclear yer cache.  or reloaded the image. it's 170x240

english?

~rougerum
...if using IE....tools, internet options.  clear history.  Then reload the page or image.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 26, 2003, 11:01:21 PM
Again, no luck. This is annoying, but thanks for patience.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on October 26, 2003, 11:03:06 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetAgain, no luck. This is annoying, but thanks for patience.

~rougerum

4 things you could try

1.  try refreshing
2.  right click on the image and click on "show picture"
3.  copy the link for the image and open it up in a new window, refresh
4.  restart
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: aclockworkjj on October 26, 2003, 11:06:00 PM
do you just want that as an av?...if so, just copy this into the Upload from a URL part....

http://www.geocities.com/jjlast1/kiro.txt

I had to change the extension to upload it...but it should work, I think.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 26, 2003, 11:09:24 PM
To continue the debaccle, jj, your attempt said that the file at the page contained no data. Shaftr, of the ones I understood, they just went to dead ends and didn't work.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: aclockworkjj on October 26, 2003, 11:12:09 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetTo continue the debaccle, jj,
I suck...(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fusers.pandora.be%2Feforum%2Femoticons4u%2Fsad%2F310.gif&hash=c4d4b1d42b378079ef79b6060e13143e7ac74bd3)
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 26, 2003, 11:13:31 PM
Quote from: aclockworkjj
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetTo continue the debaccle, jj,
I suck...(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fusers.pandora.be%2Feforum%2Femoticons4u%2Fsad%2F310.gif&hash=c4d4b1d42b378079ef79b6060e13143e7ac74bd3)

naw...naw...naw...you did great. It just wasn't meant to be.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ghostboy on October 27, 2003, 01:21:18 AM
Or was it?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: modage on October 27, 2003, 10:20:04 AM
oh MY GOD!!!!!! a fucking AVATAR!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: godardian on October 27, 2003, 12:32:47 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetWell, Godardian, lets hope your enthusiasm extends beyond just one review. SoNowThen can't stand the man. Hopefully you won't join his club. And don't worry Ravi, I haven't forgot about you. College is killing me now and I'm searching for time to watch The World of Apu. The other two have been well in my thoughts. I've just never seen The World of Apu, yet. I hope to comment very very very soon on them all.

~rougerum

I will keep you posted as I read more. I did post in the Quentin Tarantino forum about how I felt Kauffmann displayed a great deal of insight into what Tarantino is/is not while acknowleding his tremendous talent as a filmmaker...
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 27, 2003, 07:07:47 PM
many thanks, Ghostboy. It looks great.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Vile5 on October 27, 2003, 07:50:20 PM
i have no questions for GT just my congratulations for that great avatar  :yabbse-thumbup:  :yabbse-thumbup:  :yabbse-thumbup:
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ghostboy on October 28, 2003, 12:53:52 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpetmany thanks, Ghostboy. It looks great.

No problem! You'll be receiving my bill shortly.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 28, 2003, 08:14:12 PM
Quote from: RaviGT, I'd like to hear your further thoughts on the Apu Trilogy, specifically about each film and also the trilogy as a whole.

I think the main idea to understand about the The Apu Trilogy is that when Satiyat Ray made the first one, he had almost no experience in actually making films at all. What drove him was belief in the story he was telling. Both these things drive everything good and bad in the trilogy.

With Pather Panchali, there are a few things that are strived to get across: 1.) is to capture life in this little Indian village, 2.) is to tell a simple story about misadventures of a little girl and how it impacts her village, but more importantly how her tragic death impacts her family. From my obversations, thats it. Point number one is achieved but to many disadvantages. First, the pacing is amazingly slow when telling so little. Scene after scene is piled upon daily chores and ineractions. Its tedious to watch. These are wonderful though in how realistic everything is. We do sense we are in a new world. They are also bad because the editing seems off a lot of the times. Scenes will wonder off after the main action has occurred for periods of time for no logical reason. On one hand, this could seem like a glorified achievement in realism and on the other hand, it could just seem like amateur editing and telling of a movie. I'm taking the latter because with Aparajito and The World of Apu, it is obvious Ray is progressing with each film in technique and going elsewhere. The story of the daughter and her eventual death has impact, but it also has a predictability syndrome. Again, scene after scene is a building of frustations for the village in dealing with her mischievous ways. Its just little kid stuff, of course, but the movie has a feeling of fate in that the family does feel doomed. And yes, she dies and yes, they all weep. If the film wasn't so realistic and its own world, this may be a major flaw. In the following movies, the idea of death in the family does become a major flaw in stortelling.

One last point: at the end, there is a magnificent scene of imagination and excitement and feeling anything is possible in this movie when the movie stops telling the story and switches between showing different random images of the village. Its effect is that it magnifies the authencity of the film as cultural document to this world.

Half of Aparajito flows in similiar fashion to Panchali. Day to day details are observed in a similiar fashion that ends with yet another tragic death in the family, this time of the father. The effect though is gone. It is the same treatment of death as in the first and it just brings wonderment to why this film rested upon death in the family yet again. For the second half of the film, Ray shows his progression of film craftsmanship much more. Tonally, though, the second half felt different to me. With Apu going to school, his progressing life and sick mother at home was bringing the material yet again to the pitfalls of easy melodrama. Its just this time the filmmaking seems inspired for the subject. Ray's editing feels quicker and instead of dwelling on minor things, everything is shown generally and Ray cuts down time with even using a montage at one point. Death again comes up again (with the mother) but everything is clearly evident in melodrama terms. The mother's situation is outlined, with easy answers on how she can be saved. Apu's situation is outlined on how he would want to save her, but also would want to progress with his life. The film turns into a race of whether or not Apu will get home in time before his mother dies. He is given a last minute letter telling him about her situation, but of course, its too late. Upon his arrival home, she is dead. Too nicely packaged to be reminding of the honest truth in Pather Panchali.

The World of Apu is an even further decline. Everything in the film is highly romanticized on in a cynical level, we can actually applaud Ray for finally making a film complete in terms of tone and craftsmanship. Its just that he bleeds the honest air of Pather Panchali into the most convential of films. The premise is goofy: To save a bride from the disgrace of a failed marriage reception due to her groom being insane at the last moment, Apu volunteers to marry her. This is the ploy and the set up of it is to have a drama of an honest relationship that suffers the tradegy of the young wife dying during birth of the first child. In the trilogy, this is the fourth death elevated to meladrama terms and the most pathetic. So quickly, the marriage is set up and so quickly, Apu outlines his life of struggle to her (in one scene, actually) and so quickly, they do begin to care for each on such odd terms of marriage. Then, like that, she dies in a miscarriage. He is too traumatized to see the child or anyone and wanders in search of himself only to be faced eventually to see the child and claim the responsibility of being his father. All emotional melodrama again driven down our throat again. What happened to the realism?

Its sad I disliked The World of Apu as much as I did, because on the old board, my best friend was there was of Indian decent and recommended me this movie and called it one of the best and most poetic films he had ever seen. I hadn't seen it then, but I really expected more than what I got. For me, the trilogy best stands for most of it serving as cultural document to another world. Even with many dramatic problems, the authencity holds. Its just with half the second film and third film does that authencity fade and a man highly intent on making films more technically accomplished, more saddening because it is more convential. Ray seems setback in skill for understanding how to tell stories better but valuable in deeply caring about his country and aiming to tell it the most truthful way he can. He does that to some satisfaction.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on October 28, 2003, 10:13:39 PM
My Weekly questions for GT (feel free to go over to SHAFTR Says... and ask questions, that thread is dying)

1.  Throne of Blood (just watched a print of it today on the big screen)
2.  Hiroshima, Mon Amour (ditto to this)
3.  The Man With No Name Trilogy
4.  Finding Nemo
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on October 28, 2003, 10:27:41 PM
what was the last film that you saw ..in theatres that you were experiencing  something truly original and unique....(once and only kind of film).....
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 28, 2003, 10:40:05 PM
Quote from: NEON MERCURYwhat was the last film that you saw ..in theatres that you were experiencing  something truly original and unique....(once and only kind of film).....

This is easier to answer:

City of God, on just first showing, floored me. I had never seen anything like it before. I went in with Budgie's comparison to Goodfellas in my mind and realized that, surface level, it was like Goodfellas. Everything else was an explosion on the chordal sense and its realism and effectiveness to me still has been unparralled. I was so pumped about the movie I immediately caught it the next night again and on the trip home (I was out of town to see it), when I wasn't driving, I was in the back seat already writing my thoughts because I was dead afraid I'd forget everything. A lot of what I wrote there and what went into my original review (by far my longest review) was realized on my second viewing. My first viewing was just being floored. Usually I am good with experiencing and analyzing at the same time. This was a rare exception. I guess looking think back to what I did write in that original review (can be found in City of God thread at Now Showing), anything I suggested of the film being of great depth is likely wrong; its quite superficial, but so is 8 1/2. Its just the greatest work of superficiality in filmmaking since 8 1/2 or maybe Richard Lester at his most daring in filmmaking. But other than that, I'm still young at movies (only been serious since '99) and still learning (still only 20). I am very thankful for having seen City of God and felt the impact so hard so quickly.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ravi on October 29, 2003, 12:54:07 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet[The World of Apu is an even further decline. Everything in the film is highly romanticized on in a cynical level, we can actually applaud Ray for finally making a film complete in terms of tone and craftsmanship. Its just that he bleeds the honest air of Pather Panchali into the most convential of films. The premise is goofy: To save a bride from the disgrace of a failed marriage reception due to her groom being insane at the last moment, Apu volunteers to marry her. This is the ploy and the set up of it is to have a drama of an honest relationship that suffers the tradegy of the young wife dying during birth of the first child.

I can understand the premise of Apu stepping in as groom #2 seeming contrived and silly, but in many Indian cultures, if for some reason the marriage does not take place on the scheduled day, it will be hard to find another man to marry her.  I don't know the intricacies of this.

I do agree that The World of Apu is the weakest of the three films.  The death of Apu's wife is undeniably melodramatic.  We can't necessarily fault Ray for this, but the author of the original story.

Ray has definitely done better films.  Jalsaghar (The Music Room) is better than these films and one of his more interesting studies of a single character.  I'll try to rewatch the Apu Trilogy soon and write my own review.

Pather Panchali is a rambling story.  It was in some book or interview that Ray mentions the original book (the entire story is one book IIRC) was rambling, so he tried to retain that quality in the first film.  The lives of the two kids are unstructured, so it makes sense that the film has a very loose structure.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 29, 2003, 09:28:08 AM
Quote from: RaviI can understand the premise of Apu stepping in as groom #2 seeming contrived and silly, but in many Indian cultures, if for some reason the marriage does not take place on the scheduled day, it will be hard to find another man to marry her.  I don't know the intricacies of this.

I, too, understand the basis of truth in that culture for marriage being looked at in that way. I'm not calling it goofy; what I am calling it goofy is that this premise has been bled of any honest observance in realism and now is acting for simple melodrama. If the film observed the situation under realism as with Panchali, the result would have been much different. To all the deaths being from the book, thats fine, but I still carry my same opinion. It is a reliance on something that loses dramatic effect after the first. I, of course, never read the book. The movies still have to stand on their own.

I prolly was more challenged with reviewing these movies than any other asked before. They are considered classic by almost every side and so if you take a disagreeing stance, you better fucking explain.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 30, 2003, 10:06:52 PM
THE MAN WITH NO NAME TRILOGY



Sergio Leone and Quentin Tarantino have a lot in common. Tarantino simply isn’t borrowing from Leone and thus making each similiar, but both are borrowing from other things: Tarantino from Leone in filmmaking and cliches of other genres. Leone, when most at himself in the “Man with No Name” trilogy, is borrowing from Kurosawa in filmmaking and the cliches of the Western genre. Both are operating as escapists and finding personas within a genre to run with. The beginning of The Good, The Bad and the Ugly cements this idea. The titles to the film are introduced matching each character to what persona they represent in the title of the film with a scene of their own. The scenes are dramatic, but never humanely touching. The drama comes in just to keep tension who kills who and what happens next. And the humor of the scenes are very dry, but always punching at a cliche or another. With the intro of Angel Eyes, he stands in the doorway of a man’s home and his family (and we) know that a shoot out of some sort is coming. When both men actually meet, it is Angel Eyes actually sitting at dinner with the man eating alongside with him. Angel Eyes kills him from that position. Scene is taken serious, but very biting at some hallmarks of the western genre. The rest of the movie is an explosion of everything that seemed smale scale in the rest of the films. The narrative is extended and scope widened to such extremes that the movie is able to better rest on the personas and interactions of character instead of devices for a plot. It also provides more room for Leone to cover more territory in the western genre. You could say this is his “Pulp Fiction” for the genre. None of the scenes nor situations really drag and the movie makes ground from the beginning it is for narrative of these characters so the rambling is to be expected.

There are many bad moments in the film, though. Mainly the scenes of humanity draped in interfer. This happens with the two brothers, one the outlaw and the other a priest. It happens with Eastwood and the other guy (forget name) blowing up the bridge to give a moment of happiness to a dying war captain. All these scenes have the heightened emotional music Leone would exploit in future dramatic attempts. This isn’t fitting to the tone which is dramatic, but very dry humor in showing war and death as minor things or stupidity, everything against the honor of death involved in both when done with realism.

A Fistful of Dollars is different in that it is more of a dramatic attempt in the convential sense. Eastwood’s character is still similiar angst toward old westerns, but the story in the movie is more old guard in the western revenge film. It isn’t for narrative. It is for a genre story more so. The movie is also a remake of Kurosawa’s Yojimbo and considering both are near duplicates, we must compare. Kurosawa’s story doesn’t drive as typically as Leone’s, it also implements many boundry breakers as cowardice finally being observed when actually coming down to a classic (sword) fight while also breaking the barriers of what a good guy look likes. Leone mainly just goes for destryoying the image of a good guy. Also better in Yojimbo is who is playing the protaganist. I like Eastwood and all, but his acting was based just from his look when staring and smoking a cigar. His acting in between is very sloppy and little commanding of the stare he has when about to kill someone. With Toshiro Mifune, his background is that of an actor and he bleeds dominance of his character in every scene. It is also a welcome role considering his most famous is of a talented goof ball in Seven Samuari. He is bad ass to perfection here. And finally, technically, I felt Kurosawa more in command of the camera. Leone showed his style, but didn’t define space the way he would later in his career.

For A Few Dollars More is a step forward in narrative for the characters and set up more true for what they represent, but a small step forward. The Good, The Bad and the Ugly is an explosion forward.

I'll get to the rest Shaftr requested this weekend.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on October 30, 2003, 10:25:08 PM
For a Few Dollars more is probably my favorite.  Maybe because it is genre at it's core...and I love that particular genre.  

Interesting Pulp Fiction / The Good, the Bad and the Ugly comparison.  Isn't TGTBTU often listed as one of Tarantino's favorite films and what he calls one of the best films of all time.  I thought the brother sequence was genuine (especially the aftermath with Ugly talking to Good about how much his brother loves him, but I wasn't a fan of the bridge scene (the civil war plotline seemed force and out of place in the created reality of the film).

I have yet to see Yojimbo, but I will get to it soon.  I think the opening Title Sequence in Fistfull of Dollars is one of the best ever.

I am thinking of buying the trilogy...does anyone know if there is a planned SE of the films coming out?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 30, 2003, 10:28:40 PM
Tarantino cites The Good, The Bad and The Ugly as his favorite film of all time, usually.

And the only one of the trilogy certain to get SE treatment soon is the Good, The Bad and The Ugly. It is making rounds in theatres now in a brand new print. There is also a good chance Criterion will be releasing it when it comes out because it is through Criterion's buddy company, Rialto.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on October 31, 2003, 05:58:19 PM
THRONE OF BLOOD

Throne of Blood is a highly accomplished film, there's no doubt about that. The question to ask is whether or not it ranks as one of Kurosawa's very best. I say it doesn't. A beginning basis to why I think this is in order. The majesty of Kurosawa for me always has been his ability to grip an audience and carry them for so long on a story thread that may seem as very minor to other filmmakers. For me, Kurosawa's finest films of accomplishment in this sense and mastery of story come in High and Low and a later work, Ran.

The chief problem with Throne of Blood in living up to these films is the degree it generalizes on its story as compared to the others. Throne of Blood is under two hours; while Ran and High and Low are near two and half hours at minimal both. The last two films told their stories similiarily, but existed for the scene and the moment of tension more. They never sped up for unneccessary reasons or made any new information crucial to the story something to come along quickly. The movies were encompassed by the environment. I only felt this specific mastery a few times in Throne of Blood: once is when Mifune kills His Lord and is dealing with the shock of it and his wife is trying to clean up the mess. During this scene, the sound is off and every detail is gathered on screen. Every movement of Mifune's body is captured and his shock and desperation all the more felt. This scene truly gripped in only the way a master like Kurosawa could do so. The end scene of Mifune fighting to keep moral strength in his army and himself and his eventual killing had a similiar effect. With these scenes, the movie wasn't talking about its drama or showing easy scenes to demonstrate it, but living it.

Yes, Throne of Blood is accomplished and a masterpiece prolly to any other director, but it does not stand on top of the moutain for me as High and Low and Ran. And I must note, I have yet to see Ikiru

FINDING NEMO

Before, I said this was one of the best movies of the year and one of the most accomplished movies Hollywood has done in years. Let me adjust my position, I now believe it is one of the best movies Hollywood has ever done for the comedy genre. I can not think of a movie more thought out, more increasingly innovative and continuously ambitious in Hollywood comedy ever. Every scene is such an instant joy, a new joke and situation always introduced. The movie never tires for a moment on riding one storyline. It is moving as if it has most difficult of jobs of trying to fit every single fish it ever heard of tasting ocean water into one film. And even better, each fish represents its own avenue of personas so the jokes keep coming in from new places. The only movie in my mind to compare this to is Richard Lester's How I Won the War, a movie in my mind on a more artistic level and one of the very best ever, but sharing same land with Finding Nemo in level of creativity put forth. I'm glad this movie is making most people's "best of" lists so far. It'll be on my final one at the end of the year for sure.

Also, I've seen Hiroshima, Mon Amour once. A year ago and with a terrible vhs in a bad film class. I couldn't make out the subtitles nor the imagery. I fell asleep after 40 minutes. I survived the longest of anyone in my class. Maybe I'll see the dvd some time.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 01, 2003, 12:02:57 PM
Quote from: GhostboyAs the most objective (at least vocally so) film buff on this site:

Do you ever -- or have you ever -- ignored a film's defaults simply because it effects you on a personal level? Can you even do this, when you're so stridently on point about your objections? And if you can't, do you sometimes wish you could?

Actually, I think I finally understood what you meant. I guess you could say I hardly ever find movies that really come near speaking about my world at all. I'd say Beautiful Girls is personal to me. Diner is also a good one. I forgot about these movie, but I was watching one recently and realized it is very close to being about my environment and I love the film for very personal reasons. The world it shows is my world. You could also say because of this very sparing identification with movies, I don't really believe many movies at all vocally speak to my world in any mature way to get me to identify with them at all. My small town snowy locale type is most famously shown in Fargo and even if its famous and all, it just mocks us in every single cliche there is. There is even a movie named after my small town starring Jeff Daniels that was filmed here like 3 years back and its the worst of the worst in just mocking us. We are idiots in this film. Most movies are like this in just really mocking us in bad ways. So, yes, I usually am just objective with films because I see little personal in them. I'd love more honest films of these kinds of films, but I hardly ever see them.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 01, 2003, 12:04:22 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet

FINDING NEMO

Before, I said this was one of the best movies of the year and one of the most accomplished movies Hollywood has done in years. Let me adjust my position, I now believe it is one of the best movies Hollywood has ever done for the comedy genre. I can not think of a movie more thought out, more increasingly innovative and continuously ambitious in Hollywood comedy ever. Every scene is such an instant joy, a new joke and situation always introduced. The movie never tires for a moment on riding one storyline. It is moving as if it has most difficult of jobs of trying to fit every single fish it ever heard of tasting ocean water into one film. And even better, each fish represents its own avenue of personas so the jokes keep coming in from new places. The only movie in my mind to compare this to is Richard Lester's How I Won the War, a movie in my mind on a more artistic level and one of the very best ever, but sharing same land with Finding Nemo in level of creativity put forth. I'm glad this movie is making most people's "best of" lists so far. It'll be on my final one at the end of the year for sure.

Also, I've seen Hiroshima, Mon Amour once. A year ago and with a terrible vhs in a bad film class. I couldn't make out the subtitles nor the imagery. I fell asleep after 40 minutes. I survived the longest of anyone in my class. Maybe I'll see the dvd some time.

~rougerum

Finding Nemo surprised me.  I went with my g/f just because I knew she wanted to watch it.  I laughed all the way through it, was compelled in the entire way through, and I think I almost shed tears in a few parts.

I need to see more Kurosawa films, I have only seen ToB, Seven Samurai, and Rashomon.  ToB was my least favorite, but still great.  It has similiarities to a 'noh drama", with the blank impressions of Mifune's wife as if she has a noh mask on.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 01, 2003, 12:44:34 PM
I must admit I've seen Finding Nemo 4 times in theatres..more than any other movie. Just that damn enjoyable for me.

On those Kurosawa films, I'd actually say I liked Throne of Blood the best. Rashomon is right behind and overall, the better film but something about it nearly killed all my liking for the film. In one of the first scenes, with the men outside the destroyed building talking about the murder and how "gruesome" and "terrible" they are, I felt robbed of the build up Kurosawa is so famous for. Kurosawa usually with films has a very fine mind in how to dramaticize things out and knows not to give large expectations early on, but did so very blatantely in this scene. And this scene was very long so the slap in the face more visible to me. With Kurosawa, its all about the build up and how encompassed you end up becoming in his world and storytelling.

With Seven Samuari, I did become involved in the film, but its so convential to what Kurosawa later became. Most notably, the editing is much faster and loses that Kurosawa touch of prolonged scenes. Also, the dramatic points at the end carry symbolism a little too casual to what Kurosawa later developed into. With Mifune's character giving the revelation that he came from the same exact environment as the farmer's who are being tortured and robbed. This loses some touch because Mifune's performance is so over the top and so comedic that tonally it doesn't fit with the rest of the actors and yet, he is given the most truthful scene of observation in the entire movie. It feels tacked on instead of his character being given a more trufthful drive to such a point. Also, the very famous final scene of the samuari's realizing they lost a large number of men to what seems a minor accomplish, it too feels tacked on. So much of the movie is an action film that it is losing of emotional truth that drives so many Kurosawa's films. The film is too long because too many scenes revel in large and thought out action scenes and situations. The movie starts out out from a good dramatic idea, but focuses on so many things cliche like a large process scene of finding samuari's good enough for such a mission. The movie isn't driven by the strands of hurt in this village to weed through all the scenes, so it includes all of them. By the last scene, after all the action and emotion in the movie and the tonal nightmare I saw in it, the final point is lost because the drama feels spoken instead of felt. A tonally more complete film for the hurt of the villagers would have been felt.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on November 01, 2003, 04:49:43 PM
Wait...Kurosawa didn't direct Finding Nemo??
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ravi on November 01, 2003, 04:54:00 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetThe movie starts out out from a good dramatic idea, but focuses on so many things cliche like a large process scene of finding samuari's good enough for such a mission.

Perhaps you think the samurai finding scene is cliche because the film has been so influential and action films that came after this often included such scenes.  How many times have we seen team-based action films that depict each team member doing what he does best, then being recruited to the team?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 01, 2003, 04:54:53 PM
Quote from: Ravi
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetThe movie starts out out from a good dramatic idea, but focuses on so many things cliche like a large process scene of finding samuari's good enough for such a mission.

Perhaps you think the samurai finding scene is cliche because the film has been so influential and action films that came after this often included such scenes.  How many times have we seen team-based action films that depict each team member doing what he does best, then being recruited to the team?

I was thinking the same thing.  It's hard to watch these films by putting yourself in the context of what came before and what came after.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 01, 2003, 07:25:42 PM
Quote from: Ravi
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetThe movie starts out out from a good dramatic idea, but focuses on so many things cliche like a large process scene of finding samuari's good enough for such a mission.

Perhaps you think the samurai finding scene is cliche because the film has been so influential and action films that came after this often included such scenes.  How many times have we seen team-based action films that depict each team member doing what he does best, then being recruited to the team?

If I got it right, you aren't arguing much for the validity of the scenes I said were bad. You are just making a point that it may not be cliche because Seven Samuari began a lot things for action films, which I accept. The question you ask of how team action based films have continued this? Well, I'm not sure percentage wise how many have. Other types of films have made it quite general, mainly sports films in trying to rebuild a sports team and having a long scene finding people who excel at different areas and getting them for the team. That's an avenue where the practice has become cliche. My point is that Seven Samuari has so much emotionally to offer, but has so many scenes of action all around that tonally, it is a mess. My best offer for this scene and problem of finding the samuaris to do the job was just make it a minimal scene only and bring the focus of following them into battle so we could care about them more. The entire process just points to each own's specific expertice in fighting. Any battle scene could have shown they are talented in that department. Its a disposable scene, imo.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ravi on November 02, 2003, 07:33:45 PM
But in a battle scene we would be concentrating more on the body count than the skill of the fighter.  We would see one of the guys get slashed, but we wouldn't necessarily get a sense of the samurai's talent.  It is hard for me to articulate this thought, but the fight with the two samurais and the sticks (then real swords) is a punchy way of showing how damn skilled the samurai is.  I haven't seen all of Kurosawa's films, but from what I've seen Seven Samurai seems to be one of his more commercially concious efforts, so this is possibly why he tries to spell out some things for the audience.  I like the scenes of finding the samurai because they are some of the few moments that I can remember in which each one is individually highlighted.

GT, what did you think of Those Who Tread on Tiger's Tail?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 02, 2003, 08:01:57 PM
Well, maybe weighing out the invididual merits of each samuari for fighting really isn't that important. You are right that this is one of his more commercial films. Its just along with commercial aspects such as an intense focus on each samurai fighting and all that, you get a very large human drama in there as well. I'd like to have seen the movie decide which movie it was trying to be: action or drama? It seems to throw everything in the movie and when I start complaining about it failing as a drama, I start pinpointing out these kinds of scenes and saying how they aren't necessary for a drama. I wouldn't mind the movie being an action film, either. High and Low, which I consider one of Kurosawa's best, is a pure commercial film. Its just I wish Seven Samuari would have chosen to be one thing tonally.

And I haven't seen the film you mentioned. I never even heard of it, actually.

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ravi on November 03, 2003, 03:34:05 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetHigh and Low, which I consider one of Kurosawa's best, is a pure commercial film. Its just I wish Seven Samuari would have chosen to be one thing tonally.

And I haven't seen the film you mentioned. I never even heard of it, actually.

~rougerum

I'm a big fan of Kurosawa's Ed McBain films.

Those Who Tread on Tiger's Tail (it may have some variations on the title) is an earlier Kurosawa work.  I've seen it too long ago to write a review, but I thought it was kind of boring.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 05, 2003, 11:37:11 PM
more questions...

1.)  The 400 Blows
2.)  Les Bonnes Femmes (I've doubt you've seen it, but worth a shot)
3.)  In a Lonely Place
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 06, 2003, 08:40:05 AM
Quote from: SHAFTRmore questions...

1.)  The 400 Blows
2.)  Les Bonnes Femmes (I've doubt you've seen it, but worth a shot)
3.)  In a Lonely Place

Haven't seen even one of those. Sorry. The 400 Blows, I understand, I should have seen by now. I've tried ordering it and all, but my order fucks up and the box set is an arm and a leg in payment to get.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Sanjuro on November 08, 2003, 04:46:23 AM
hey let me have a shot. i ahve a bunch of questions since i enjoy your reviews a lot and respect your opinion
1.) how do you think kagemusha compares with ran?
2.) why do you call 8 1/2 superficial?
3.) i know you dont like most of them, but is there any movie with a plot twist that you think is good?
REVIEWS
4.) The Conversation
5.) Wild at Heart
6.) Dogville
7.) Dancer in the Dark as a musical
8.) is Pulp Fiction a 'masterpiece' for you?
thanks!
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 08, 2003, 07:46:15 PM
Quote from: Sanjurohey let me have a shot. i ahve a bunch of questions since i enjoy your reviews a lot and respect your opinion
1.) how do you think kagemusha compares with ran?
2.) why do you call 8 1/2 superficial?
3.) i know you dont like most of them, but is there any movie with a plot twist that you think is good?

Thanks for the complement. I'll tackle the first three questions now. I'll get to the reviews later.

1.) how do you think kagemusha compares with ran?
Tough question. Both are great films, imo. Both come from similiar composition in Kurosawa holding the camera further back and relying on silence more often. Thing is, Kagemusha relies more on that silence for its power. It has a touch of Ozu more so than usual Kurosawa and doesn't end in a very dramatic tone. It ends as if we've seen something and are suppose to keep the film in our memory so it can grow on us. Ran is a powerful film just on first viewing. In observing Kagemusha, what is even weirder with the reliance on silence and observation, it comes a from ploy idea: A leader is killed and to keep their enemy from conquering them in a weak moment, they find a nobody look a like of the leader to stand in his place to keep the enemy at bay. Hollywood could have easily made a bad film out of this idea (and likely has).
Ran seems to typify many common things of Kurosawa in his career of making mainly historical war films. He could have easily made Ran years ago into a very different film. He seems to save it last for certain reasons and out of what could be convential work for him, has made a personal statement. The story of the general trying to get away from power in search of peace could be a metaphor for Kurosawa's own career. Like the general, he depended on war in some way (Kurosawa made films about them) and like the general, had to live with deaths near to his family (Kurosawa's wife died years earlier and he unsuccessfully tried to kill himself) and finally, like the general, tried to find peace at the end of his life to give his life some purpose (Ran would be his last war film. The rest of his films he made before he died were made more about peace and a search for it).
Finally, I must add that both films feel like spiritual films like no Kurosawa film before. I mentioned his newly developed composition of the camera being further away and the silence even longer with these two films. In Japanese culture, the major religion is the Shinto religion, which suggests one idea that there is not just one God, but many Gods. And these Gods aren't outside our world, but in it and looking down on us to see how we go about our life. An idea to patience and kindness in Japanese culture is that the idea of a physical God in their life criticizing them has been influencing generations of Japanese people, even if today's Japanese are not fully aware of it. Both films feel like they come from the point of view of God. Further evidence of Ran being a personal statement and Kagemusha being about the memory of one's man little known existence and demise feels like the beliefs of the Shinto religion are being directly applied to both films. Kurosawa with both works feels like he is making final statements on a subject and genre of film that dominated his life.
(note: I also realize some Japanese people post here and may be critical of how correct I am in the last paragraph. Its really from all that I read on the specific subject and my own beliefs in relation to the film. Nothing more nor anything that is to be offensive in case I got something wrong.)

2.) why do you call 8 1/2 superficial?
Fellini always seems to have involved himself somewhat into his films. Before 8 1/2, it seemed only to be to a certain extent while being objective as well. Fellini is the protaganist in 8 1/2 so the idea he can be fully objective about himself is gone. He really is exploring his inner dreams and fantasies while only identifying the griefs and complaints of others. He makes no attempts to actually involve himself in them to make drama at all, but just to show a scene and end it with a daydream or hallucination that seems to have hit him at the time. If the film was to be looked at dramatically, it would be a pretty bad film. In the film, everyone's complaints of Guido are continually and continually identified, never delved. For Guido, from bedding the whore, lying about her to his wife and then lying again about her to his wife, they all feel like one point being said over and over again. The genious of the film is the filmmaking. The only other film I know comparable in brilliance of filmmaking at the time would be West Side Story (a movie neeeding much more recognition). Both films have that effect of making the viewing of the film so great.

i know you dont like most of them, but is there any movie with a plot twist that you think is good?
Prolly the one in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest where the Indian reveals he can speak and everyone at the mental hospital reveal they are only volunteers, not patients. The reason why this example is good is because the film doesn't rest itself on them for success. They seem to give new shades to the characters more so. The film has much more in its ending and narrative than just these twists. Plot twists are naturally cheap effects and at least this movie keeps them in check to a certain point where they aren't the only things that satisfy or move us when the film ends.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 09, 2003, 12:25:49 AM
1.)  George Washington:  a film I just saw and I believe I have seen you mention before.

2.)  This is Spinal Tap

3.)  A Better Place:  a film that GW reminded me of, if you haven't seen it, check it out and let me know what you think.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: cine on November 09, 2003, 12:57:44 AM
SHAFTR, lemme guess: you're on a 400 Blows fix? :wink:
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 09, 2003, 01:41:43 AM
Quote from: CinephileSHAFTR, lemme guess: you're on a 400 Blows fix? :wink:

Yes, I saw The 400 Blows last week, 35 mm print.  I really want the Criterion Box Set Truffaut's films that follow up The 400 Blows.

http://www.criterionco.com/asp/boxed_set.asp?id=185
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: cine on November 09, 2003, 01:58:48 AM
Ah, as do I.. I'm sure its very worth it. I should have it before 2004. :-D
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Sanjuro on November 09, 2003, 10:56:02 AM
Quote from: SHAFTR
Quote from: CinephileSHAFTR, lemme guess: you're on a 400 Blows fix? :wink:

Yes, I saw The 400 Blows last week, 35 mm print.  I really want the Criterion Box Set Truffaut's films that follow up The 400 Blows.

http://www.criterionco.com/asp/boxed_set.asp?id=185

i just received this today, havent really checked it out yet, but the packaging is amazing! if you do get it, get it from dvdplanet i saved like 20 bucks i thnk!
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 09, 2003, 03:31:07 PM
Quote from: SanjuroREVIEWS
4.) The Conversation
5.) Wild at Heart
6.) Dogville
7.) Dancer in the Dark as a musical
8.) is Pulp Fiction a 'masterpiece' for you?
thanks!

Sadly, I've only seen Dancer in the Dark and Pulp Fiction. The Conversation has been on my "must watch" list for a few years now. It isn't at any video store here and everytime its on tv I get lazy and not tape it or watch it. I watched the first 20 minutes of Wild At Heart and turned it off because it was so annoying. I'll try it again some other time. Dogville has yet to be released near my area.

7.) Dancer in the Dark as a musical
Its not a good film nor is it a good musical. I don't understand Von Trier's logic in using the musical for this film. It is the most superficial and fake genre out there but yet he introduces it to a very grim and dark story. The result is a film so off balanced that there can be little way to justify it. The main excuse: Because Bjork's character is blind and her dreams are of music and light so these acted out musicals make sense? No. The musical numbers are also filmed in indie dreariness with people who can't dance. It becomes a lame performance. The filmmaking is also piss poor in capturing the performance. The camera switches so quickly from place to place that any attempt to appreciate talent in dancing is lost. Its like watching like photographs of different people dancing appear quickly on the screen without being able to see the full performance to appreciate what is done. The defense to this: What if the dancing was done with quality? Still no. There would still be a severe difference of tone that the superficial will feel extended to death in meaning and the realistic would feel like it was pandering to something below it. Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, in all its superficiality of story, felt extended a little too far to dramatic meaning. Dancer in the Dark was trying to convey the dreams and hopes of a blind person in search of some happy thoughts when facing a terrible consequence. Thing is, it just settled for the most obvious idea when trying to make a musical for her. It could have searched for something deeper and more fitting to the tone of the film.

8.) is Pulp Fiction a 'masterpiece' for you?
Yes, but maybe not in the way of how others call it one. I don't see any drama in the film or anything that is meant to be taken serious at all. I compare it to The Good, The Bad & The Ugly in taking the canvas of a genre and telling a story of stylized pulp for it that has satisfaction in just following all the off beat characters. Compared to Resevoir Dogs, this film is epic and its scope is all the more satisfying. Resevoir Dogs is enjoyable for me, but also very frustating because it is also a riff on a genre, but so limited in vision that you feel you are being kicked over and over again with the same signals of how this is taking on a genre. Pulp Fiction is always inventive and changing and so the reminder of genre riff is never the same one.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Slick Shoes on November 09, 2003, 03:45:14 PM
so i guess you didn't like moulin rouge?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 09, 2003, 03:58:22 PM
Quote from: Slick Shoesso i guess you didn't like moulin rouge?

I did actually. The energy in the filmmaking and screenplay won me over. Chicago, though, I did not like. It was superficial, but also trying to be something dramatically. The film was also raped of any invention or energy that may have saved the terrible dancing and MTV editing that tried to hide it.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 09, 2003, 04:19:14 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: Slick Shoesso i guess you didn't like moulin rouge?

I did actually. The energy in the filmmaking and screenplay won me over. Chicago, though, I did not like. It was superficial, but also trying to be something dramatically. The film was also raped of any invention or energy that may have saved the terrible dancing and MTV editing that tried to hide it.

I hated Moulin Rouge...more than most can imagine.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 09, 2003, 08:45:37 PM
Quote from: SHAFTR1.)  George Washington:  a film I just saw and I believe I have seen you mention before.

Best film of 2000 and very influential for me. When I first saw this, the only thing apparent to me was how foreign the film still felt. The structure feels like it has every characteristic a film could invent: off balanced, simple, reckless, unexplainable, idiotic, pretensious. At first, I thought this was a film made with no plans. After thinking about it and viewing it more, I realized how thought out and masterful this film really was and that instead of the usual third person perspective given, it mixed moments of all three, but mainly held first person narrative through out in bringing a portrait of the boy George. Everytime I watched the film, my perspective on him deepened. The film was made for this. Also, like I said, it also has two other perspectives that seems to speak for his friends and the world around him. Then there is the filmmaking and how it alligns itself to the words and hopes of everyone in the film. It really is filmmaking as poetry. No film to come out recently has portrayed a boy and his world so effectively.

Quote from: SHAFTR2.)  This is Spinal Tap

I really do like this movie, but it is so tiring. There is no real story here at all, but scene after scene that has some comedic jab at this band. A lot of the jokes in the film do hold up, but when the movie gets on a streak of some bad and dated jokes, the loss of story just kills those scenes for me. I wish the story would have had more of a story so it could have allowed me to follow something even if being flooded with bad jokes. The film though is extremely effective of today because of its documentary feel. Its a nice thing of a comedy feeling genuine compared to the artificial and staged ones coming out today.

Quote from: SHAFTR3.)  A Better Place:  a film that GW reminded me of, if you haven't seen it, check it out and let me know what you think.

You suspected right. I haven't seen it. Unless I ordered it off the net, I likely have no chance of watching this anytime soon. I'll keep an eye on IFC and Sundance for it, though.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 09, 2003, 08:50:21 PM
Quote from: SHAFTR3.)  A Better Place:  a film that GW reminded me of, if you haven't seen it, check it out and let me know what you think.

You suspected right. I haven't seen it. Unless I ordered it off the net, I likely have no chance of watching this anytime soon. I'll keep an eye on IFC and Sundance for it, though.[/quote]

From what I can gather you live in a small town in the middle of no where (no where to rent films at).  I could be wrong though.  Either way, you should go Netflix.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 09, 2003, 08:57:44 PM
Quote from: SHAFTRFrom what I can gather you live in a small town in the middle of no where (no where to rent films at).  I could be wrong though.  Either way, you should go Netflix.

I do live in a small town. My world so remote I can even say I spent nearly half my childhood growing up on a farm. We have video rental stores, but I know that wouldn't be there. I'd do netflix, but I have so many problems with internet ordering that I am very wary of trying it.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 09, 2003, 09:05:21 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: SHAFTRFrom what I can gather you live in a small town in the middle of no where (no where to rent films at).  I could be wrong though.  Either way, you should go Netflix.

I do live in a small town. My world so remote I can even say I spent nearly half my childhood growing up on a farm. We have video rental stores, but I know that wouldn't be there. I'd do netflix, but I have so many problems with internet ordering that I am very wary of trying it.

It is quite simple.  You put in your debit/credit card information, every month it takes out $21 until you cancel.  You create your queue and it follows it.

What small town do you live in?  I have a feeling your from Wisconsin, which means I might know.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 09, 2003, 09:14:25 PM
Quote from: SHAFTRWhat small town do you live in?  I have a feeling your from Wisconsin, which means I might know.

Nope. I'm in Michigan in the Upper Peninsula. And yes, I am a yooper (if you ever heard that nickname). The nickname means I am a flannel wearing, beer swiggling, pastie eating, canadian sounding, deer hunting, redneck who is dumber than rocks. I guess my town isn't that small because it is labeled a city, but it is a small town to me. The town is Escanaba. Just don't fucking stalk me or anything.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 09, 2003, 09:35:49 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: SHAFTRWhat small town do you live in?  I have a feeling your from Wisconsin, which means I might know.

Nope. I'm in Michigan in the Upper Peninsula. And yes, I am a yooper (if you ever heard that nickname). The nickname means I am a flannel wearing, beer swiggling, pastie eating, canadian sounding, deer hunting, redneck who is dumber than rocks. I guess my town isn't that small because it is labeled a city, but it is a small town to me. The town is Escanaba. Just don't fucking stalk me or anything.

Oh man, the UP is a scary place.  I went camping up there once in one of the national parks and a bear ran by me when I was in the woods, scared the shit out of me.  I had a very strange weekend there with some friends from HS (2 of the 3 of which I have grown apart from).  

Anyways, I'll give you some more film questions, starting with my favorites.

1.)  Chasing Amy
2.)  Breathless
3.)  Shaft (1971)
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 09, 2003, 09:59:29 PM
Quote from: SHAFTROh man, the UP is a scary place

That's our goal for tourists. I went on a hunting trip once when out of state guys started marching on the land where my friends were baiting for deer. We asked these guys nicely if they could stay away from the area because our group had been baiting all week. They told us to fuck off and just went hunting there anyways. To get revenge, one of the guys in the group got a deer corpse from a guy who ran one over and we found the camp for these guys and we stuck the deer in one of the sleeping bags on the ground. The sleeping bag was soaked in blood when we finished. The guys were off hunting so never caught us doing it.

Also, you gotta visit the bar that is owned by a 300 pound lady who is known on some nights to challenge men and women to mud wrestling matches. It is popular and she always gets challengers. Worst, she is also a part time stripper. She's become sorta legendary around here.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 09, 2003, 10:05:20 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: SHAFTROh man, the UP is a scary place

That's our goal for tourists. I went on a hunting trip once when out of state guys started marching on the land where my friends were baiting for deer. We asked these guys nicely if they could stay away from the area because our group had been baiting all week. They told us to fuck off and just went hunting there anyways. To get revenge, one of the guys in the group got a deer corpse from a guy who ran one over and we found the camp for these guys and we stuck the deer in one of the sleeping bags on the ground. The sleeping bag was soaked in blood when we finished. The guys were off hunting so never caught us doing it.

Also, you gotta visit the bar that is owned by a 300 pound lady who is known on some nights to challenge men and women to mud wrestling matches. It is popular and she always gets challengers. Worst, she is also a part time stripper. She's become sorta legendary around here.

I grew up in Northwestern Wisconsin which is scary in it's own right.  One time a bunch of my friends and I were ice fishing and some snowmobilers decided to run over our tip ups.  It was very uncool, so we saw where they came from and decided to exact our revenge.  They had made a nice little skating rink on the ice so we drilled holes everywhere on the rink and pissed on the ice.  We felt very good about our actions until we found out that that it wasn't the snowmobiler's home.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 09, 2003, 10:12:58 PM
Hahaha....thats great. Most people here can't identify with these kinds of stories at all. We know them all too well.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 09, 2003, 10:19:37 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetWe know them all too well.

Yes we do, all too well.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ghostboy on November 10, 2003, 02:36:26 AM
I hail from Wisconsin, too, but a more civilized part. AKA Milwuakee.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 10, 2003, 02:43:45 AM
Quote from: GhostboyI hail from Wisconsin, too, but a more civilized part. AKA Milwuakee.

My g/f is from West Bend.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: aclockworkjj on November 10, 2003, 02:56:06 AM
you guys are just like mike and mark from american movie right?  

Wisconsin nerds!!!! yeahhp, a hey der hey, hows bout da Packers?

hehe...

west bend...that is funny...I know it well.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Sanjuro on November 11, 2003, 05:51:29 AM
hey gt i really agree with you on your take on dancer in the dark.  i actually feel that chicago and dancer in the dark are quite same in structure.

im excited to hear your take on breathless.

edit: oh yeah and for wild at heart i think you just have to put up with it with the first parts of the movie. as someone said before , it really is a gem.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on November 11, 2003, 12:50:09 PM
GT..its been awhile.....

who in your opinion is the most over-rated actor/actress..
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 11, 2003, 04:49:15 PM
Quote from: SHAFTR
1.)  Chasing Amy
2.)  Breathless
3.)  Shaft (1971)

For now, I'll do Breathless. Chasing Amy will be much shorter so it expect it soon. I haven't seen Shaft, though.

Breathless
I'm not sure Breathless is a great film, but it is no doubt a very influential one. To give it identification, I'll say it is the very first modernist film and the main movie to usher in the French New Wave. By the first modernist film, I mean it is the film with clearest public accepted break between old and new cinema: techniques of filmmaking were not as formal but guerilla. The actors were very natural in approaching the the roles instead of structured. The story could also be called anarchaic to the old style story in which the three act play is clearly shown over and over again. Breathless seems to just follow a character.

My highest appreciation of the film comes in being able to create a tonally complete view point of a man that is rewarded with filmmaking to push his situation. The portrait is, as someone might say, of modern day man and how he is different from a movie character. In telling this man's story, what we follow is his little patience, his quircks and the wandering thoughts he has everyday in every banal situation. This is where the filmmaking works for his situation. The camera movement is anarchaic. The editing jumps all over the place in order to grasp how quickly this man changes his mind and his general restlessness in the world. The filmmaking and story do follow hand in hand for what they want to achieve. The best thing of the movie is the effect of watching this man live his life.  

Then there is what the movie is trying to achieve. The story is simple: A man kills a police officer and cares little about doing it and continues on with his life. He has a girlfriend carrying his child and he is ignorant of many of her needs but she still loves him. He is hiding out from the police and she is helping. The idea is that they will run off to Italy together but in her mistreatment, she betrays him and he is shot down by the police. The ending is suppose to be tragic. The movie is an attempt to see how far will we go to have sympathy for this man who does crimes and cares little for it. We follow him and get to know his personality. Even with all the immorality in the film, it does have a moral basis in trying to get us to care for this man and also his girlfriend's situation. This is the part of the movie still in the old world objective, even if the characters are tainted to severer levels. Often movies today just have no morals.

My criticism of the movie in what keeps it from greatness is that it does little to understand this man's situation of how he got to such a point. Like I said, the movie's highest achievement seems to be technical in just being able to show this man to an effective level of filmmaking achievement, but how well does that hold up? Its goals really are to put itself as a clear barrier between old and new cinema. It is Godard acting as the critic and saying, morally, how his film is different than the ones preceeding it and challenging us to accept it as a movie on the same level of sympathy for the main character as we would an older movie. After some years, we do accept it and his challenge has been answered. What else is there of the film? The story simply follows this man in the most superficial way. It retains little insight into this dangerous world that has not been delved into further by any American Indie director to come out of the 70s. The filmmaking achievement is all that stands.

Also, the movie is out of date. Modernism is dead. The French New Wave seemed, out of the films I've seen from it, to really mock a lot of the traditions of old cinema. In a wonderful essay titled "What's Left of the Center?", Stanley Kauffmann says The French New Wave eventually just became mocked itself and rested as just another movement. He cites the 1974 film French film Going Places (which I have not seen) and its importance to the film world. Going Places follows two men who are bright and intelligent, but without any moral basis. The film also has no moral basis. They roam around doing moral and criminal crimes for little reason. We are also not to care for them. In the very opening of the film, one character pushes another around in a supermarket cart as they pursue a stout woman and the one in the cart tries to pinch her ass. The scene, as Kauffmann says, was very well known to be a goof on Breathless because the most publically detailed filmmaking technique in the film was that Godard put his cinematographer in a shopping cart and pushed him around in it. With Going Places, enter Post Modernism. Kauffmann further identifies how this move by Godard was addressed as "witty, direct assault on convential filmmaking". Thing is, that idea doesn't last and didn't. It was being mocked by the 1970s and no one now sees filmming from shopping carts as any anything really innovative. Thus, the technical hoopla of the French New Wave movement has faded and all that exists are the films to be judged as ones. And for reasons already given, Breathless is for me a very good film but not a great one.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 12, 2003, 03:53:09 PM
Chasing Amy
The best part of this movie is how organic the material is. Through out all of Kevin Smith's movies, there is so much  slang of looking down at women and calling other guys "gay" or "faggot" for being dumb. It feels like Smith is more opportunistic in using this behavior for other movies than anything else. Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back the most extreme example. In Chasing Amy he uses it to good purposes in understanding the motives of these men when one of them is dealing with a love for a lesbian who makes him confront these things about himself. We are immensed in this world of frat house lingo that makes these people for, some reason, use a class of people as a scapegoat for all their problems. For me, Chasing Amy is the only good and admirabe film Smith has done. Some of the drama in the film is a little too melodramatic for the natural air Smith is able to give, (car scene when raining hindered on it) but for the most part, Smith accomplishes something of good quality. Even though I like this film, I still refuse to buy the dvd. I just am too annoyed with the gimmickery that runs through Smith's career to pay even $15 for the very nice Criterion dvd of it. At best, I'll say I like it.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 12, 2003, 04:20:04 PM
Quote from: NEON MERCURYGT..its been awhile.....

who in your opinion is the most over-rated actor/actress..

Yes, it has been a while. Feel free to keep asking me questions. This is the best part of the board for me because it allows me to analyze more.

By far the most overrated actor for me is Edward Norton. While he is being promoted as "actor of his generation", his work to me usually just does the job of passability. From movie to movie, I don't see him within his characters at all. From role to role, I continually see the actor Edward Norton. The raise of voice when he gets mad always sounds the same. His manner of speech is always the same. I see him change looks, but his work seems to rest on the same tone of acting. And then his roles really vary little. They always put him as the "tough guy", even when it is a sensitve portrayal as in the 25th Hour or even for American History X. Even with Red Dragon, he is tough because he is playing the "heroic cop". There is a streak across his career as if he has to be someone, that he has to be on that respect level of Robert De Niro and Al Pacino. Even on this mundane goal, he often doesn't accomplish the goal because his presence is not that of a "tough guy". I did believe him in American History X, but all the other roles his very skinny frame intrudes and his Middle America look and boyish presence are always there. But yet, he continues to push forward in being seen in a certain kind of reputation. Last summer, I was watching a tape of the AFI Robert De Niro tribute and Ed Norton came out and I remember (but could be wrong) that when Norton was introduced, he was even mentioned as maybe this generation's great actor. You gotta arrange for that kind of introduction. Norton wants this hype but his acting is tired and presence not there.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: godardian on November 12, 2003, 04:21:18 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetChasing Amy
The best part of this movie is how organic the material is. Through out all of Kevin Smith's movies, there is so much of the slang of looking down at women and calling other guys "gay" or "faggot" for being dumb. Smith feels like he is opportunistic in using this behavior for other movies, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back the most extreme example, but he uses it to good purposes in understanding the motives of these men when one of them is dealing with a love for a lesbian who makes him confront these things about himself. We are immensed in this world of frat house lingo that makes these people for some reason use a class of people as a scapegoat for all their problems. For me, Chasing Amy is the only good and admirabe film Smith has done. Some of the drama in the film is a little too melodramatic for the natural air Smith is able to give, (car scene when raining hindered on it) but for the most part, Smith accomplishes something of good quality. Even though I like this film, I still refuse to buy the dvd. I just am too annoyed with the gimmickery that runs through Smith's career to pay even $15 for the very nice Criterion dvd of it. At best, I'll say I like it.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I enjoy Chasing Amy- it's an amateurish yet heartfelt little romantic comedy with some real charm to it. When I've seen Kevin Smith's other leaden, stunted, charmless movies, I've had to reconcile the fact that he made the endearing, earthy Chasing Amy with the apparent fact that it was some kind of fluke.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 12, 2003, 06:00:36 PM
Quote from: godardian
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetChasing Amy
The best part of this movie is how organic the material is. Through out all of Kevin Smith's movies, there is so much of the slang of looking down at women and calling other guys "gay" or "faggot" for being dumb. Smith feels like he is opportunistic in using this behavior for other movies, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back the most extreme example, but he uses it to good purposes in understanding the motives of these men when one of them is dealing with a love for a lesbian who makes him confront these things about himself. We are immensed in this world of frat house lingo that makes these people for some reason use a class of people as a scapegoat for all their problems. For me, Chasing Amy is the only good and admirabe film Smith has done. Some of the drama in the film is a little too melodramatic for the natural air Smith is able to give, (car scene when raining hindered on it) but for the most part, Smith accomplishes something of good quality. Even though I like this film, I still refuse to buy the dvd. I just am too annoyed with the gimmickery that runs through Smith's career to pay even $15 for the very nice Criterion dvd of it. At best, I'll say I like it.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I enjoy Chasing Amy- it's an amateurish yet heartfelt little romantic comedy with some real charm to it. When I've seen Kevin Smith's other leaden, stunted, charmless movies, I've had to reconcile the fact that he made the endearing, earthy Chasing Amy with the apparent fact that it was some kind of fluke.

I can't help but come to the rescue of my favorite filmmaker.  For some reason, that I'm not sure of, Chasing Amy is one of the few films that has ever moved me.  Originally it was the love/relationship aspect, but what has really stuck is the Banky/Holden relationship.  Affleck & Lee just clicked.  I know there are a few parts that bother me, and I have heard Smith say he wish weren't there (the cunt line before Allysa sings and the "another one bites the dust" line with the lesbians).  Besides that, the criticisms of the slang are valid, but I think they should be criticisms on the character that is saying it, not the writer.  In that respect, it works.  I probably have seen this film more times than any other (ex. Wizard of Oz) and it still comes off as fresh and the jokes funny.  

I think there is still a charm in Clerks, and even Mallrats.  J&SB Strike Back only worked for me the first time I saw it (being a Smith fanboy).  Dogma made me really think but now I think of it as a mess, that needed either a) more work b) a trimming or c) a more visual director.  I still enjoy the film though for it's moments.  I can't help but feel that his films are very genuine and that when he tackles a particular subject he actually cares about the characters and the subject itself, or at the very least is familiar with it.  I don't like his films as much as I used to (but I still love them), but he will always remain my favorite filmmaker b/c unlike most directors, he cares about his fans.

I actually do understand why people might not like Smith films, they are very love/hate.  I'm just on the love side hoping more people will join me.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ravi on November 12, 2003, 06:12:13 PM
QuoteI think there is still a charm in Clerks, and even Mallrats.  J&SB Strike Back only worked for me the first time I saw it (being a Smith fanboy).  Dogma made me really think but now I think of it as a mess, that needed either a) more work b) a trimming or c) a more visual director.

I still like Clerks and Chasing Amy, but I hated Mallrats when I saw it.  It had very little of the cleverness I saw in Clerks.  JSBSB was stupid, silly fun, and on that level I enjoyed it.  I liked Dogma when I first saw it, but I don't think it holds up that well on repeated viewings.  It's way too talky, and like you say, could have used more visually interesting direction.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 12, 2003, 09:52:57 PM
Quote from: Ravi
QuoteI think there is still a charm in Clerks, and even Mallrats.  J&SB Strike Back only worked for me the first time I saw it (being a Smith fanboy).  Dogma made me really think but now I think of it as a mess, that needed either a) more work b) a trimming or c) a more visual director.

I still like Clerks and Chasing Amy, but I hated Mallrats when I saw it.  It had very little of the cleverness I saw in Clerks.  JSBSB was stupid, silly fun, and on that level I enjoyed it.  I liked Dogma when I first saw it, but I don't think it holds up that well on repeated viewings.  It's way too talky, and like you say, could have used more visually interesting direction.

Mallrats takes a few viewings.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 17, 2003, 09:21:28 PM
I am attempting to not let this thread die like SHAFTR Says... did.

1.)  My Life to Live
2.)  Shadows
3.)  From Dusk Til Dawn
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Banky on November 17, 2003, 10:14:49 PM
i think all of KS movies are brilliant minus J&SBSB
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Kev Hoffman on November 17, 2003, 11:11:17 PM
Quote from: Bankyi think all of KS movies are brilliant minus J&SBSB

I wouldn't go as far as saying they're brilliant.  They're just sporadic flashes of brilliance, mixed in a web of disapointing elements.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Banky on November 17, 2003, 11:20:38 PM
Quote from: Kev Hoffmanmixed in a web of disapointing elements.

elaborate
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Kev Hoffman on November 17, 2003, 11:36:53 PM
Quote from: Banky
Quote from: Kev Hoffmanmixed in a web of disapointing elements.

elaborate

I can't say much that hasn't been spoken already.  But I'll fill in some things off the top of my head that strike me as disapointing:

Kevin's lack of visual style (which works in some instances, Chasing Amy namely, and doesn't in others, like Mallrats and Dogma)

Mallrats is a fine example of my theory.  Though it sparkles with incredible wit, it falls flat in any sort of development.  The story goes absolutely nowhere I haven't seen a thousand times before.

Dogma upon repeated viewings is filled with plot holes, and sub-par dialogue that leaves me just not caring about the movie.   I don't care what anyone says, but the dialogue in Dogma sounds like forced out garbage.

Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Sanjuro on November 18, 2003, 06:10:41 AM
1. Pierrot le fou VS. Band of Outsiders
2. Discreet Charm of the Borgousie(Sp)
3. Heaven and Earth
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 22, 2003, 09:13:37 PM
I apologize for not commenting on the films asked any sooner, but I've been restricted on time drastically as of late. I own My Life to Live and was planning to rewatch it again for a planned essay I am writing, so I'll get to that. That's the only film from Shaftr's list I've even see. From Sanjuro, I've seen Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie and Band Of Outsiders. I can rent Heaven and Earth, so maybe I'll do that. Expect something next week and don't feel obliged at all to keep this thread going. I can keep discussions going in other threads. I've just been busy as hell lately.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 25, 2003, 08:55:02 PM
When I first saw My Life to Live, I thought I missed something and wasn't able to appreciate the quality film everyone else talked about. I saw it recently again and realized there was little to appreciate. The film is quite bad.

Every single scene rolls out in emptiness. In the matter of little happening, vast amount of drama is talked about or symbolized, but no strength in the story to suggest any of that at all. The point of the story is that Karina is forced into prostitution because she faces poverty and while being a prostitute, is tragically killed because of the corruption of others around her. Its just the film is so thin in observation and so persistent in just following Karina through every banality that logic of drama obviously comes up: How was her situation so bad that she had to go into prostitution full time? It said she had to pay someone back 2000 francs, but made that and more on her first job, so why continue if she already has a job? What was the major problem between the dueling gangs that it led to her being shot because of it? In defense, every single answer will likely be a simple one, because there is little elaborate on with the story. It is almost non existent even though trying to be tragic.

Then there is the filmmaking, they key to everyone's admiration for this film. If the filmmaking is suppose to be large in symbolism because it is so purposely unconvential and positioned in each scene for a purpose, but what symbolism can it really bring when the drama is nearly non existent? The film is actually quite lame because it tries to be dramatic without anything to really help it. In analyzing the first scene with the quarrel between the lovers and the camera to each other's back in different shots, I guessed two reasons for such a motive: Could their backs to the camera symbolize their backs to each other? Sometimes,  when people talk to each other in a film, they sometimes speak at the camera which is invisible to them. Also, could Godard be forcing us to observe this situation without the benefit of just judging from the prettiness or ugliness of face and take the words for their words? Who knows. Its talk for the Godard elite.

Continuing with Godard, I must say Band Of Outsiders is the enjoyable film by him I've seen. Its problems aren't as present in this film as his others. For most of the film, a delicate realism of two petty criminals influence over a school girl is exciting to watch and interesting because it is so natural and not connected to any strings. Moments like the impromptu dance and 1 minute of silence only benefits to this nice air. For all of this, the film is nicely without pretension. Then to speak on the intrusion, Godard the critic appears and parts of the movie is narrated like a crime story sizing up up everyone but the point is, with this naturalism, these criminals aren't much for criminals and their sloppiness of robbing a house goes against expectations of the genre because they are real people. Well, just showing them as real people already does that without the narration being needed. The narration of the film is the worst part because it talks about the feelings of each character! The best part of the movie is that you don't really know how Karina is feeling toward these men she knows are betraying her but also fascinating her. There's a nice mystery in that. But, most of the film is quite engaging and exciting and almost feels like a good counterpoint to a film like Knife in the Water in simplicity, but Godard interferes in the end.

I'll do Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoise very soon. Just wanted to make a Godard post. Haven't seen the other ones mentioned, sadly. I'm just glad to have time to reply to this thread.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: godardian on November 25, 2003, 09:49:29 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetI guessed two reasons for such a motive: Could their backs to the camera symbolize their backs to each other? Sometimes,  when people talk to each other in a film, they sometimes speak at the camera which is invisible to them. Also, could Godard be forcing us to observe this situation without the benefit of just judging from the prettiness or ugliness of face and take the words for their words? Who knows. Its talk for the Godard elite.


Well, if that's not a convenient brushing-off, sidestepping the very relevant question of to exactly what extent common issues of "plot" and "character" could apply to Godard's work, I don't know what is!

I think your approach to Godard is completely off the mark, GT. Godard was never out to tell a story that made dramatic sense, not ever. You can blame him for this and disparage him for it and completely disagree with him, but that's the standard he set. His standard is to "film criticism," or "the film as film criticism." Each film becomes about something quite other than the "story." His films have little regard for story, that's true, but infinite regard for how the story is told. And that's not self-indulgent Tarantino-ness, either; he is very serious about uncovering the conventional mechanisms of narrative and revealing to the audience something very important about its relationship to what's on screen.

Now, you can argue with Godard's standards and goals and artistic purposes all you want; in fact, at a certain point I do that, as well. But by its own standards for its own professed intent, My Life to Live is probably the best, most pure example of what Godard does and is "about." It is not only a successful film on its own terms; it is also one of the few really unique achievements in cinema history.

I think what you say about My Life to Live reveals expectations of film as a medium that a) were very well understood by Godard and b) entirely rejected by him. Now, you have every right to hold your own expectations of a film, but from your attack on this film above, it seems to me you were looking for anything but what was actually there- as if you were unable to see the new way Godard proposed to go about things because you insist upon the old way. It doesn't seem there was much effort on your part to understand or see why he was doing what he was doing, just that he wasn't doing it the way a conventional film is expected to.

Susan Sontag says it better than I ever could hope to (of course!) in her essay devoted to the film. Some quotations:

"'The chicken has an inside and an outside,' wrote the little girl. 'Remove the outside and you find the inside. Remove the inside, and you find the soul.'

The story of the chicken is the first of many 'texts' in the film which establish what Godard wants to say. For the story of the chicken, of course, is the story of Nana. In
My Life to Live, we witness the stripping down of Nana. The film opens with Nana having divested herself of her outside: her old identity. Her new identity, within a few episodes, is  to be that of a prostitute. But Godard's interest is in neither the sociology nor the psychology of prostitution. He takes up prostitution as the most radical metaphor for the separating out of the elements of a life."

...and then at the end of the essay (it really is required reading for film lovers, in my opinion):

"My Life to Live seems to me to be a perfect film. That is, it sets out to do something that is both noble and intricate, and wholly succeeds in doing it. Godard is perhaps the only director today who is interested in 'philosophical films' and possesses an intelligence and discretion equal to the task. Godard is the first director fully to grasp the fact that, in order to deal seriously with ideas, one must create a new film language for expressinng them- if the ideas are to have any suppleness and complexity."
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: godardian on November 25, 2003, 09:57:03 PM
P.S. - In addition to the more complex and significant points about the film above, I personally find a great, vigorous beauty not just in the way the film was shot, but in its structure through editing. If there can be such a thing as sheer grace through disjunction, this film has it.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: aclockworkjj on November 25, 2003, 10:08:59 PM
How about Quills?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 25, 2003, 10:14:19 PM
Quote from: godardian
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetI guessed two reasons for such a motive: Could their backs to the camera symbolize their backs to each other? Sometimes,  when people talk to each other in a film, they sometimes speak at the camera which is invisible to them. Also, could Godard be forcing us to observe this situation without the benefit of just judging from the prettiness or ugliness of face and take the words for their words? Who knows. Its talk for the Godard elite.


Well, if that's not a convenient brushing-off, sidestepping the very relevant question of to exactly what extent common issues of "plot" and "character" could apply to Godard's work, I don't know what is!

I think your approach to Godard is completely off the mark, GT. Godard was never out to tell a story that made dramatic sense, not ever. You can blame him for this and disparage him for it and completely disagree with him, but that's the standard he set. His standard is to "film criticism," or "the film as film criticism." Each film becomes about something quite other than the "story." His films have little regard for story, that's true, but infinite regard for how the story is told. And that's not self-indulgent Tarantino-ness, either; he is very serious about uncovering the conventional mechanisms of narrative and revealing to the audience something very important about its relationship to what's on screen.

Now, you can argue with Godard's standards and goals and artistic purposes all you want; in fact, at a certain point I do that, as well. But by its own standards for its own professed intent, My Life to Live is probably the best, most pure example of what Godard does and is "about." It is not only a successful film on its own terms; it is also one of the few really unique achievements in cinema history.

I think what you say about My Life to Live reveals expectations of film as a medium that a) were very well understood by Godard and b) entirely rejected by him. Now, you have every right to hold your own expectations of a film, but from your attack on this film above, it seems to me you were looking for anything but what was actually there- as if you were unable to see the new way Godard proposed to go about things because you insist upon the old way. It doesn't seem there was much effort on your part to understand or see why he was doing what he was doing, just that he wasn't doing it the way a conventional film is expected to.

Susan Sontag says it better than I ever could hope to (of course!) in her essay devoted to the film. Some quotations:

"'The chicken has an inside and an outside,' wrote the little girl. 'Remove the outside and you find the inside. Remove the inside, and you find the soul.'

The story of the chicken is the first of many 'texts' in the film which establish what Godard wants to say. For the story of the chicken, of course, is the story of Nana. In
My Life to Live, we witness the stripping down of Nana. The film opens with Nana having divested herself of her outside: her old identity. Her new identity, within a few episodes, is  to be that of a prostitute. But Godard's interest is in neither the sociology nor the psychology of prostitution. He takes up prostitution as the most radical metaphor for the separating out of the elements of a life."

...and then at the end of the essay (it really is required reading for film lovers, in my opinion):

"My Life to Live seems to me to be a perfect film. That is, it sets out to do something that is both noble and intricate, and wholly succeeds in doing it. Godard is perhaps the only director today who is interested in 'philosophical films' and possesses an intelligence and discretion equal to the task. Godard is the first director fully to grasp the fact that, in order to deal seriously with ideas, one must create a new film language for expressinng them- if the ideas are to have any suppleness and complexity."

I have to agree with Godardian on this one.  An interesting way to look at My Life to Live is 12 different ways to film a conversation.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 25, 2003, 10:24:22 PM
Don't count me out yet. I'm readying a reply for tomorrow. I knew this would come.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Sanjuro on November 26, 2003, 08:25:07 AM
i have to agree with godardian very much on this.  but im interested in what your reply is going to be
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 26, 2003, 09:48:16 AM
Quote from: godardianI think your approach to Godard is completely off the mark, GT. Godard was never out to tell a story that made dramatic sense, not ever.

I'm not asking him to. Its just the art of Godard, as you have identified, I really disbelieve in entirely and I think his art is the nice excuse to disqualify a quite weak story, conventional or unconvential. I was hoping to get you to reply because you ignored my comments on Breathless, so I figured My Life To Live would do that.  And as you can quote Susan Sontag, so can I:

"...Godard proposes a new conception of point of view, by staking out the possibility of making films in the first person. By this, I don't mean simply that his films are subjectiveor personal...[He] has built up a narrative presence, that of the film-maker, who is the central structural element in the cinematic narrative. The first-person film-maker isn't an actual character...He is the person responsible for the film who yet stands outside it beset by more complex, fluctuating concerns than any single film can represent or incarcanate...What he seeks is to conflate the traditional polarities of spontaneous mobilethinking and the finished work, of the casual jotting and the fully premeditated statement."

By this measure, Godard's art is that he wants to stop his films from being fixed photographic record, but something happening at the moment we see it, a creation of spontaniety in which Godard is responding to everything around the film and everything in himself at the moment. The idea would serve as endless interpretation to the filmmaking and anything else. But, no film really can be spontaneous at all. The stages from photography to actual conception are too large and great to achieve that. Stanley Kauffman, the critic, when he always reviewed Godard film's, understood this and kept saying that the Divine Comedy, too, was made in similiar terms with similiar expectations but that the quality of writing is what made it able to work, even if still impossible to achieve in concept. Doing this on terms of writing and story that is weak reveal absolutely nothing because if the filmmaking stands on nothing to really reveal at all. To say he is not interested in the film but everything oustide of it is to excuse the poverty of the material and allow him to do almost anything.

Quote from: godardianSusan Sontag says it better than I ever could hope to (of course!) in her essay devoted to the film. Some quotations:

"'The chicken has an inside and an outside,' wrote the little girl. 'Remove the outside and you find the inside. Remove the inside, and you find the soul.'

The story of the chicken is the first of many 'texts' in the film which establish what Godard wants to say. For the story of the chicken, of course, is the story of Nana. In
My Life to Live, we witness the stripping down of Nana. The film opens with Nana having divested herself of her outside: her old identity. Her new identity, within a few episodes, is  to be that of a prostitute. But Godard's interest is in neither the sociology nor the psychology of prostitution. He takes up prostitution as the most radical metaphor for the separating out of the elements of a life."

OK, the reasoning that excuses the lack of story between her going from debt to prostitution is there, but where do the essay excuse a story I think is written at the level of high school kids? None of the scenes are written well, they are dull in the most obvious sense and go from attention to every detail of a handwritten letter to a sophmoric philosophical discussion. Godard's art could be seen as one trying to be the most radical it can be but that in itself isn't an esthetics in which to judge on its own merits. Godard still must prescribe himself to creating things like a well written story, interesting characters and scenario. Is this also saying he has to go Hollywood? No!

Quote from: godardian...and then at the end of the essay (it really is required reading for film lovers, in my opinion):

"My Life to Live seems to me to be a perfect film. That is, it sets out to do something that is both noble and intricate, and wholly succeeds in doing it. Godard is perhaps the only director today who is interested in 'philosophical films' and possesses an intelligence and discretion equal to the task. Godard is the first director fully to grasp the fact that, in order to deal seriously with ideas, one must create a new film language for expressinng them- if the ideas are to have any suppleness and complexity."

I'll take Michelangelo Antonioni over Godard anyday in providing a new film language that can serve as operating for higher ideas.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SoNowThen on November 26, 2003, 10:52:11 AM
I don't wanna read all this that came before, but the reason Godard shot the opening scene of My Life To Live facing the back off Anna Karina was so that you would be forced to listen to what they were saying, rather than watching them.

Godard had just discovered direct sound with A Woman Is A Woman, and went nuts on it in this film.



If you even think for a second that anybody else influenced modern filmmaking more than Godard, you're wrong GT.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SoNowThen on November 26, 2003, 11:00:27 AM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetWhen I first saw My Life to Live, I thought I missed something and wasn't able to appreciate the quality film everyone else talked about. I saw it recently again and realized there was little to appreciate. The film is quite bad.

Every single scene rolls out in emptiness. In the matter of little happening, vast amount of drama is talked about or symbolized, but no strength in the story to suggest any of that at all. The point of the story is that Karina is forced into prostitution because she faces poverty and while being a prostitute, is tragically killed because of the corruption of others around her. Its just the film is so thin in observation and so persistent in just following Karina through every banality that logic of drama obviously comes up: How was her situation so bad that she had to go into prostitution full time? It said she had to pay someone back 2000 francs, but made that and more on her first job, so why continue if she already has a job? What was the major problem between the dueling gangs that it led to her being shot because of it? In defense, every single answer will likely be a simple one, because there is little elaborate on with the story. It is almost non existent even though trying to be tragic.

Then there is the filmmaking, they key to everyone's admiration for this film. If the filmmaking is suppose to be large in symbolism because it is so purposely unconvential and positioned in each scene for a purpose, but what symbolism can it really bring when the drama is nearly non existent? The film is actually quite lame because it tries to be dramatic without anything to really help it. In analyzing the first scene with the quarrel between the lovers and the camera to each other's back in different shots, I guessed two reasons for such a motive: Could their backs to the camera symbolize their backs to each other? Sometimes,  when people talk to each other in a film, they sometimes speak at the camera which is invisible to them. Also, could Godard be forcing us to observe this situation without the benefit of just judging from the prettiness or ugliness of face and take the words for their words? Who knows. Its talk for the Godard elite.

Continuing with Godard, I must say Band Of Outsiders is the enjoyable film by him I've seen. Its problems aren't as present in this film as his others. For most of the film, a delicate realism of two petty criminals influence over a school girl is exciting to watch and interesting because it is so natural and not connected to any strings. Moments like the impromptu dance and 1 minute of silence only benefits to this nice air. For all of this, the film is nicely without pretension. Then to speak on the intrusion, Godard the critic appears and parts of the movie is narrated like a crime story sizing up up everyone but the point is, with this naturalism, these criminals aren't much for criminals and their sloppiness of robbing a house goes against expectations of the genre because they are real people. Well, just showing them as real people already does that without the narration being needed. The narration of the film is the worst part because it talks about the feelings of each character! The best part of the movie is that you don't really know how Karina is feeling toward these men she knows are betraying her but also fascinating her. There's a nice mystery in that. But, most of the film is quite engaging and exciting and almost feels like a good counterpoint to a film like Knife in the Water in simplicity, but Godard interferes in the end.

I'll do Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoise very soon. Just wanted to make a Godard post. Haven't seen the other ones mentioned, sadly. I'm just glad to have time to reply to this thread.

Okay, firstly: the camera work is less symbolic than it is purely rhythmic. Godard approached shooting this picture (with the accompanying score) from a very mathematical point of view. The visuals are all about dialetics, and the content and conversations are more semiotics.

Secondly, Godard is not making the simple (and stupid) statement that Karina was forced into prostitution. He just present the banal reality of this life, and one possible tangent of it in the form of this girl. Hence, the reading of all the health stats at the 3/4 mark, which Godard did himself in VO, taking it straight from a city article about prostitute stats.

In actuality, this film is more about Godard and his relationship with his new wife Anna, and their partnership and filmmaking. The scene with Brice Pairn is the heart of the film, but the following scene with the oval portrait is the key to the central idea of the film. In the very back layers, this movie is a shrewd comment on Godard himself making movies, and using people's images (specifically Anna Karina) to tell a story, and whether or not this affects these people.

You force this shitty 2-d point on the film, GT. That's your hang up, not Godard's.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: molly on November 26, 2003, 12:16:32 PM
question: should I read that 50 page long thread about Kill Bill before I see it, or not?
I'm not being sarcastic
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pubrick on November 26, 2003, 12:31:28 PM
Quote from: mollyquestion: should I read that 50 page long thread about Kill Bill before I see it, or not?
I'm not being sarcastic
no.

unless u want to spoil the movie.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: modage on November 26, 2003, 04:06:26 PM
GT, sometimes when you are reviewing something or debating, it feels like i'm talking to a textbook or something.  like, godardian will speak intelligently about movies and tie in the occasional quote from a critic, but in a way where i am still interested and i feel like he knows what he's talking about.  but sometimes when you start bashing a movie with a bunch of film criticism nonsense, it doesnt feel like theres a real person behind the review but rather some textbook on film theory and criticism.  so, is it that you are so smart that your reviews go over my head, or that you are so boring that i stop caring about your reasons for disliking things?  but i guess my real question is: are you human?  

i think my sinking suspicion at this point is that you are some construct of the matrix and are just here to keep everybody confused.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pedro on November 26, 2003, 06:11:17 PM
i think GT is super smart, but he could make the same points in a few sentences instead of a few pages.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on November 26, 2003, 06:27:16 PM
GT ..i see that your thread has moved from the "tom-foolery" idle chatter forum to the proper everything else cinema"... :yabbse-thumbup:

and i would like to ask you of your opinion on the film....TRUE ROMANCE.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 26, 2003, 07:08:54 PM
GT,

I respect your opinion on this site but I think that sometimes you'd make a better literary or theatrical critic.  Often you ignore the importance of the actual filmmaking.  Godard is all about filmmaking and his stories, plot, etc is not important.  Godard's films are about an exercise in style.  I don't expect many of us to be moved that much by the story in My Life to Live or any of his other films.  The filmmaking is what is important.  My Life to Live, to me, is the best example of what someone can do in a film.  It has a little bit of everything and as I said before is an example of how to film a conversation 12 different ways.  There are so many interesting elements of My Life to Live that are there beyond the story of the film.  The social critique of prostitution (done in VO instruction manual style).  The relationship between Karina/Godard (the Poe story being told in Voice Over by Godard hilmself about a man who paints a portrait of his wife and takes all the life out of her).

I know how much you enjoy story and narrative construction, but when watching Godard you need to throw that out and just watch the film's aesthetics and style.  I'm not asking you to praise nor love Godard, just watch his films in a different way.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 26, 2003, 07:26:04 PM
Quote from: Pedro el Fascolomisi think GT is super smart, but he could make the same points in a few sentences instead of a few pages.

Thanks. I could definitely get better at my writing, but I think I've vastly improved as well. I could make the same points in a few sentences, yes, but I am explaining why I think that point. I don't just like saying something without backing it up and I think most of the time I am writing large to explain something instead of repeating a point over and over again. Maybe.

Quote from: themodernage02so, is it that you are so smart that your reviews go over my head, or that you are so boring that i stop caring about your reasons for disliking things?

Neither. 1.) I'm quite simple in english. Its just I have very little personality when talking and 2.) you do still care because just yesterday, you argued what I said on horror films and Kill Bill.  

Quote from: themodernage02but i guess my real question is: are you human?

Of course not. That's your problem with me. You have no way to relate me at all. I'm just a series of differing opinions to you.

Quote from: NEON MERCURYand i would like to ask you of your opinion on the film....TRUE ROMANCE.

Didn't like it. The film was trenched in seriousness like a drama, but filled with so much unrealitistic gun play and killing that I felt that part of the movie was being too opportunistic for the good of the story. The story didn't have to lose violence, but try to understand it better.

Sadly, JJ, I missed Quills. I'll get to what SoNowThen said tomorrow. Hopefully Bunuel and Discreet as well.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: aclockworkjj on November 26, 2003, 07:28:39 PM
GT IS A YOOPER!!!!!!!!...hahaha, i love it!  Get a deer yet?  my old man pulled in a 10-pointer (nuttin' great, but enough for sum venison jerky...mmmm).
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 26, 2003, 08:10:44 PM
Quote from: SHAFTRGT,

I respect your opinion on this site but I think that sometimes you'd make a better literary or theatrical critic.  Often you ignore the importance of the actual filmmaking.  Godard is all about filmmaking and his stories, plot, etc is not important.  Godard's films are about an exercise in style.  I don't expect many of us to be moved that much by the story in My Life to Live or any of his other films.  The filmmaking is what is important.  My Life to Live, to me, is the best example of what someone can do in a film.  It has a little bit of everything and as I said before is an example of how to film a conversation 12 different ways.  There are so many interesting elements of My Life to Live that are there beyond the story of the film.  The social critique of prostitution (done in VO instruction manual style).  The relationship between Karina/Godard (the Poe story being told in Voice Over by Godard hilmself about a man who paints a portrait of his wife and takes all the life out of her).

I know how much you enjoy story and narrative construction, but when watching Godard you need to throw that out and just watch the film's aesthetics and style.  I'm not asking you to praise nor love Godard, just watch his films in a different way.

Fair argument, but with all due respect, I find that kinda funny. A few days ago, I was being criticized in one very large post for being too welcome to filmmaking over narrative and story. It was about City of God and my great praise of it when it first came out and how someone only saw it as an endless series of filmmaking tricks.

I'm fine with the idea of Godard operating as filmmaker. I just don't believe there is much quality in the filmmaking of his I've seen with the exception of Breathless. I think the high praise given to aesthetic's in being above other films are rationalizations for his shortcomings. I found the filmmaking in My Life to live not very exciting nor insightful nor really organic. I think these are filmmaking tricks. The fact that Godard revolts against convention of story does not mean in effect he has created an esthetics. You mention some of the ideas in which the film is to convey, but they are ideas conveyed in just one or two scenes. They like a dabs of paints thrown on a work that really is designated with stand still presence of Anna Karina than anything else. She wanders and idles through the entire film that  ideas and such are thrown but to no avvail because everything about her situation lacks motivation or spirit to really be anything involving or moving.

And you know what, some people have looked at this film as a great joy to watch because of its story. Roger Ebert, in his review of the movie for his Great Movies series, mentioned of the great charm and intrigue that Anna Karina's character had. People mention the physical similarity of Karina had in this film to one of my favorite people in all the movies, the silent actress Louise Brooks, but I'm glad none of them have gone so far to say they share the same quality of spirit and presence.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 26, 2003, 08:17:31 PM
Quote from: aclockworkjjGT IS A YOOPER!!!!!!!!...hahaha, i love it!  Get a deer yet?  my old man pulled in a 10-pointer (nuttin' great, but enough for sum venison jerky...mmmm).

Naw. Haven't really had a chance. Too busy with work. Its been this deal for the last couple years. But don't worry, I make up by taking one out with my car. Nothing like protecting the environment.

pssstt....don't identify me as a "yooper". Most people don't know what that means and if they did know and also knew the stereotypes, it'd be quite bad.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Sanjuro on November 27, 2003, 01:43:01 AM
my 2 cents:

i think with godard its just a matter of preference.  for him, some things are just more important than other things. the way he makes a movie is because he think this is what makes it nice, this is what he thinks is beautiful, and so he shows it in that particular way.  i totally connect with him and get giddy with his films but i can understand why other people wouldnt.

spoilers
i love how in my life to live after his story is told he just BLAM kills of the main character just like that.  now some may say this is not that creative, but for a movie like my life to live this is the perfect way to end it.  its like saying the story has ended, we have no use of the anna karina anymore so why not just plain and simply without much drama just end it.  
end of spolers

godards films have these certain charm and it is in this charm where you find its drama, not in the story.  so i guess if you cant connect with this, it is impossible to like godard. he is just the type that is not for everyone.  

godards films are everything and nothing all at once.  he never set out to make a masterpiece. still i really believe he is one of the greatest that ever lived.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 27, 2003, 11:56:32 AM
Quote from: Sanjuromy 2 cents:

spoilers
i love how in my life to live after his story is told he just BLAM kills of the main character just like that.  now some may say this is not that creative, but for a movie like my life to live this is the perfect way to end it.  its like saying the story has ended, we have no use of the anna karina anymore so why not just plain and simply without much drama just end it.  
end of spolers

.

I always looked at his endings like that, atleast in his earlier films, as a comment on Hollywood's all or nothing ending.  Either the main character dies or loves at the end, depending on their role (good or bad) in a Hollywood filmm, I think that Godard likes playing with that convention.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SoNowThen on November 27, 2003, 12:03:46 PM
GT you still haven't replied to what I said yet.
And no Kaufmann quotes.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 27, 2003, 12:23:21 PM
Quote from: SoNowThenGT you still haven't replied to what I said yet.
And no Kaufmann quotes.

I haven't replied yet because I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and am going to rewatch it. I haven't rewatched it yet because it is a holiday and I am in the middle of family business. I'm going to try to watch it again later tonight.

And why no Kauffmann quotes, huh? You disagree with him as you do with me so why can't I use him? You seemed to have disliked him ever since you saw him slam Mean Streets, The Shining and Roma. I haven't seen Roma nor read any of his reviews for those films, but I don't like Mean Streets nor The Shining and have been vocal about it. He has very interesting things to say but you don't even give him a chance. Are you going to give me the ignorant button when you are giving me the ignorant label of not understanding Godard's methods? I think I've said some valid criticisms of Godard in my last three posts on him, but I seem to be hitting the wall to what all fans of his say, as Susan Sontag nicely puts it, "What his detractor's don't grasp, of course, is that Godard doesn't want to do for what they reproach him for not doing." In my mind, thats just nice wording to excuse Godard of many of his shortcomings, but hopefully, with watching the film again, I can better adjust the opinion to fit the art of Godard.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SoNowThen on November 27, 2003, 12:28:50 PM
Don't get pissy. I just want your words. I didn't quote anybody for you, so I just don't want you to take that route out on me.

Funnily enough, I was gonna watch this again last night after it came up on this thread.

I sincerely hope you can find something to enjoy in it, as it is (I've stated before) my 3rd fav film of all time.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on November 27, 2003, 12:57:51 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: aclockworkjjGT IS A YOOPER!!!!!!!!...hahaha, i love it!  Get a deer yet?  my old man pulled in a 10-pointer (nuttin' great, but enough for sum venison jerky...mmmm).

Naw. Haven't really had a chance. Too busy with work. Its been this deal for the last couple years. But don't worry, I make up by taking one out with my car. Nothing like protecting the environment.

pssstt....don't identify me as a "yooper". Most people don't know what that means and if they did know and also knew the stereotypes, it'd be quite bad.

This is my first thanksgiving no in NW Wisconsin, for various reasons.  I'm spending it in Chicago.  It feels strange without all the blaze orange.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Sanjuro on November 28, 2003, 12:27:20 PM
Quote from: SoNowThenI sincerely hope you can find something to enjoy in it, as it is (I've stated before) my 3rd fav film of all time.

hey would this happen to be your fav godard then?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: foray on November 28, 2003, 10:26:57 PM
GT, I am madly in love with you. Will you marry my yellow moldy ass?


yarof
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 29, 2003, 10:16:14 AM
SoNowThen, sorry I couldn't respond earlier like I promised. Family business took up more time than expected on thanksgiving and I was busy all day yesterday. Soon, my friend, soon. P.S. I can't promise no quotes, but I'll do my best.

Quote from: forayGT, I am madly in love with you. Will you marry my yellow moldy ass?

I can't marry anyone who really doesn't believe in the institution of marriage or finds it interesting enough to experiment with it the way you are now. And besides, I'm a hellraiser to you. Nice guys are in line for your willing hand. Not I.

P.S. nice to see you finally surface on this board. Try to stick around.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pubrick on November 29, 2003, 10:23:57 AM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetI can't marry anyone who really doesn't believe in the institution of marriage or finds it interesting enough to experiment with it the way you are now. And besides, I'm a hellraiser to you. Nice guys are in line for your willing hand. Not I.

P.S. nice to see you finally surface on this board. Try to stick around.
so GT, introduce us to ur old buddy.. is she a hot chick?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 29, 2003, 10:45:15 AM
Quote from: Pso GT, introduce us to ur old buddy.. is she a hot chick?

Hah, an old forum mate who use to chat movies with me. Is she a hot chick? Her words can be sexy, indeed, but I'm guessing she's the kind of girl that would slam you in a second for approaching her that way, P.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: MacGuffin on December 10, 2003, 11:05:36 AM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetPeople mention the physical similarity of Karina had in this film to one of my favorite people in all the movies, the silent actress Louise Brooks, but I'm glad none of them have gone so far to say they share the same quality of spirit and presence.

How do you feel about this bit of news?:

Neve Campbell Set to Play Louise Brooks
Source: The Hollywood Reporter

Neve Campbell will play the silent-film star-turned-elusive actress Louise Brooks. She has purchased Peter Nickowitz and Bill Oliver's screenplay Lulu as a starring vehicle for herself.

The script tells the life story of Brooks, who was born in 1906 in Kansas. She went on to star in more than two dozen films, most notably Pandora's Box, A Girl in Every Port and Beggars of Life. Known for her strong-willed ways - and her trendsetting bobbed hair - Brooks then moved to Germany, where she starred in several German productions. It was in Europe that she became a recluse, hiding away from the public eye until she was rediscovered in her later years after she was given a typewriter that she used to write a series of essays about her life.

The beginning of Campbell's project finds Brooks in her solitude and then traces back the story of her life. No director or finacier is on board the film yet.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on December 10, 2003, 11:27:59 AM
Quote from: MacGuffin

How do you feel about this bit of news?:

Neve Campbell Set to Play Louise Brooks
Source: The Hollywood Reporter

OOOOOOOHHHHHHHHH, that is huge for me. Really. You could say I am quite excited by the possibility of getting a glimpse of Louise Brooks recreated and refelt in a minor way, but I'm really going to be tough on this film cause the subject is so near and dear to me. With being a historian for the subject, I also almost feel the impossibility of this succeeding. Louise Brooks was so vibrant she can be compared to Muhammad Ali. As much as Smith fit the look of Ali, he couldn't capture his spirit. He could just recite his lines. Neve Campbell looks similiar to Brooks, but I feel she is doomed. Gracias, Mac!
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ©brad on December 10, 2003, 01:31:28 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: MacGuffin

How do you feel about this bit of news?:

Neve Campbell Set to Play Louise Brooks
Source: The Hollywood Reporter

OOOOOOOHHHHHHHHH, that is huge for me. Really. You could say I am quite excited by the possibility of getting a glimpse of Louise Brooks recreated and refelt in a minor way, but I'm really going to be tough on this film cause the subject is so near and dear to me. With being a historian for the subject, I also almost feel the impossibility of this succeeding. Louise Brooks was so vibrant she can be compared to Muhammad Ali. As much as Smith fit the look of Ali, he couldn't capture his spirit. He could just recite his lines. Neve Campbell looks similiar to Brooks, but I feel she is doomed. Gracias, Mac!

i think this is the most excited i have ever seen gt.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on January 17, 2004, 08:43:39 PM
NEON et al ask....will you decide to stay here  and not leave...?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on January 28, 2004, 09:46:05 AM
Quote from: NEON MERCURYNEON et al ask....will you decide to stay here  and not leave...?

For the time being, I am here. I wasn't banned like I asked to be and the week off proved helpful for me to come back and realize the good things on this site. Even with all the dumb shit that goes on here, its a decent working environment to keep my mind active.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ono on January 28, 2004, 10:49:56 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet...its a decent working environment to keep my mind active.
Not quite the way I view Xixax, but to each his own.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on January 28, 2004, 05:26:39 PM
Quote from: Onomatopoeia
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet...its a decent working environment to keep my mind active.
Not quite the way I view Xixax, but to each his own.

I think of it more as a crossroads to share Goatse.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on April 13, 2004, 08:02:10 PM
GT.......what up?!!!  ......long time........

its time to bring this thread back to life......

1.) What you think about jackie brown?
2.)what is the most annoying/overrated actress
3.)of all the films that are currently in pre/post-production, what are you most eagerly awaiting?
4.) what you thionk about 12 monkeys
5.) what you think about risky business
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 15, 2004, 11:29:15 AM
Quote from: N the E digital O rape N[1.) What you think about jackie brown?

For me, it may be Tarantino's worst film. Its the only one to me that seems to attempt some kind of plot, but yet it lingers the way Tarantino does with his other films in the manner of style exploration. So the film really lacks to find a successful vision because when I look at the film in context of plot, I see a hollow film too obcessed with its own style and when I look at as just a stylized film, I see a film that just in scope and reward is still an inch of what Pulp Fiction brought. Some follow up. Pulp Fiction was Resevoir Dogs rewarded and where Jackie Brown could have been a growing period for Tarantino in him finally dealing with a plot, its a so so committment on his part. Too many scenes run through the banal, scenes that pick up on the habits and life of these characters that really don't allow for Tarantino to get the higher achievement. Its a reimagination of the black exploitation done with maturity and Tarantino, because he still has such a love for the genre, decides to only really mature it somewhat.


Quote from: N the E digital O rape N[2.)what is the most annoying/overrated actress

Annoying is hands down Rennee Zelwegger. She's bearable in Down With Love, Jerry Maguire and Nurse Betty, but her affair with the serious work is tainted by her desperation to go all out with the kind of performance she feels will best win her an academy award. It results in her doing over emotional performances with the handicap that everytime she tries to speak emotionally, she is fucking annoying. She can not go a sentence without me wanting to deconstruct her jaw with my fist. Its odd, but she enrages me. Prolly because under that smirk, I see a self advertising machine trying to please everyone around her. Prolly because with every line she says  there is a desperate attempt to sound intelligent when I hear a ridiculously dumb voice that is no better than any other average person. She's the kind of girl you'd shoot in the foot and she'd scream because it made her look bad in front of everyone else.

Overrated is Nicole Kidman. She's fine for the average role and has done good work in Eyes Wide Shut, but her sudden aim for better work since then has been marred by an acting approach I think greatly limits her from really acting. She never seems to lose herself in a role, to allow herself to be embarassed the way one of her characters might. She was still Hollywood royality in Cold Mountain because she never abandoned her expensive make up in the film, kept a royal stature instead of losing it for a role of complexity and defeat. Its like the old Hollywood acting, where an actor always seemed to carry their desired Hollywood self image with every role they did, thus not allowing themselves to really encompass the character.


Quote from: N the E digital O rape N[3.)of all the films that are currently in pre/post-production, what are you most eagerly awaiting?

Hands down, Alexander by Oliver Stone. Sure, I am paying close attention to Sin City and Batman Begins and really loving the potential of both projects but my expectations are so high for Alexander that at minimumal, I think it will be the best film of the year. At my highest expectation, It'll be one of the best films I've seen. Oliver Stone was the premiere filmmaker of the 90s for me; JFK nicely sitting atop my top ten list at #1 and NBK also in the top ten. Neil Labute comes close but his vision has been lost since his first two films. Stone has also lost his great vision with many films, but the word is he is back and on fire with this film. Best thing to look forward to.

Sadly, haven't seen risky business or 12 monkeys.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Sigur Rós on April 15, 2004, 11:57:08 AM
I wanna ask you a bunch of questions amd I want them answered imediately!

Are you a hot chick?
Do you like surfing?
Ever been to Europe?
Why do good things happen to bad people?
Who's your daddy and what does he do?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on April 15, 2004, 12:02:30 PM
You have mentioned that Antonioni is your favorite director of all time, or atleast who you think of as the best director. My question is...why?  What films have you seen of his?  Which is your favorite?  What makes him better than anyone else, in your opinion?

Glad this thread is resurrected.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: cron on April 15, 2004, 12:04:16 PM
Quote from: Sigur Rós
Who's your daddy and what does he do?



hahahahaha terrific.  
STOP WHINING!
I'M A COP, YOU IDIOT!
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: modage on April 15, 2004, 12:28:27 PM
Quote from: cronopio
Quote from: Sigur Rós
Who's your daddy and what does he do?



hahahahaha terrific.  
STOP WHINING!
I'M A COP, YOU IDIOT!
hahahhahaha, i was just re-watching that movie the other day and everytime one of those lines comes up its hilarious.  like, even when he says something like 'yeah'.  because i can place it in one of those.  'you sunuvabitch, how are you?'
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Sigur Rós on April 15, 2004, 01:23:36 PM
Quote from: themodernage02
hahahhahaha, i was just re-watching that movie the other day and everytime one of those lines comes up its hilarious.

Oh come on... STOP WHINING! You kids are soft! You lack discipline! WELL I'VE GOT NEWS FOR YOU, YOU ARE MINE NOW! YOU BELONG TO ME!
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: cron on April 15, 2004, 01:26:59 PM
Quote from: Sigur Rós
Quote from: themodernage02
hahahhahaha, i was just re-watching that movie the other day and everytime one of those lines comes up its hilarious.

Oh come on... STOP WHINING! You kids are soft! You lack discipline! WELL I'VE GOT NEWS FOR YOU, YOU ARE MINE NOW! YOU BELONG TO ME!

YES.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 15, 2004, 07:42:12 PM
Quote from: Sigur RósAre you a hot chick?

Only in drag and if your sexual kink is reserved for the taste presently common in the red light district of Amsterdam.

Quote from: Sigur RósDo you like surfing?

Absolutely. Living 3 blocks literally from stunning Lake Michigan has afforded me a life of privilege in extreme surfing. My friends and I go out to the beach every morning during the summer and spend hours trying to get that one great wave that will be over three feet high. Sometimes we get lucky and catch that wave, sometimes we don't. Either way, there is noting like the bonding of friends trying to surf and just falling flat on their faces.

Quote from: Sigur RósEver been to Europe?

I housed a foreign exchange student from England who insisted the family eat crumpets, drink tea and talk like girls. Does that count?

Quote from: Sigur RósWhy do good things happen to bad people?

Cause most of the good guys are pussies and never take advantage of situations that are usually awarded to bad people.

Quote from: Sigur RósWho's your daddy and what does he do?

A bad ass mother fucker who could give you a lil brother if you really really wanted one.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 16, 2004, 12:04:51 PM
Quote from: SHAFTRYou have mentioned that Antonioni is your favorite director of all time, or atleast who you think of as the best director. My question is...why?  What films have you seen of his?  Which is your favorite?  What makes him better than anyone else, in your opinion?

To begin with, I guess I'd say that him, as a film artist, has paved the way to one of the most unique and breathtaking visions I've ever seen in any film. His films feel so spare, but yet there is so much going on. He's the ultimate visual artist, a man who connects the identity of an image, from all the details within it, to speak volumes of abstract on the story going on. I'm beginning to appreciate the art of Jean Luc Godard, but I feel his art has influenced and been copied in ways. Antonioni's art is still primarily Antonioni's alone. I've seen his early 60s trilogy, including L'Avventura, La Notte and L'Eclise (finally!). Also, his lesser masterpiece, Blow Up and his most recent film, Beyond the Clouds, a film I feel is merely good compared to what he best achieves. I really want to see The Passenger a lot, but from what I've read, it stands as his most accessabile film. Red Desert is really the last major film of his 60s work I've yet to see. I still haven't seen any of his 50s work, but my reading suggests his high point in the 60s. His work after The Passenger and before his stroke in the 80s just is mainly unavailable here. My favorite film of his is still L'Avventura but Red Desert may topple that.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SoNowThen on April 16, 2004, 12:07:01 PM
L'eclisse was a head-fuck and a half, eh, GT?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 16, 2004, 12:10:52 PM
Quote from: SoNowThenL'eclisse was a head-fuck and a half, eh, GT?

Jeez, its a great film. I really wish I didn't see the My Voyage to Italy by Scorsese before it because he really captures the spirit of not only the film (hardly new by comparison to the rest of the trilogy) but the greatness of the ending...the ending really is about nothing happening but also everything and yet so imaginative at the same time in its spareness. Seriously, all i feel i should say about that. I hope everyone can experience that film at one point or another.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SoNowThen on April 16, 2004, 12:13:09 PM
Yeah, I'm waiting for it on Criterion for a round two.

Interestingly enough, after now seeing the trilogy plus Red Desert, I can see why a lot of critics group all four of them together. I can't think of them as just a trilogy anymore, simply because L'Eclisse opens up so many new ideas that it's essential for Antonioni to work them through to a finale in Red Desert. So, I guess what I'm saying is that you gotta see that, asap.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: godardian on April 16, 2004, 02:51:31 PM
Quote from: SoNowThenYeah, I'm waiting for it on Criterion for a round two.

Interestingly enough, after now seeing the trilogy plus Red Desert, I can see why a lot of critics group all four of them together. I can't think of them as just a trilogy anymore, simply because L'Eclisse opens up so many new ideas that it's essential for Antonioni to work them through to a finale in Red Desert. So, I guess what I'm saying is that you gotta see that, asap.

"If you like Red Desert, you'll loooove Safe!" - godardian
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: cron on April 16, 2004, 03:04:11 PM
Quote from: godardian
Quote from: SoNowThenYeah, I'm waiting for it on Criterion for a round two.

Interestingly enough, after now seeing the trilogy plus Red Desert, I can see why a lot of critics group all four of them together. I can't think of them as just a trilogy anymore, simply because L'Eclisse opens up so many new ideas that it's essential for Antonioni to work them through to a finale in Red Desert. So, I guess what I'm saying is that you gotta see that, asap.

"If you like Red Desert, you'll loooove Safe!" - godardian


haha that reads  like a Joel Seigel quote in a DVD .  :wink:
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 16, 2004, 03:50:00 PM
New question (sorry if it's been asked): Fate or Free Will?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: godardian on April 16, 2004, 05:29:10 PM
Quote from: cronopio
Quote from: godardian
Quote from: SoNowThenYeah, I'm waiting for it on Criterion for a round two.

Interestingly enough, after now seeing the trilogy plus Red Desert, I can see why a lot of critics group all four of them together. I can't think of them as just a trilogy anymore, simply because L'Eclisse opens up so many new ideas that it's essential for Antonioni to work them through to a finale in Red Desert. So, I guess what I'm saying is that you gotta see that, asap.

"If you like Red Desert, you'll loooove Safe!" - godardian

haha that reads  like a Joel Seigel quote in a DVD .  :wink:

Yes, completely inappropriate for either film. But so true. I don't know why they didn't put that instead of "Voted Best Film of the Decade by the Village Voice" on the Safe cover.  

To keep this sort of kind of relevant: Have you ever seen Safe, GT? It's one of my Most Important Films, so I'm wondering what you make of it.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 17, 2004, 07:22:37 PM
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanNew question (sorry if it's been asked): Fate or Free Will?

Free will..I see the idea of fate mainly in religious belief that feels whatever happens to you, deserving or not, comfort comes because it is under the control of some God who has a path of importance for you even if you can't see it at the time. Basically, I believe it is a comfort mecanism people use to believe that all the terrible things aren't really that terrible. I believe that unfair shit does happen all the time and sometimes, it clips us. You could say that is a belief of fate, but I see us as the ultimate decider on who we want to be and all. Its just sometimes life will take things away. To believe in fate seems to me to believe that everything that happens would have already happened. Personal will is the decider for most of it. Coincidence and luck the rest.

And Godardian, apologies, I still haven't seen Safe! Its at the top of my list for movies to catch on TV but everytime I see it, its already playing and I'm too late. I'll see it sooner or later and I do expect big things from it.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on April 17, 2004, 07:32:28 PM
GT.


-what is your fav dvd from your collection and why?
-what actress/actor do you forsee will be huge (talent and box office appeal)?
-what film can you watch over and over and never get bored of it?
-your opinions of sean penn
-what is your fav. trilogy in a film series.?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 17, 2004, 08:01:42 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetI see the idea of fate mainly in religious belief that feels whatever happens to you, deserving or not, comfort comes because it is under the control of some God who has a path of importance for you even if you can't see it at the time.
What if this God has something terrifying and tragic planned for you? If it's safety and/or predicatability that's comforting, how could an unseen fate comfort you? Aren't some people more terrified by the idea that they ultimately can't control their life?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pubrick on April 17, 2004, 09:18:21 PM
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanAren't some people more terrified by the idea that they ultimately can't control their life?
what are u saying, isn't a predetermined fate a greater loss of control?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 17, 2004, 10:37:36 PM
Quote from: Pubrick
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanAren't some people more terrified by the idea that they ultimately can't control their life?
what are u saying, isn't a predetermined fate a greater loss of control?
Yes... and I think loss of control is more terrifying to most people than the weight of microscopic responsibility.

Fate in its purest form also scares people because it must be applied universally (you can't say good things are fated and bad things are accidents) and thus they can't assign a rightness or wrongness to it.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 18, 2004, 11:58:21 AM
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetI see the idea of fate mainly in religious belief that feels whatever happens to you, deserving or not, comfort comes because it is under the control of some God who has a path of importance for you even if you can't see it at the time.
What if this God has something terrifying and tragic planned for you? If it's safety and/or predicatability that's comforting, how could an unseen fate comfort you? Aren't some people more terrified by the idea that they ultimately can't control their life?

What I mean is that when something bad happens, it is given the excuse that it was "God's higher plan" and the services of that person dead is for heaven or something. I think that's the biggest comfort of fate that religious uses.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 18, 2004, 12:50:07 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetWhat I mean is that when something bad happens, it is given the excuse that it was "God's higher plan" and the services of that person dead is for heaven or something. I think that's the biggest comfort of fate that religious uses.
That's a bastardization, though, because you can't assign rightness or wrongness to it. Fate is not defeat, it's inevitability.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 21, 2004, 05:58:17 PM
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetWhat I mean is that when something bad happens, it is given the excuse that it was "God's higher plan" and the services of that person dead is for heaven or something. I think that's the biggest comfort of fate that religious uses.
That's a bastardization, though, because you can't assign rightness or wrongness to it. Fate is not defeat, it's inevitability.

Well, my comments are mostly in the context of what people around me say in really looking at the logic of fate. I agree with you in what it means, but I just mainly get these apologists instead and for the record, I disagree with both

Quote from: NEON MERCURYwhat is your fav dvd from your collection and why?

Hand downs, my L'Avventura Criterion dvd. Best pure art film I've seen yet, great commentary that really pin points the art of Antonioni in the best way I've seen a commentary address any filmmaker's art. Great essay by Antonioni himself and Jack Nicholson then reading some of the words of Antonioni and giving personal comments along with it. Really, does it get any better?

Quote from: NEON MERCURY-what actress/actor do you forsee will be huge (talent and box office appeal)?

Don't know her work too well, but Maria Bello seems destined for a good future. She's already an oscar nominee who's made credible indie films with looks to match any Hollywood leading lady so its the combination of looks plus respect that will likely be good for her. Also, an alumi of a very popular TV show so people may remember her there and make it a point to see her films.

Also, Kieran Culkin. Insanely good, he has the good fortune of coming from a talented family but not yet be destroyed by their family troubles. The last film I saw him in was Igby Goes Down and I hope he continues into adulthood of making good films and becoming a bigger star. Actually, with his talent, I expect him to.

Quote from: NEON MERCURY-what film can you watch over and over and never get bored of it?

Bull Durham and Out Of Sight. Two hugly entertaining good movies for me. I guess it can't be because they are good films, but prolly cause I identify so much with the characters played by George Clooney and Kevin Costner. Actually, I am such huge fans of both actors that any decent film they have made, I likely own on dvd.

Quote from: NEON MERCURY-your opinions of sean penn

Insanely talented, but overrated. He's had many great performances, but he's picky with his roles and with every role, seems to be the hope he'll match all his expectations. He doesn't a lot of times. He was good in Dead Man Walking, but his role was mostly him acting the part of tough guy. Only at the end did he have to go into a part emotional and difficult. Also, then there is a film like The Weight of Water where you feel he just had to show up. I got that impression with some other films of his, but hey, with these films, comes a Sweet and Lowdown performance that blows everything away. Thing is, he's not Robert Duvall who is just trying to work a lot of times and is given sub par material, Penn is actually in control of his career and picking his personal projects. Its just half the roles I feel he is standing around instead of progressing to what he can really do. Its kinda like when Laurence Olivier said once he was the greatest actor not cause of his talent, but of his ambition unlike any other to really tackle greatest roles he could. Sean Penn has the talent to do that, but because he sometimes stands around with his career and is not living up to his promise.

Quote from: NEON MERCURY-what is your fav. trilogy in a film series.?

Tough question cause with every acclaimed trilogy, stands some weak films. Man With No Name trilogy ends well, but begins in lackluster fashion. First Godfather is great, I'd argue against the last two. Never liked Star Wars at all. Apu Trilogy is uneven and filled with some bad films...I guess I'd have to say The Die Hard Trilogy. First one is a great action film, second is pretty good and the third is just an ok film but really, when looking at all the trilogies that are not really complete in talent, i go back to Die Hard cause they are so entertaining.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Fernando on April 21, 2004, 06:30:57 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet

Quote from: NEON MERCURY-what is your fav. trilogy in a film series.?

Tough question cause with every acclaimed trilogy, stands some weak films. Man With No Name trilogy ends well, but begins in lackluster fashion. First Godfather is great, I'd argue against the last two. Never liked Star Wars at all. Apu Trilogy is uneven and filled with some bad films...I guess I'd have to say The Die Hard Trilogy. First one is a great action film, second is pretty good and the third is just an ok film but really, when looking at all the trilogies that are not really complete in talent, i go back to Die Hard cause they are so entertaining.

What about Three Colors?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SoNowThen on April 21, 2004, 06:41:52 PM
Fernando wins.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 21, 2004, 09:00:01 PM
Quote from: Fernando
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet

Quote from: NEON MERCURY-what is your fav. trilogy in a film series.?

Tough question cause with every acclaimed trilogy, stands some weak films. Man With No Name trilogy ends well, but begins in lackluster fashion. First Godfather is great, I'd argue against the last two. Never liked Star Wars at all. Apu Trilogy is uneven and filled with some bad films...I guess I'd have to say The Die Hard Trilogy. First one is a great action film, second is pretty good and the third is just an ok film but really, when looking at all the trilogies that are not really complete in talent, i go back to Die Hard cause they are so entertaining.

What about Three Colors?

FUCK! Thank you for the reminder. Yes, it wins and considering how chocked up that dvd is, it may be a candidate for my fave dvd as well. Its just the commentaries were okay only.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Stefen on April 21, 2004, 09:06:15 PM
What is your opinion of Britney Spears guide to semi-conductors?

http://britneyspears.ac/lasers.htm

Do your worst.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Thrindle on April 21, 2004, 10:37:30 PM
GT,
   Will you watch Legends of the Fall with me when I need to cry?  And will you dance barefoot in the livingroom with me at dusk?  And will you listen to Joni Mitchell just because you know I love it?  And will you let me read to you on summer afternoons?  And will explain bizarre art films to me when I don't understand them?  Will you not laugh too hard at my expense?   :wink:

Just wondering.   :P
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Chest Rockwell on April 22, 2004, 04:20:00 PM
Do not exploit the GT for your own pleasantries, ma'am.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 22, 2004, 11:16:58 PM
Quote from: StefenWhat is your opinion of Britney Spears guide to semi-conductors?

http://britneyspears.ac/lasers.htm

Do your worst.

Do my "worst"? Your approach to this subject is disheartening, a clone of the programming our culture has set us to view Ms. Britney Spears. As with every female celebrity, from young age, we demand they look good. We demand they keep looking better as they get older in order for us to care. Britney has done that, but she also accomplished the miracle of modern day science in this new theory and not only is she in a position of not being given enough due credit, but she is given hardly any. The conspiracy fear of our society does not start and end with media corporations banning this discussion, but from the Spears herself. Here we see this little girl who's had her life detailed world wide and from the moment she was 8 years and developed these great ideas, she was slapped on her wrist by her mother for getting out of line in her training. She was a mock clone of everyone in this world who was afraid of high discussion, but thank god within the midst of doing off broadway plays at age 11, participating in star search at age 12 and then mickey mouse club the following year, she continued in her exploration. Thank God she did this admidst everything she has been exploited for, because to those few men who hit on her with the approach of giving her credit for scientific genius, ten times more likely you'll score!


Quote from: ThrindleGT,
Will you watch Legends of the Fall with me when I need to cry?

Yes, and I won't make the personal pain of watching that movie visibly present on my face. For the first hour, I will be distracted by the movie itself as it starts almost as naturally and beautifully as A River Runs Through It. When the story starts to bog down in the bad cliches of romance novel, I'll still be with you, holding you, but continually thinking of every man on this earth I deem worthy to die, bleeding thoughts of anger and violence, just to keep myself at peace. When you look at me and smile at a great revelation you felt from the film, I'll be able to smile back because in my mind an elaborate death sequence has just ended and I'm happy to imagine that God's warranted justice has been fulfilled, at least mentally.

Quote from: Thrindlewill you dance barefoot in the livingroom with me at dusk?

Yes, but is that after we eat cereal in bathrobes and throw the bowls against the wall, or after? Or is that first and then after dancing I paint your toe nails in bed, color rose red of course? Logistically speaking, its smarter for me to paint your toe nails first and then dance barefoot to help your nails dry. But, foolish me, I forgot about what order to put in the bathtub sequence, bedroom sequence and kitchen table gymanstics, but we don't want to bore everyone by getting into that.  

Quote from: ThrindleAnd will you listen to Joni Mitchell just because you know I love it?

Not only will I listen to it and give the feminist music a chance, but when she speaks of african winds coming in and I see the candle I lit go to smoke, I'll cry an inner tear.


Quote from: ThrindleAnd will you let me read to you on summer afternoons?

Yes, cause if its a quality early 20th century book from an over priced second hand book store, I'll at least be able to appreciate the richness of the words in one sense even if I'm actually bored. But if you wanna play Annie and read me Walt Witman, essays on metaphysics, I'll no doubt be happy.

Quote from: ThrindleAnd will explain bizarre art films to me when I don't understand them?

I'll catch you up on the lessons learnt of most of Italian cinema starting from the neo realisit period and through the Internal Realism period as characterized by Antonioni in the 60s and finally to the fantastics of imagery by Federico Fellini. But, for French New Wave, right now I'll just slip you the cliff notes and call myself still a learning student.

Quote from: ThrindleWill you not laugh too hard at my expense?

You know I can't promise that.



Quote from: Chest RockwellDo not exploit the GT for your own pleasantries, ma'am.

For future reference, let it be known that entrance upon this forum with any new comments must always end in the form of a question, or if you don't catch on, play it Jeopardy style. But I'd like to greet you anyways and show you door, shake your hands and...shit, 5 and half inches indeed! Sorry, dude. Just buy a bigger car and you'll be fine in self confidence.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ono on April 22, 2004, 11:20:00 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet...a whole lot of stuff.
There's a side of GT I never thought I'd see.  Welcome one, at that.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: RegularKarate on April 23, 2004, 02:35:21 PM
Here's a question:

At what point did you start saying "Shit" and "Dude"?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: modage on April 23, 2004, 06:21:35 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetYes, and I won't make the personal pain of watching that movie visibly present on my face. For the first hour, I will be distracted by the movie itself as it starts almost as naturally and beautifully as A River Runs Through It. When the story starts to bog down in the bad cliches of romance novel, I'll still be with you, holding you, but continually thinking of every man on this earth I deem worthy to die, bleeding thoughts of anger and violence, just to keep myself at peace. When you look at me and smile at a great revelation you felt from the film, I'll be able to smile back because in my mind an elaborate death sequence has just ended and I'm happy to imagine that God's warranted justice has been fulfilled, at least mentally.
hey, that was actually funny!  wow, i had no idea.  :shock:

GT., maybe you can tell me this: is cinephile's 50 Cent avatar ironic?  or is he being serious?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: cine on April 24, 2004, 01:02:25 AM
Quote from: themodernage02GT., maybe you can tell me this: is cinephile's 50 Cent avatar ironic?  or is he being serious?
:waving:
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on April 24, 2004, 09:19:32 PM
....GT....good answers on your last five..here's some more...


-what is your favorite 80's film.?
-do you like films today..or do you perfer the classics..(i.e. Casablanca)
-what type of films are most cliched??(romantic comedies, horror, political thrillers, murder mysteries, etc)?
-if you yourself could work in the film industry what profession??(director, producer, actor, etc.)
-i hate to put you on the spot..but which xixaxian do you most eagerly await to post a review on a film from??
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Chest Rockwell on April 24, 2004, 09:35:33 PM
Quote from: NEON MERCURYi hate to put you on the spot..but which xixaxian do you most eagerly await to post a review on a film from??
...me... :oops:
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 24, 2004, 11:47:36 PM
-
Quote from: NEON MERCURYwhat is your favorite 80's film.?

I'm a tired song on praising this film, but only some people here have seen it: Grave of the Fireflies. The Verdict is wildly under praised and maybe the best film of the decade, but Grave of the Fireflies is closest to me and one of the most emotional and fulfilling experiences I ever had watching a movie. It just keeps getting shelved into categories keeping from people watching it. Its anime so its just a cartoon or its unkown and old and hardly talked about so it can't be that great or stylistically its kinda boring so who gives a shit. I'm glad that almost all of the people here who have seen it carry some similiar feelings along with them for the film, but its a number of people i could count on my hands. More people need to see it and I can't see myself getting tired of it ever.


Quote from: NEON MERCURY-do you like films today..or do you perfer the classics..(i.e. Casablanca)

Its going to have to be classics. Casablanca isn't even that good, but past all the computer technology and all the styles redone and mixed, the older films still excite me ten times more than most films todays. By the late 1960s, it seems every style that we know had already been spoken for, had already been shown and explored and likely was going to leave  future films to trying to redo them on the measure of better quality only. The critic Stanley Kauffmann said the major shift in film came with 2001: A Space Odyssey. He said that after that film, the focus on film became on technology instead of the human face. Even considering the praise of the film, its a correct statement. 2001 is a very respectable film, but an easily exploitive film. It was only a matter of time before Hollywood would correlate the special effects break through 2001 had into a pure entertainment vehicle and the result was Star Wars, one of the most influential films ever. Now styles are being repeated and the focus is on technology. Too many movies have a casual computer feeling to it compared to older films cause most movies can't escape the influence of computers. Its just with all these films, I still find Ingmar Bergman's Persona more inventive, interesting and experimental than any film to come out in the last 5 years. Like I said, I feel all styles were discovered before the end of the 60s and during the 60s, between the old system and monopoly age, lived a decade where films were really cutting edge and filmmakers were hired on the experience they didn't have. blah blah blah, I'll just say classics.

Quote from: NEON MERCURY....-what type of films are most cliched??(romantic comedies, horror, political thrillers, murder mysteries, etc)?

Horror, easily. For the life of me, I want to love horror films so much but they are so boring cause they all are so predictable. The sad thing is that my humor is closest to the explicitness of horror films and its a rare thing when I find a movie like Irreversible that I know isn't traditional horror, but at least shocking and inventive enough to really catch my interest. I just can't find any other film at that same temperature level that really excite me so I know more sick jokes than anyone should. Quentin Tarantino could make a beautiful horror film. I wish he would.

Quote from: NEON MERCURY-if you yourself could work in the film industry what profession??(director, producer, actor, etc.)

Still, director. I thought producer would be nice cause all of the decisions he makes on a film and the power he has, but he sucks more dicks in trying to please people that I'd throw up after 20 minutes of having his job. Writer is beautiful for the anymonity and the creativity you are allowed to do, but your work is the mercy of a producer and director who usually want to flaunt their own ideas. Actor is for people who want to fuck everyone. I say director cause as billy wilder put it, it allows the writer to protect his material when he becomes one and as tarantino keeps saying, you can still get good pussy after it all.

Quote from: NEON MERCURY-i hate to put you on the spot..but which xixaxian do you most eagerly await to post a review on a film from?

OK, me answering this in no way says who I like best or who i think is the smartest at all..That being said, Mutinyco hands down. When he gets past his tendency to judge a film worthless and not worth his time to type a review, he has some great opinions...and thing is, I hardly ever agree with him! Not only do I think his reviews are some of the most thorough and well explained reviews on the board, but his voice is always unique and unlike many other people, comes from years of experience in the field where he is applying everything he learned to what he says and so technically, he can speak at great lengths. Considering I'm just a general viewer only, I consider myself a casual fan and in no way can I speak for the experience of filmmaking and spending hours in an editing lab the way he can. I know many people here have had this experience, but I don't think anyone really translates that experience into words the way I think he does.  His problem is that he bullies himself too much into arguments to force everyone to know the nuts and bolts of what he said and in frustation, will make the mistake of telling people their wrong on interpreting something.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Thrindle on April 25, 2004, 12:41:17 AM
Well, seeing as it's late at night and I'm trying to find sleep (yet again) I thought I might 'exploit' you a little more...  So GT, would you forgive me for standing you up, even if my excuse was legitimate?  Would you allow me to sing in the car, while you were driving, without reaching to turn up the music?  Could I stay in my pajamas all day long (while watching movies) and would you still think I was cute?  Could I read you my poetry in the afternoon on the sundeck, and would you tell me you like it, no matter how meloncholy, melodramatic, or ridiculous it may be?

:-D
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on April 25, 2004, 10:27:08 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet-
Quote from: NEON MERCURYwhat is your favorite 80's film.?

I'm a tired song on praising this film, but only some people here have seen it: Grave of the Fireflies. The Verdict is wildly under praised and maybe the best film of the decade, but Grave of the Fireflies is closest to me and one of the most emotional and fulfilling experiences I ever had watching a movie. It just keeps getting shelved into categories keeping from people watching it. Its anime so its just a cartoon or its unkown and old and hardly talked about so it can't be that great or stylistically its kinda boring so who gives a shit. I'm glad that almost all of the people here who have seen it carry some similiar feelings along with them for the film, but its a number of people i could count on my hands. More people need to see it and I can't see myself getting tired of it ever.

.

I saw it.  What a rough viewing.  I watched it late one night and it really is a powerful film.  I think it works best as anime, rather than live action.  It was really good, but I have to admit I had never heard of it before GT.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: modage on April 25, 2004, 10:16:36 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: NEON MERCURY-do you like films today..or do you perfer the classics..(i.e. Casablanca)

Its going to have to be classics. Casablanca isn't even that good, but past all the computer technology and all the styles redone and mixed, the older films still excite me ten times more than most films todays. By the late 1960s, it seems every style that we know had already been spoken for, had already been shown and explored and likely was going to leave  future films to trying to redo them on the measure of better quality only. The critic Stanley Kauffmann said the major shift in film came with 2001: A Space Odyssey. He said that after that film, the focus on film became on technology instead of the human face. Even considering the praise of the film, its a correct statement. 2001 is a very respectable film, but an easily exploitive film. It was only a matter of time before Hollywood would correlate the special effects break through 2001 had into a pure entertainment vehicle and the result was Star Wars, one of the most influential films ever. Now styles are being repeated and the focus is on technology. Too many movies have a casual computer feeling to it compared to older films cause most movies can't escape the influence of computers. Its just with all these films, I still find Ingmar Bergman's Persona more inventive, interesting and experimental than any film to come out in the last 5 years. Like I said, I feel all styles were discovered before the end of the 60s and during the 60s, between the old system and monopoly age, lived a decade where films were really cutting edge and filmmakers were hired on the experience they didn't have. blah blah blah, I'll just say classics.
i dont know what this means, but i think this idea you have is an illusion created out of fantasizing how things used to be before we were alive and that they were somehow better 'then' cause it wasnt 'now'.  i dont think there ever was such a standstill in movies, its just all the critics who were really coming of age throughout certain periods tend to look fondly on those days and so then, us, eager film lovers who want to find out more tend to look to them for whats good.  i dont think all the styles were just discovered and mined and done by any certain year and its all been repeats since then.  things are always moving forwards and looking backwards, dont you think?

Quote from: NEON MERCURY....-what type of films are most cliched??(romantic comedies, horror, political thrillers, murder mysteries, etc)?

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetHorror, easily. For the life of me, I want to love horror films so much but they are so boring cause they all are so predictable. The sad thing is that my humor is closest to the explicitness of horror films and its a rare thing when I find a movie like Irreversible that I know isn't traditional horror, but at least shocking and inventive enough to really catch my interest. I just can't find any other film at that same temperature level that really excite me so I know more sick jokes than anyone should. Quentin Tarantino could make a beautiful horror film. I wish he would.
he did (sort of), it was called From Dusk Till Dawn.  i hope he makes another one though.  and i realize this is just an opinion you're sharing but i think there is probably just as many inventive horror movies as romantic comedies or thrillers or any of the genres neon mentioned.  the trouble with genres, is usually to qualify you have to fit the 'formula'.  the best you can hope for is a filmmaker who is AWARE of the formula enough to subvert it.  i thought Jeepers Creepers did that, although no one else seems to agree with me.  did you see it?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 25, 2004, 10:45:27 PM
Quote from: themodernage02
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: NEON MERCURY-do you like films today..or do you perfer the classics..(i.e. Casablanca)

Its going to have to be classics. Casablanca isn't even that good, but past all the computer technology and all the styles redone and mixed, the older films still excite me ten times more than most films todays. By the late 1960s, it seems every style that we know had already been spoken for, had already been shown and explored and likely was going to leave  future films to trying to redo them on the measure of better quality only. The critic Stanley Kauffmann said the major shift in film came with 2001: A Space Odyssey. He said that after that film, the focus on film became on technology instead of the human face. Even considering the praise of the film, its a correct statement. 2001 is a very respectable film, but an easily exploitive film. It was only a matter of time before Hollywood would correlate the special effects break through 2001 had into a pure entertainment vehicle and the result was Star Wars, one of the most influential films ever. Now styles are being repeated and the focus is on technology. Too many movies have a casual computer feeling to it compared to older films cause most movies can't escape the influence of computers. Its just with all these films, I still find Ingmar Bergman's Persona more inventive, interesting and experimental than any film to come out in the last 5 years. Like I said, I feel all styles were discovered before the end of the 60s and during the 60s, between the old system and monopoly age, lived a decade where films were really cutting edge and filmmakers were hired on the experience they didn't have. blah blah blah, I'll just say classics.
i dont know what this means, but i think this idea you have is an illusion created out of fantasizing how things used to be before we were alive and that they were somehow better 'then' cause it wasnt 'now'.  i dont think there ever was such a standstill in movies, its just all the critics who were really coming of age throughout certain periods tend to look fondly on those days and so then, us, eager film lovers who want to find out more tend to look to them for whats good.  i dont think all the styles were just discovered and mined and done by any certain year and its all been repeats since then.  things are always moving forwards and looking backwards, dont you think?

No, I don't. The problem with your argument is that it really doesn't suggest an alternative to my argument but just disagree with it. Yes, you hypothesis my golden age was may have been fond memories of elder critics instead of an actual golden age, but you can't make that argument with me. As a viewer who has seen numerous films from both periods and every other period, the 60s contained the best films. When I answer these type of questions, of course I have to speak of history more so and evidence outside my own viewing just cause it'd be too hard to elaborate on every opinion for every major film in both eras.


Quote from: themodernage02
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetHorror, easily. For the life of me, I want to love horror films so much but they are so boring cause they all are so predictable. The sad thing is that my humor is closest to the explicitness of horror films and its a rare thing when I find a movie like Irreversible that I know isn't traditional horror, but at least shocking and inventive enough to really catch my interest. I just can't find any other film at that same temperature level that really excite me so I know more sick jokes than anyone should. Quentin Tarantino could make a beautiful horror film. I wish he would.
he did (sort of), it was called From Dusk Till Dawn.  i hope he makes another one though.  and i realize this is just an opinion you're sharing but i think there is probably just as many inventive horror movies as romantic comedies or thrillers or any of the genres neon mentioned.  the trouble with genres, is usually to qualify you have to fit the 'formula'.  the best you can hope for is a filmmaker who is AWARE of the formula enough to subvert it.  i thought Jeepers Creepers did that, although no one else seems to agree with me.  did you see it?

True he wrote From Dusk til Dawn, but i never had faith in his sole writing ventures cause I'm assuming he had some lack of faith in the material that kept him from directing it. When he writes something he wants to direct..then expectations rise up big time because we are going to get all of Tarantino so I still think he has yet to really do a horror film.. I didn't see Jeepers Creepers, but the idea of arguing which genre is more cliche is likely ludacris anyways cause you can't pin point it. I just happened to be annoyed by horror more than the rest, I guess.

Thrindle's next........
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: The Disco Kid on April 25, 2004, 11:54:55 PM
GT,

Whats the deal with the ghost scene near the end of The Shining in which Wendy encounters the guy in the woodchuck costume performing fellatio to the guy in a tuxedo? Does it have any real significance or is it just some bizarre shit Kubrick threw in for creepiness sake?

Ive seen the movie dozens of times and I like to think that Ive finally deciphered the true gist of it, but that scene has always, and continues to, baffle the living shit out of me. Any thoughts?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 26, 2004, 12:04:50 AM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetThe critic Stanley Kauffmann said the major shift in film came with 2001: A Space Odyssey. He said that after that film, the focus on film became on technology instead of the human face. Even considering the praise of the film, its a correct statement. 2001 is a very respectable film, but an easily exploitive film. It was only a matter of time before Hollywood would correlate the special effects break through 2001 had into a pure entertainment vehicle and the result was Star Wars, one of the most influential films ever. Now styles are being repeated and the focus is on technology. Too many movies have a casual computer feeling to it compared to older films cause most movies can't escape the influence of computers.
If 2001 killed the human face, how do you explain the 70s? And can you give specific examples of this obsession with technology immediately following 2001? Star Wars is a pretty weak example... I mean, that was 10 years later...
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: molly on April 26, 2004, 12:37:34 PM
Quote from: ThrindleWell, seeing as it's late at night and I'm trying to find sleep (yet again) I thought I might 'exploit' you a little more...  So GT, would you forgive me for standing you up, even if my excuse was legitimate?  Would you allow me to sing in the car, while you were driving, without reaching to turn up the music?  Could I stay in my pajamas all day long (while watching movies) and would you still think I was cute?  Could I read you my poetry in the afternoon on the sundeck, and would you tell me you like it, no matter how meloncholy, melodramatic, or ridiculous it may be?

:-D

good question, i also want to hear the answer.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 26, 2004, 03:16:07 PM
Quote from: ThrindleSo GT, would you forgive me for standing you up, even if my excuse was legitimate?

In the long run, my heart would. Its just before I got to that point, careful payback would be in order. The following morning, at work, I'd convince everyone to tell you that I worked all day with my head down, refusing to even address my obvious sadness, keeping to myself. Then after work, when you'd obviously call me, I'd take with that fake optimism tone when I am sad but I'm trying to sound upbeat. I'd avvoid hanging out with you, wishing to be alone and then a few hours later, I'd pour out a huge email to you telling you all the past sins i went through on stuff like this and that I know it wasn't your fault, but I was truly hurt anyways, writing in my most poetic voice, illegally quoting emily dickinson and other poet the slave of inner loneliness. With the honesty of my own turmoil and acceptance it wasn't your fault, you'd fall into the biggest sympathy trap anyone could imagine.
Later that night, we'd meet up and talk about things. My emotions, situation and all and then when I tried to act sincerely happy, I'd look to you and say, "We've been talking about this for so long, we really need to talk about something else. Lighten up the mood. You know what I've always wanted to do? I know you'd never be interested but I feel tonight I really can be honest with you, open up my heart, you know. Its just I've always wanted to go cow tipping, play pranks like wiping a dollar bill on your ass and leaving it on the ground for people to pick up and going through drive thru fast food places and throwing pops in the windows at the people working there. Things that are just fun."
And in all the emotions of the night, you'd somehow agree to it like I was proposing marriage at the most romantic and right time possible. Ah how sympathy traps fucking rule!


Quote from: ThrindleWould you allow me to sing in the car, while you were driving, without reaching to turn up the music?

Absolutely, and not only that, I'd record your beautiful voice too; well, at least for when you sing over Radiohead songs so i could pull a goof on all my religiousradioheadfan friends and send it to them saying, "Hey, this is fucking singing guys! You know, actual notes in a voice! Not just a retard groveling over an expensive tape recorder!" The sheer prospects of anger to cause would be too good to not do it.
or: with your talent of actual singing (I have none), you could elimate all reason for me to even own a cd player in my car.

Quote from: ThrindleCould I stay in my pajamas all day long (while watching movies) and would you still think I was cute?

I'd definitely find you cute, but we must take into account your totalitarian love of good hygeine for yourself but mostly for others around you. See, I'd be with you in watching movies, pigging out on junk food and doing little activity so I'd likely not take a shower either. To really enjoy a pajama and all movie day, you have to hermit yourself from all appliances that don't make popcorn in two minutes or have dvds to insert into. So, after the long hours of a junk food blitz, your stomach will likely give up on this crusade cause at the end of the night and i leaned over to you, smiled (displaying beautiful yellow popcorn stained teeth) and asked, "Want to do the nasty?", you'd run to the nearest shower in complete horror. Oh, we both know that would be the end result. Don't deny it.

Quote from: ThrindleCould I read you my poetry in the afternoon on the sundeck, and would you tell me you like it, no matter how meloncholy, melodramatic, or ridiculous it may be?

You could and the words you chose to spoke wouldn't even matter. The moving picture I could stare at of you reading, looking up slightly, quietly smiling, would be enough. Added upon that the soundtrack of your voice and its enough to daze and dream with for hours. Pardon my french, but round two of questionnaire ends with a public confession from an asshole. Consider yourself blushed, consider myself slighlty embrassed.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Stefen on April 26, 2004, 03:17:51 PM
Wow, thrindle may be the worst kind of girlfriend in the history of civilazation. Watch out GT.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 26, 2004, 03:48:53 PM
Quote from: StefenWow, thrindle may be the worst kind of girlfriend in the history of civilazation. Watch out GT.

Are you a fan of the history of modern warfare? See, I am. Lately, as with the American power shown in Iraq and Afghanistan, war has been moving to severe levels of technical precision instead of the usual ground troop power most people idealize with war. Last year, in Foreign Affairs, neo conservative war expert Max Boot statistically analyzed the success of the Afghanistan and Iraqi wars in terms of pure military take over with every other known and recorded war and made the bold statement of calling it "the most successful wars in human history". The military post Vietnam war has stayed as far possible from really depending on ground troops cause of the risks of men dying to conditions in foreign lands unforseeable to military strategists. Cause of the suffering that enslaved the men who fought in the Veitnam War, there likely will never be a draft again in the United States. Its really quite astonishing.
But, I love the details and stories of war when it was man on man and gun power had to deal with guerrila tactits that proved too tough to win. A great example of simple weaponery was in the Vietnam war when Vietnamese military, upon capturing US soldiers, sometimes would give them a certain type of torture I really loved: First, the soldier would be layed on the ground, each limb tied a post. Under his body, was a shard of bamboo growing from the earth. When placed under his body, it was just a sharp, consistent pain against the back of the soldier. But through the miracle of mother nature, bamboo happens to grow 2 feet a day. The Vietnamese soldiers would leave him there and thus, within two or three days, the soldier would slowly, but surely, be impaled. Now, if you don't want step 5 miles back from your nice little comment about Thrindle, I'll make your ass a modern day example of what Vietnamese torture can do to those who make blind comments from wrong angles. *Thank you for your criticism. Fuck you very much"
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: MacGuffin on April 26, 2004, 03:51:26 PM
Quote from: StefenWow, thrindle may be the worst kind of girlfriend in the history of civilazation.

What? Thrindle embraces her slothness; is a movie-lover; is uninhibited in her 'amateurish' singing and writings abilities; honest; intelligent; funny, and...

...can xixax all day and canoodles like nobody's business. It's really a wonder why she's single.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 26, 2004, 03:55:51 PM
All that for Thrindle, and you don't respond to my simple question?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 26, 2004, 04:13:18 PM
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanAll that for Thrindle, and you don't respond to my simple question?

I have to pace myself, really. Takes me a while to respond to simple questions and i should have responded to her yesterday. You're coming up, no doubt.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Stefen on April 26, 2004, 05:38:57 PM
Quote from: MacGuffin
Quote from: StefenWow, thrindle may be the worst kind of girlfriend in the history of civilazation.

What? Thrindle embraces her slothness; is a movie-lover; is uninhibited in her 'amateurish' singing and writings abilities; honest; intelligent; funny, and...

...can xixax all day and canoodles like nobody's business. It's really a wonder why she's single.

Poor gold trumpet would never have any time for himself. And if thrindle and gt got together they wouldn't spend muck time on xixax. GT would be to busy meeting all thrindles demands for a relationship. Sooner or later GT would grow a vagina out of thin air, and the first time he does come back to xixax he will start a thread just to gossip. I've seen it before.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 26, 2004, 05:54:22 PM
Quote from: Stefen
Quote from: MacGuffin
Quote from: StefenWow, thrindle may be the worst kind of girlfriend in the history of civilazation.

What? Thrindle embraces her slothness; is a movie-lover; is uninhibited in her 'amateurish' singing and writings abilities; honest; intelligent; funny, and...

...can xixax all day and canoodles like nobody's business. It's really a wonder why she's single.

Poor gold trumpet would never have any time for himself. And if thrindle and gt got together they wouldn't spend muck time on xixax. GT would be to busy meeting all thrindles demands for a relationship. Sooner or later GT would grow a vagina out of thin air, and the first time he does come back to xixax he will start a thread just to gossip. I've seen it before.

But you don't have to worry about these little problems, do you? See, your girlfriend is likely the girl who is happy to just be around you. Given little to do, you tell her everything to do. Picking out her wardrobes, what you think is hot and not. Fearing she may stray, you don't like the idea of her going out by herself so you forbid it and she's happy to stay at home when you feel like just chilling and then when you want to go out, nothing too revealing for her in what she wears and no looks or comments about any other guys. If you want a drink, no need to ask what she wants. She'll just have what you want. Bravo, Stefen, your girlfriend has been identitied as a fucking blow up doll ready and willing to orgasm at the press of a button cause you sent in for the "realistic" version, but hey, anything to be rid of all those problems you've "seen" happen in the real world. Now when you take a second glance at this thread, the role of a man in any situation of general charm with a lady requires a give and take in what each wants from the other. When Thrindle begins her "Ask Thrindle" thread, you can witness my taking.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: cron on April 26, 2004, 05:59:12 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetWhen Thrindle begins her "Ask Thrindle" thread...

BRILLIANT!!!!



?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Stefen on April 26, 2004, 06:00:41 PM
haha that was a little harsh eh? I was just giving my opinion and helping you out on the things asked of you. But seeing as how my girlfriend is a blow up doll (good one) my whole opinion is a moot point. But yes I can tell you have LOTS of experience in this category judging by the way you answered my post. All girls are exactly the way you described.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 26, 2004, 06:04:11 PM
Quote from: Stefenhaha that was a little harsh eh?

Not sure. I enjoyed it but its still playing with fire.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Stefen on April 26, 2004, 06:06:35 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: Stefenhaha that was a little harsh eh?

Not sure. I enjoyed it but its still playing with fire.

it was still cold.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 26, 2004, 06:07:49 PM
Quote from: Stefen
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: Stefenhaha that was a little harsh eh?

Not sure. I enjoyed it but its still playing with fire.

it was still cold.

Then I did everything expected of me.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Thrindle on April 26, 2004, 07:55:43 PM
I GO TO WORK FOR ONE DAY AND IT BECOMES A WARZONE!
Rather than let GT defend me all day... I will simply respond to the criticisms bestowed upon me.

Quote from: StefenWow, thrindle may be the worst kind of girlfriend in the history of civilazation.

You could very well be right.  I've never dated myself.  Thank you for a very insightful opinion.  Maybe now I can understand why my relationships haven't worked out.... :wink:

Quote from: StefenGT would be to busy meeting all thrindles demands for a relationship.

Well...  I suppose GT could be busy meeting all of my demands.  Those painfully demanding things like falling in love, respecting someone else's integrity, caring enough about someone to leave your criticism to yourself... Oh and watching movies, reading novels, and having decent conversation.  That's pretty brutal, you're absolutely right.

Honestly Stefen,  I demand a lot of myself, and a lot of others.  I think this is a virtue.  

I love myself enough to be treated well.  I wish that for you too.  Why should anyone accept less than the best?!

PS  If you want anymore snotty life advice, just PM me, and I'll start the Ask Thrindle thread in your honor.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Stefen on April 26, 2004, 08:00:34 PM
Well most of the things you mentioned may be well and dandy in the beginning, but after the newness wears off I doubt everything will be smooth sailing, as im sure you've experienced in all of your failed relationships. Don't let the voice of reason sway your thoughts on anything in this matter.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Thrindle on April 26, 2004, 08:09:42 PM
Quote from: StefenWell most of the things you mentioned may be well and dandy in the beginning, but after the newness wears off I doubt everything will be smooth sailing, as im sure you've experienced in all of your failed relationships. Don't let the voice of reason sway your thoughts on anything in this matter.

I'm defending myself no longer.  Stefen, we do NOT agree.  I will not continue to explain myself because obviously you just aren't on my wavelength.  Fair enough.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 27, 2004, 11:46:57 PM
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetThe critic Stanley Kauffmann said the major shift in film came with 2001: A Space Odyssey. He said that after that film, the focus on film became on technology instead of the human face. Even considering the praise of the film, its a correct statement. 2001 is a very respectable film, but an easily exploitive film. It was only a matter of time before Hollywood would correlate the special effects break through 2001 had into a pure entertainment vehicle and the result was Star Wars, one of the most influential films ever. Now styles are being repeated and the focus is on technology. Too many movies have a casual computer feeling to it compared to older films cause most movies can't escape the influence of computers.
If 2001 killed the human face, how do you explain the 70s? And can you give specific examples of this obsession with technology immediately following 2001? Star Wars is a pretty weak example... I mean, that was 10 years later...

Ok, I'll elaborate. While the proceeding years after 2001 had not yet met the boom, I still think the high point of cinema came in the 60s. For America, it did reach the 1970s but that era of films of 1968 to 1977 in America hardly competed with the quality of foreign films to come out in the 1960s. So my point of "nothing new" comes into place cause on comparison, the 1970s feel like a downgrade of quality and exploration.



Quote from: The Disco KidGT,

Whats the deal with the ghost scene near the end of The Shining in which Wendy encounters the guy in the woodchuck costume performing fellatio to the guy in a tuxedo? Does it have any real significance or is it just some bizarre shit Kubrick threw in for creepiness sake?

Ive seen the movie dozens of times and I like to think that Ive finally deciphered the true gist of it, but that scene has always, and continues to, baffle the living shit out of me. Any thoughts?

Plot wise, its the manifestion to Wendy that the ghosts are real. In relation to Kubrick's career, it seems most interesting in that is yet another subtle hint of homoeroticism. Other than that, on all the essays on The Shining I've read, they always mention the influence of films like The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie in influencing that type of scene, meaning its just some weird fucked up shit that happens in a dream, has traces of meaning, but really can't be explained.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 28, 2004, 12:02:24 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanIf 2001 killed the human face, how do you explain the 70s? And can you give specific examples of this obsession with technology immediately following 2001? Star Wars is a pretty weak example... I mean, that was 10 years later...

Ok, I'll elaborate. While the proceeding years after 2001 had not yet met the boom, I still think the high point of cinema came in the 60s. For America, it did reach the 1970s but that era of films of 1968 to 1977 in America hardly competed with the quality of foreign films to come out in the 1960s. So my point of "nothing new" comes into place cause on comparison, the 1970s feel like a downgrade of quality and exploration.
So what are you saying? 2001 negatively influenced foreign films of the 70s? Which ones?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 28, 2004, 12:17:40 PM
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanIf 2001 killed the human face, how do you explain the 70s? And can you give specific examples of this obsession with technology immediately following 2001? Star Wars is a pretty weak example... I mean, that was 10 years later...

Ok, I'll elaborate. While the proceeding years after 2001 had not yet met the boom, I still think the high point of cinema came in the 60s. For America, it did reach the 1970s but that era of films of 1968 to 1977 in America hardly competed with the quality of foreign films to come out in the 1960s. So my point of "nothing new" comes into place cause on comparison, the 1970s feel like a downgrade of quality and exploration.
So what are you saying? 2001 negatively influenced foreign films of the 70s? Which ones?

No, that the foreign cinema explosion of the 60s died down in the 70s in quality of films and the American indepedent movement of the 70s failed to further what had been achieved in the 60s. You find the cinema of the 1970s to be the best ever, I find it grossely overrated. But, in your original question of whether or not 2001 began a streak of films focused on technology, it did not. It made films like Star Wars possible and considering I don't think the 70s advanced what had been achieved in the 60s, made it succeptible for a film like Star Wars to take over.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 28, 2004, 12:27:59 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetYou find the cinema of the 1970s to be the best ever, I find it grossely overrated.
Okay. I also find almost everything before the 60s overrated, except German Expressionism.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet[2001] made it succeptible for a film like Star Wars to take over.
I still don't see that. Obviously that argument isn't referring to economics (which is the whole reason Star Wars, and Jaws & Rocky before it, changed the industry). So are you just talking about interest in technology? You're saying 2001 opened the door (with, strangely, a 10-year delay) for movies to tackle the subject of humans and technology? Didn't METROPOLIS do that?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pubrick on April 28, 2004, 12:32:21 PM
1. Do u think JB uses as many question marks in real life as he does online?

2. Do u think he likes the Black Eyed Peas "Where is the Love" video more than the average person? Do you like it?

3. Which is ur favorite room in a house?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on April 28, 2004, 12:57:32 PM
Are you really cool, or do you have ghost writers?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: molly on April 28, 2004, 01:14:48 PM
Do you believe that people are mainly good, or do you believe they are not mainly good? Do you feel comfortable when you have to trust to people, when you don't have other option but to put your trust in somebody else's hands? And i don't think specifically, i think i general, when you'd have to sum all mankind, all 6 billion in that one person.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 28, 2004, 01:31:20 PM
To follow that up, do you believe in evil?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 28, 2004, 10:19:17 PM
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet[2001] made it succeptible for a film like Star Wars to take over.
I still don't see that. Obviously that argument isn't referring to economics (which is the whole reason Star Wars, and Jaws & Rocky before it, changed the industry). So are you just talking about interest in technology? You're saying 2001 opened the door (with, strangely, a 10-year delay) for movies to tackle the subject of humans and technology? Didn't METROPOLIS do that?

If I remember correctly, Metropolis didn't really have a major effect upon release. Made in Germany in 1927, it was made as Hollywood was switching over to talkies and generally ignored foreign films anyways. I think Metropolis garnered a following and appreciation over many years. 2001: A Space Odyssey was huge upon release, breaking many box office records. And yea, after 2001 the studios attempted the same success with other sci fi films, but didn't find the right key til Star Wars.

Quote from: Pubrick1. Do u think JB uses as many question marks in real life as he does online?

Naw. I think he's more reserved and likely to give someone an evil look instead of interrogating them.

Quote from: Pubrick2. Do u think he likes the Black Eyed Peas "Where is the Love" video more than the average person? Do you like it?

Naw. It would have be by a better artist for him to like it that much. Prolly Radiohead, change of lyrics to include ice age atom bombs and video done in propagandic animation. I don't like the video or song. Too preachy for me.

Quote from: Pubrick3. Which is ur favorite room in a house?

Kitchen. Great food and great sex.

Quote from: Walrus, KookookajoobAre you really cool, or do you have ghost writers?

Ghost writers.

Quote from: mollyDo you believe that people are mainly good, or do you believe they are not mainly good?

I believe people are mainly good. Its just their intentions become confused due to personal problems and differences with other people so things flare up.

Quote from: mollyDo you feel comfortable when you have to trust to people, when you don't have other option but to put your trust in somebody else's hands? And i don't think specifically, i think i general, when you'd have to sum all mankind, all 6 billion in that one person.

I don't feel comfortable at all because we've been repeating the same generic life lessons since as far back as I know.

Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanTo follow that up, do you believe in evil?

Though I think the term is greatly overused, yea, I do believe in evil. I just don't go around calling every Middle Eastern nation it like others.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on April 28, 2004, 11:01:09 PM
GT has transcended from Message Board Poster > Film Critic > Philosopher
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 28, 2004, 11:14:45 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetIf I remember correctly, Metropolis didn't really have a major effect upon release. Made in Germany in 1927, it was made as Hollywood was switching over to talkies and generally ignored foreign films anyways.
Okay, let's clarify something: There's a difference between economic effects and artistic efects. I'm not saying it had a box office effect on Hollywood, but that the major filmmakers of the 70s and late 60s were influence by it and early German film in general.

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetAnd yea, after 2001 the studios attempted the same success with other sci fi films, but didn't find the right key til Star Wars.
What were these "other sci fi films"? You haven't made the connection yet.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on April 28, 2004, 11:35:33 PM
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetAnd yea, after 2001 the studios attempted the same success with other sci fi films, but didn't find the right key til Star Wars.
What were these "other sci fi films"? You haven't made the connection yet.

I know that during that period many Sci-Fi films were released.  Or to better put it, films that dealt with the future.

All of the following were released between 1968 - 1977:

The Andromeda Strain
Sleeper
Westworld
Logan's Run
The Omega Man
Death Race 2000
Rollerball
THX 1138
Silent Running
Futureworld
Soylent Green

PS> I know I'm not GT and you didn't Ask SHAFTR, but I thought I'd chime in.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 28, 2004, 11:45:34 PM
2001 and Star Wars are so different from all of those, though...

I don't see the box office connection. Where's the economic strategy?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on April 28, 2004, 11:49:33 PM
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman2001 and Star Wars are so different from all of those, though...

I don't see the box office connection. Where's the economic strategy?

The connection is that the studios saw the success of 2001 and tried to carry it through with more Sci Fi films, most failed until Star Wars.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 28, 2004, 11:59:59 PM
Quote from: SHAFTRThe connection is that the studios saw the success of 2001 and tried to carry it through with more Sci Fi films, most failed until Star Wars.
I don't get how that list of movies is profound. There were just as many if not more popular science fiction movies throughout the 60s. 2001 didn't make much more domestically than Planet of the Apes (also 1968), which, being a Fox production, has more of a tangible connection to Star Wars.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on April 29, 2004, 12:04:45 AM
your Planet of the Apes mention is warranted

----------
by Bruce Eder / Allmovie.com
....
There were some successful big-screen science fiction series during the middle- and late-1960s, the most notable of which were Franklin Schaffner's topical sci-fi/satire Planet of the Apes, and Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. Planet of the Apes, loosely based on Pierre Boule's satiric novel, proved that serious stories could be embraced by major actors (Charlton Heston was probably the first major leading man not to compromise his career by doing science fiction) in a science-fiction setting. But science fiction movies really made their entry into the realm of serious cinema with Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey, the most ambitious (and some would say pretentious) entry into the genre since Metropolis 40 years earlier. Audiences generally found the film dull and didactic, where it wasn't simply obscure, but were overpowered by its visual splendor and the grandeur of its two million-year time frame. The film doomed the childrens' version of science fiction to extinction and opened up opportunities for other filmmakers. Douglas Trumbull, who had designed many of the special effects for Kubrick's movie, was one of the first to avail himself of the chance to make a movie of his own, with the environmentally conscious science-fiction drama Silent Running (MCA/Universal), which scored a modest hit at the box office.


Serious science fiction became much easier to produce in this new environment, and among the most widely seen of this new crop of films was Robert Wise's The Andromeda Strain, based on the best-seller by Michael Crichton, which was made with meticulous detail but played at a less-than-exciting pace (this movie also ran into a problem in its future-release cycles, as technology caught up with it -- some desktop computers can now do most of the work that the film's huge underground computer is shown doing). By the middle of the 1970s, however, the brand of earnest, issue-oriented science fiction popular at the start of the decade had run out of steam at the box office, a result of too many disappointing big-budget efforts such as Soylent Green and The Omega Man. Among the last of this sub-genre was Logan's Run (MGM/United Artists), an adaptation of a well known book that has aged surprisingly well despite some very dated sensibilities about the future and about how to design and play science fiction (the letterboxed laserdisc of this movie is a treat).


Even as Logan's Run was playing out its string at the box office to modest success, George Lucas was readying the film that would usher in yet another new era in science fiction -- Star Wars.
....
----------
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 29, 2004, 12:13:49 AM
I don't know what we're arguing about anymore.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SHAFTR on April 29, 2004, 12:15:16 AM
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanI don't know what we're arguing about anymore.

I never meant this as an argument.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 29, 2004, 10:35:41 AM
Well, what I think JB means is that after 2001, no sci fi film used technology in the way of recreating space the way Star Wars did....and that very well could be true, but yea, many large efforts at producing sci fi films did happen after 2001 even if it didn't try to recreate the special effects glamor of the film, it surely was trying to recreate the box office success and 2001 was a pinnacle film to suggest to studios that sci fi films can make money.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 29, 2004, 11:01:52 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpetit surely was trying to recreate the box office success and 2001
I have a hard time believing 2001 was a model for the science fiction blockbuster, though. It was Star Wars, after all, that invented that idea... and it made six times the profit. If they really thought Star Wars was going to be a blockbuster, why did it have a budget of $11 million? Star Wars closely followed blockbusters Jaws and Rocky at a time when science fiction was becoming less and less successful... it hadn't really happened until the late 60s and the first couple years of the 70s. In the late 70s, there was a hunger for fast-paced adventure movies, which might account more for producing Star Wars... and 2001 is as far from that model as you can get.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: modage on April 29, 2004, 07:56:30 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet2001 was a pinnacle film to suggest to studios that sci fi films can make money.
the 1950's was all science fiction films, (probably most of which made money or they would've stopped making them).  they were low-budget, but i dont think the studios didnt realize that genre could make money until almost 1970.

also: i'm not sure what this argument is.  are you saying that because 2001 had good special effects, it couldnt have any good effect on movies?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 29, 2004, 07:59:35 PM
Quote from: themodernage02also: i'm not sure what this argument is.  are you saying that because 2001 had good special effects, it couldnt have any good effect on movies?
This is what's annoying me. Star Wars had a bad effect on the box office economy, and 2001 made Star Wars possible, so 2001 is to blame?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: godardian on April 29, 2004, 08:38:12 PM
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman
Quote from: themodernage02also: i'm not sure what this argument is.  are you saying that because 2001 had good special effects, it couldnt have any good effect on movies?
This is what's annoying me. Star Wars had a bad effect on the box office economy, and 2001 made Star Wars possible, so 2001 is to blame?

This argument is (or at least has gone) completely insane. 2001 is like The Velvet Underground; a serious movie made by a die-hard movie-lover that many die-hard movie-lovers love (or hate for well-considered reasons) and that is hugely influential on a large number of those who really love cinema. Star Wars is like a disco-hits album you bought at the supermarket; infinitely more popular than The Velvet Underground, but it will date very badly and is infinitely less worthy of your time, thought, or money.

I think it's ridiculous to think of 2001 as a "special effects" movie (which the Star Wars movies definitely are; without the tricks and gimmicks, the "special effects glamor" GT mentioned, why else would those godforsaken movies exist?), though its use of special effects is impressive. It's so, so much more than pretty special effects. For Kubrick, the special effects are a beloved and very carefully employed tool, not a crutch.

To me, the only- and I mean the only- truly relevant question is: Is Stanley Kubrick a filmmaker for the ages, as opposed to George Lucas, whose head is evidently so far up his own ass that he hasn't ever actually seen a movie? I'm entirely certain that anything who's been influenced by Kubrick is bound to make better films than anyone influenced by Lucas. Box office "scores" (and this is, very sadly, how it's thought of now) will not be thought of when people are still watching 2001 fifty years from now and laughing at how popular Star Wars was.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 29, 2004, 09:49:19 PM
Quote from: godardian
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman
Quote from: themodernage02also: i'm not sure what this argument is.  are you saying that because 2001 had good special effects, it couldnt have any good effect on movies?
This is what's annoying me. Star Wars had a bad effect on the box office economy, and 2001 made Star Wars possible, so 2001 is to blame?

This argument is (or at least has gone) completely insane. 2001 is like The Velvet Underground; a serious movie made by a die-hard movie-lover that many die-hard movie-lovers love (or hate for well-considered reasons) and that is hugely influential on a large number of those who really love cinema. Star Wars is like a disco-hits album you bought at the supermarket; infinitely more popular than The Velvet Underground, but it will date very badly and is infinitely less worthy of your time, thought, or money.

I think it's ridiculous to think of 2001 as a "special effects" movie (which the Star Wars movies definitely are; without the tricks and gimmicks, the "special effects glamor" GT mentioned, why else would those godforsaken movies exist?), though its use of special effects is impressive. It's so, so much more than pretty special effects. For Kubrick, the special effects are a beloved and very carefully employed tool, not a crutch.

To me, the only- and I mean the only- truly relevant question is: Is Stanley Kubrick a filmmaker for the ages, as opposed to George Lucas, whose head is evidently so far up his own ass that he hasn't ever actually seen a movie? I'm entirely certain that anything who's been influenced by Kubrick is bound to make better films than anyone influenced by Lucas. Box office "scores" (and this is, very sadly, how it's thought of now) will not be thought of when people are still watching 2001 fifty years from now and laughing at how popular Star Wars was.

While my respect for 2001 has wained in the last year, I do understand what everyone is saying. Yes, 2001 made Star Wars possible and maybe because of its intent, really is not to blame at all. But, I don't think 2001 really is that great of an achievement and when people see art through technology before anything else, I can understand that. Many people believe that Kubrick post 2001 became so increasingly obcessed with filmmaking that he lost his touch of being interesting with the stories, actors and dialogue and in 2001, see not a great art film, but a magnificent display of filmmaking before all and sadly, I must side with this group more so these days. Kubrick doesn't hold up well for me at all. And yea, I realize the shit storm this is going to create.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: modage on April 29, 2004, 09:55:44 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetMany people believe that Kubrick post 2001 became so increasingly obcessed with filmmaking that he lost his touch of being interesting with the stories, actors and dialogue and in 2001, see not a great art film, but a magnificent display of filmmaking before all and sadly, I must side with this group more so these days. Kubrick doesn't hold up well for me at all.
but arent most of the art films of the 60's that you admire known mostly for their filmmaking techniques and/or their ideas not the stories they were telling?  (the how, not the what?)  wouldnt 2001 be just as worthy under those qualifications?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on April 29, 2004, 09:59:13 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetBut, I don't think 2001 really is that great of an achievement and when people see art through technology before anything else, I can understand that.
If you think that's why people appreciate 2001, you need to read this thread...

http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=5802

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetKubrick post 2001 became so increasingly obcessed with filmmaking that he lost his touch of being interesting with the stories, actors and dialogue
How is it a bad thing that he [supposedly] shed the burden of conventional storytelling?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 29, 2004, 10:02:01 PM
Quote from: themodernage02
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetMany people believe that Kubrick post 2001 became so increasingly obcessed with filmmaking that he lost his touch of being interesting with the stories, actors and dialogue and in 2001, see not a great art film, but a magnificent display of filmmaking before all and sadly, I must side with this group more so these days. Kubrick doesn't hold up well for me at all.
but arent most of the art films of the 60's that you admire known mostly for their filmmaking techniques and/or their ideas not the stories they were telling?  (the how, not the what?)  wouldnt 2001 be just as worthy under those qualifications?

Its an interesting idea, but of course I'd back that up with all the art films from the 60s I liked and I thought were progressive in filmmaking techniques and ideas also had good stories to back them up. (I never said I loved the films of the 60s alone on structure) Of course, I don't love all the films from 60s and certain members can speak very highly of this I'm sure. Its a case by case situation and I don't think 2001 holds up that great. I like the film, but I cannot say its divine anymore.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 29, 2004, 10:09:24 PM
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetBut, I don't think 2001 really is that great of an achievement and when people see art through technology before anything else, I can understand that.
If you think that's why people appreciate 2001, you need to read this thread...

http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=5802

Sorry, I misspoke there. I meant to say I understand how people see great art through all the technology on the surface level of the film.

Quote from: Jeremy Blackman
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetKubrick post 2001 became so increasingly obcessed with filmmaking that he lost his touch of being interesting with the stories, actors and dialogue
How is it a bad thing that he [supposedly] shed the burden of conventional storytelling?

Too general to defend. I hardly believe Kubrick became that experimental in his storytelling after 2001 in any point besides Barry Lyndon. He kept pretty in line with his stories that I never thought he was that unique and many other filmmakers pushed further with their stories. Again, I believe his art was solely in his filmmaking abilities mainly and he glided his filmmaking with stories that were very general compared to many other films, films comparable to other films by other filmmakers who delved a lot better than Kubrick I think did.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Thrindle on August 09, 2004, 01:11:23 AM
GT,

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: ThrindleAnd will you let me read to you on summer afternoons?
Yes, cause if its a quality early 20th century book from an over priced second hand book store, I'll at least be able to appreciate the richness of the words in one sense even if I'm actually bored.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: ThrindleWould you allow me to sing in the car, while you were driving, without reaching to turn up the music?
With your talent of actual singing (I have none), you could elimate all reason for me to even own a cd player in my car.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: ThrindleCould I read you my poetry in the afternoon on the sundeck, and would you tell me you like it, no matter how meloncholy, melodramatic, or ridiculous it may be?
You could and the words you chose to spoke wouldn't even matter. The moving picture I could stare at of you reading, looking up slightly, quietly smiling, would be enough. Added upon that the soundtrack of your voice and its enough to daze and dream with for hours. Consider yourself blushed, consider myself slighlty embrassed.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: ThrindleCould I stay in my pajamas all day long (while watching movies) and would you still think I was cute?
I'd definitely find you cute, but we must take into account your totalitarian love of good hygeine for yourself but mostly for others around you.

Just smile and ask yourself: what were the odds?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on August 09, 2004, 11:20:38 AM
Quote from: ThrindleGT,

Just smile and ask yourself: what were the odds?

Thinking about the odds of us back then is fretting but thinking about the reality of us now is quite nice. No words can describe my smile these days.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pedro on August 09, 2004, 01:09:45 PM
awwwwww.  cute.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on August 10, 2004, 11:36:42 AM
Why did admins want to close Thrindle's thread when your thread is getting this high?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on August 10, 2004, 11:55:58 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: ThrindleGT,

Just smile and ask yourself: what were the odds?

Thinking about the odds of us back then is fretting but thinking about the reality of us now is quite nice. No words can describe my smile these days.

you know what would be cool ......and neat and lovely at the same time?.
if GT proposed to thrindle in the "ask thrindle" thread and she accepted ..and the wedding vows/services were held in the  xixax chat room....it would be an xixax first........


just an idea  though...........
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pedro on August 10, 2004, 12:59:30 PM
Quote from: NEON MERCURY
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: ThrindleGT,

Just smile and ask yourself: what were the odds?

Thinking about the odds of us back then is fretting but thinking about the reality of us now is quite nice. No words can describe my smile these days.

you know what would be cool ......and neat and lovely at the same time?.
if GT proposed to thrindle in the "ask thrindle" thread and she accepted ..and the wedding vows/services were held in the  xixax chat room....it would be an xixax first........


just an idea  though...........
right.  now, when he does it, it wouldn't be original and/or surprising....

should've PMed that shit.

you know GT, though...he's just in it for the action
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on August 10, 2004, 01:08:33 PM
Quote from: Pedro the Alpaca
you know GT, though...he's just in it for the action

......hahaha.

yeah, i have this theory on GT that ..
1. he is actaully a frat boy
2. he's more into music than film
3. he drinks heiniken likes its going out of style..and he smokes cloves.
4.  he sales insurance
5.  he looks like a sexier patrick swayze mixed w/ some joaquin phoenix thrown in for good measure
6.  scored 1389 on his SATs
7. he is mod-ages's doppleganger
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Thrindle on August 26, 2004, 04:19:59 PM
I dyed my hair black.  Do you still love me?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on August 27, 2004, 11:00:10 AM
Quote from: ThrindleI dyed my hair black.  Do you still love me?


To your shock and amazement I'm sure, but yes, I do!
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: meatball on November 26, 2004, 02:46:23 AM
where the hell are you, man?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 26, 2004, 11:33:52 PM
Quote from: pitbullwhere the hell are you, man?

Dead. This forum has past me by. Its become the old cigs and coffee forum in being dominated by personalities and not actual film talk. I just have no more motivation for anything here anymore.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Just Withnail on November 27, 2004, 09:16:41 AM
Sad, but understanable. I think I'm one of the few who appreciated your voice. Byebye, man.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gamblour. on November 27, 2004, 10:46:14 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: pitbullwhere the hell are you, man?

Dead. This forum has past me by. Its become the old cigs and coffee forum in being dominated by personalities and not actual film talk. I just have no more motivation for anything here anymore.

Well, if this "domination" has happened twice, maybe that's just the way things go.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Stefen on November 27, 2004, 11:21:51 AM
I guess you could call me a personality, so I attribute to GT's absense, but what can I say? Movies aernt what they used to be (last decade)
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on November 27, 2004, 12:08:06 PM
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetThis forum has past me by. Its become the old cigs and coffee forum in being dominated by personalities and not actual film talk. I just have no more motivation for anything here anymore.

What else do you expect with film talk?

Seriously, what did you expect?  We don't eat, drink and breathe cinema. (although we try).  We have other things going on, and we slowly start talking about that stuff more than we do with films because we grow accustomed to each other more.

That's pretty positive, wouldn't you say?  It's not like film discussion is completely evaporated.  It's here, but yeah, evereyday life talk has dominated most discussion because everyday life happens... everyday.  We like to talk about it, and we see new movies, and we discuss them.

I think this board is still very much alive with updates and discussion, and I guess I ranted on this long because I was just thinking the other day how much I love this board.  As far as message boards go, this one is the most consistent one I've ever posted on that didn't go completely wayward into trolling and flame wars, and lost its original focus.

I guess that's it.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Stefen on November 27, 2004, 12:14:17 PM
Best ever walrus post.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on November 27, 2004, 12:16:07 PM
Quote from: StefenBest ever walrus post.

I made Stefen proud! ::shitty emoticon::
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Stefen on November 27, 2004, 12:21:16 PM
Quote from: Sidewalrus, Kookookajoob
Quote from: StefenBest ever walrus post.

I made Stefen proud! ::shitty emoticon::

What a crappy post.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 27, 2004, 12:37:35 PM
Quote from: Sidewalrus, Kookookajoob
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetThis forum has past me by. Its become the old cigs and coffee forum in being dominated by personalities and not actual film talk. I just have no more motivation for anything here anymore.

What else do you expect with film talk?

Seriously, what did you expect?  We don't eat, drink and breathe cinema. (although we try).  We have other things going on, and we slowly start talking about that stuff more than we do with films because we grow accustomed to each other more.

That's pretty positive, wouldn't you say?  It's not like film discussion is completely evaporated.  It's here, but yeah, evereyday life talk has dominated most discussion because everyday life happens... everyday.  We like to talk about it, and we see new movies, and we discuss them.

I think this board is still very much alive with updates and discussion, and I guess I ranted on this long because I was just thinking the other day how much I love this board.  As far as message boards go, this one is the most consistent one I've ever posted on that didn't go completely wayward into trolling and flame wars, and lost its original focus.

I guess that's it.

Idle chatter has always existed, but I guess my point is that when film talk is appropriate for certain threads, they seem minimal. I always get the feeling people are coasting on their opinions by just saying what they like and thats it. Of course I'm generalizing, but call it an impression I picked up.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on November 27, 2004, 03:50:46 PM
Well, I agree film talk could be more in depth (I for one don't delve in too deep) but what about that Green Screen, thing?  I wouldn't say this site is totally void of discussion, but if it's not as big as it used to be, well you just might be right about that.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SiliasRuby on November 27, 2004, 04:07:11 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: Sidewalrus, Kookookajoob
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetThis forum has past me by. Its become the old cigs and coffee forum in being dominated by personalities and not actual film talk. I just have no more motivation for anything here anymore.

What else do you expect with film talk?

Seriously, what did you expect?  We don't eat, drink and breathe cinema. (although we try).  We have other things going on, and we slowly start talking about that stuff more than we do with films because we grow accustomed to each other more.

That's pretty positive, wouldn't you say?  It's not like film discussion is completely evaporated.  It's here, but yeah, evereyday life talk has dominated most discussion because everyday life happens... everyday.  We like to talk about it, and we see new movies, and we discuss them.

I think this board is still very much alive with updates and discussion, and I guess I ranted on this long because I was just thinking the other day how much I love this board.  As far as message boards go, this one is the most consistent one I've ever posted on that didn't go completely wayward into trolling and flame wars, and lost its original focus.

I guess that's it.

Idle chatter has always existed, but I guess my point is that when film talk is appropriate for certain threads, they seem minimal. I always get the feeling people are coasting on their opinions by just saying what they like and thats it. Of course I'm generalizing, but call it an impression I picked up.
I don't post long posts on here much unless it is something I have a strong feeling about (Most of the time, I just read others posts and smile) But here I felt I should speak up because this is something I have a strong feeling about.
I see both Gold Trumpet's and walrus's sides to this and I do think we are that we are becoming more and more involved with our everyday lives than the films that we are supposed to be living and breathing but I think that is a good thing. We are recognizing who each and every one of us is as a human being rather than just some guy (Or gal) behind a computer. I do wish we were a little more involved with the movie topics than just idle chatter. But, it doesn't bother me that much at all. I actually look forward to what other people have to say in the idle chatter section and it is something of seeing some humanity in the words in some posts that people have posted that I feel lacking in the outside world (I hope that sentence made some sort of sense; the edit button will haunt me with that one by the way.). This place called xixax is one of my few escapes where I always feel like I can be myself and get away with it without feeling guilty. Most people on here won't post back to what I said and that is fine. I just thought I should get this all out. Oh, one more thing, thank you so much everyone who helped put this site together, all the administrators, (yes, even you Pubrick; especially Mac), are doing a great job of keeping this place going, and to all the other posters who I have chatted with before: Thrindle, meatball (Pitbull), I just want to sincerely say thank you.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on November 27, 2004, 04:16:40 PM
We're all one big happy family!
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: cron on November 27, 2004, 09:40:47 PM
shhh
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: SiliasRuby on November 27, 2004, 09:51:40 PM
Quote from: cronopioshhh
Yeah, we don't want anyone to know that we are a happy family.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ©brad on November 27, 2004, 10:49:20 PM
oh my god.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Thrindle on February 09, 2005, 11:18:06 PM
Ok GT, I want honesty and constructive criticism.  Giver.

http://thrindle.deviantart.com/
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: cine on February 09, 2005, 11:21:14 PM
Quote from: ThrindleOk GT, I want honesty and constructive criticism.  Giver.

http://thrindle.deviantart.com/
don't you two talk anymore?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Stefen on February 09, 2005, 11:25:44 PM
did you and gt have sex?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Myxo on February 09, 2005, 11:46:48 PM
Electoral College is great.

The other two are so-so for me.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: modage on February 09, 2005, 11:56:16 PM
Quote from: Stefendid you and gt have sex?

they did, but that didnt work out so well...

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetAnother dissent. Yes, I didn't like the sex. But no, I wasn't out to hate it either. There was a feeling of backlash with me to how accepted 'intercourse with women' was, but I really believed it would have been a great experience for me. I had this experience with Xixax member Thrindle and she'll even verify I really wanted to like the intercourse but alas, i could not. It wasn't even mildly good for me. It was plain bad.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on February 09, 2005, 11:56:26 PM
Selected poems from the site....

Quote from: ThrindleElectoral College

We are rights, voices, shouts, cries,
we are passion.
We are victory.
We are legislated prejudice.
We are pro-life, rape-conceived, child.
We are reality tv.

We are Moral.

We are caffeine nicotine ephedrine
High.

We are heterosexual.
We are married
to our Swans,
and just-so houses.

We are two-person Pride,
on a Thursday afternoon.

We are learning,
we are reading,
we are voting,
we are singing,
our Prerogative.

We are Christian

We are upwardly mobile.
We are middle class rich.

We are trickle down.

We are free

and God,
We work hard,
for everything you have given us.

This reminds me of U2's God Part II. That song spoke about hyprocrisy in American culture in relation to morals and ethics. It was more of a religious focus while this is political. God Part II is really one of U2's most underrated song, bringing a feel (without ever specifically say its own meaning) of the insanity it is to not believe as much as to believe and how American culture spun it to outrageoussness. You spell it a little more, saying things that can be easily understood but to your credit, the lyricism clicks. It hits every note in a way that doesn't air out the subject and keeps a pace that has a really good effect to it.

Quote from: ThrindleNeed

Pull me in
to everything

you

I'll give
a year in my mind
and the secret
on my lips

To have you
have me
with burning streetlights
and my insomniac moon.

The best part of the poem is the separation between the first body and that "you" that sits alone. The transition is perfect because the first body hangs on the detail of what you really need, but there's no detail to be said. As it makes the transition, you are able to vocalize a breath being said by the audience as they read and the unbearable feeling of the author is really felt because so much more exists in that breath than one can imagine. Really a great achievement in just that part. I also know I am minimizing one part of the poem, but its by far the most interesting thing to comment on.

Quote from: ThrindleAnimation

Yesterday
I engaged in conversation
His words drizzled around my face
streaked my thoughts.
His dialect: frenetic dance
scampered without rhythm

His reverie splashed
into tinted air
I tried to correct his words, grammar, and
speech
sigh
Instead, he poured himself
into a rainbow

Really good. The ability to stream a normal situation into how one is able to show love really works in the "less is more" quality. You don't have to say how he loves, but pronounce the ability for him to transcend a minor moment in everyone's daily life.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Stefen on February 09, 2005, 11:58:43 PM
I could see myself fucking thrindle.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on February 10, 2005, 12:00:09 AM
Quote from: themodernage02
Quote from: Stefendid you and gt have sex?

they did, but that didnt work out so well...

Quote from: The Gold TrumpetAnother dissent. Yes, I didn't like the sex. But no, I wasn't out to hate it either. There was a feeling of backlash with me to how accepted 'intercourse with women' was, but I really believed it would have been a great experience for me. I had this experience with Xixax member Thrindle and she'll even verify I really wanted to like the intercourse but alas, i could not. It wasn't even mildly good for me. It was plain bad.

Your time of harassing me has finally paid off. Fucking beautiful.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Thrindle on February 10, 2005, 12:12:09 AM
Quote from: MyxomatosisElectoral College is great.

The other two are so-so for me.
Yeah, I think those two are so-so as well.  It's funny because as you get older your focus changes.  My melodrama has shifted somewhat... but it's starting to feel like apathy.  Whatever.

Thanks for the feedback... because I was really insecure about Electoral College.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Stefen on February 10, 2005, 12:24:20 AM
Hey Thrindle, talk about that one time where I said I could see myself fucking you.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Thrindle on February 10, 2005, 01:00:54 AM
Quote from: StefenHey Thrindle, talk about that one time where I said I could see myself fucking you.
I'm not into hate-sex.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on February 10, 2005, 08:33:54 AM
Quote from: Thrindle
I'm not into hate-sex.

But just imagine the make-up sex afterwards.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on April 05, 2005, 11:16:04 PM
GREEN SCREEN ANNOUNCEMENT:

I'm starting a Bi-Weekly column. Or, rather, a journal. Calling it a column makes me think I have a professional bone in my body about anything I do here. The purpose of me announcing this here of all places is that even though the material will be original in that I will write about select subjects, I also have a desire to attach the purpose of this thread to the journal. I'm accepting questions for a future journal through private message.

Try to keep the question related to film but if you want to bash me, be clever. I may even respond. I really don't mind, but also with not minding, I really don't expect much of anything question wise. Just look at the number of people who asked me questions through out this long thread and you'll see more people likely post now than have asked me a question. I give much kudos to the great Neon Mercury for being the life of this thread. I'm just putting this out there anyway.

So, if you want to throw me a question, I'll greatly appreciate it. I can gurantee nothing short of my best but that really may not be much given certain topics. Or a lot of topics! Its just I had so much fun doing this thread I would like to keep it going in some way.

Yes, the idea is as egocentric as you get, but I heard a critic recently say for a critic to be a critic he has to be somewhat arrogant. Lets say I'm just planting my roots here.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: life_boy on April 28, 2005, 05:45:50 PM
So, you mentioned a loss of respect for 2001.  If you did a Top 5 Favorite Films List now, has it changed much since January 2003?  

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet5 is easier than 10 for me.

1.) 2001: A Space Odyssey
2.) 8 1/2
3.) Grave of the Fireflies
4.) Apocalypse Now
5.) L'Avventura

(revised with PDL taken off and L'Avventura put on)

~rougerum
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 02, 2005, 04:53:13 PM
Quote from: life_boySo, you mentioned a loss of respect for 2001.  If you did a Top 5 Favorite Films List now, has it changed much since January 2003?  

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet5 is easier than 10 for me.

1.) 2001: A Space Odyssey
2.) 8 1/2
3.) Grave of the Fireflies
4.) Apocalypse Now
5.) L'Avventura

(revised with PDL taken off and L'Avventura put on)

~rougerum

Yea, 2001 would be definitely nixed, also Apocalypse Now. As I've gotten into literature more, Apocalypse Now really doesn't hold up at all to the standards many people give it. The film's descent into a 'heart of darkness' is, I would argue, facile. The rest (glad I took Punch-Drunk Love off the original list) is fine. Though on any given day Fellini's Amarcord could step in for 8 1/2, but both are equally great.

As to replacements of the two I nixed, I'm not sure. Andrei Tarkovsky's The Mirror has had a stranglehold on my mind and imagination for the last year without the ability for me to utter one comprehending thought on it. And in feeling I have to garner some attention to a recent film, I think Oliver Hirschbeigel's Downfall is the best film I've seen in years. Its really everything I could ask a film to be. (my official review is coming shortly). Those are just two films that popped into my head. Trying to complete an all new list is too hard. Give me a year notice.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Stefen on May 02, 2005, 04:57:07 PM
Why are you so AWESOME?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: meatball on May 02, 2005, 05:06:30 PM
Can I have your phone number?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 02, 2005, 05:12:17 PM
Quote from: StefenWhy are you so AWESOME?

If the questions means why, of all people, I have a thread like this? Well, I'm not the only one. One person made a thread like this and a bunch of people made copy cat ones. Mine, for whatever reason, has barely held out. Its not even popular. Mostly, its a few pages back at least and usually just inhabited by a few people. To those people, my eternal appreciation. They give me something to write about on here.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 02, 2005, 05:13:42 PM
Quote from: MeatCan I have your phone number?

no
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: meatball on May 02, 2005, 06:26:24 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: MeatCan I have your phone number?

no

GOD DAMMIT!
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on May 02, 2005, 08:41:26 PM
Why did you lose respect for 2001?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: deathnotronic on May 03, 2005, 04:11:06 PM
Where, oh where has my little dog gone?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Sigur Rós on May 03, 2005, 05:32:42 PM
Has a trumpet ever been made out of solid gold and if so who owns it?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 04, 2005, 11:47:08 PM
Quote from: WalrusWhy did you lose respect for 2001?

It really was played out for me. Once upon a time, I loved the film to an obcession. I read all the backstory and delved into Kubrick's own philosophy to how he thought aliens would be like and everything. I felt like I knew every detail that could have been learned about the film. Thing is, after really getting into more films than just Kubrick ones, the film never really grew. It just became the film that symbolized my introduction into really following film as an art.

I think the reason it never grew or became stiff in my interest is that it is too obcessed with technology. Now I understand the purpose of what 2001 was trying to do in storytelling, but I also believe Ingmar Bergman was correct when he said emphasis in films has to be on the human face. 2001 just never had that quality as other films did in becoming enriching on second viewings because of their humanity. 2001 became to me more a summation of an amazingly made film that is as enriching upon discovery as any film could be but just also as short sighted as any film could be. I really don't get any enjoyment out of watching that film anymore. I think its actually a better project than film.


Quote from: deathnotronicWhere, oh where has my little dog gone?

prolly dead considering your name.

Quote from: Sigur RósHas a trumpet ever been made out of solid gold and if so who owns it?

Only one has been made. Ted Turner owns its. He plays it as much as he goes to a Braves game, so like once a year. Too bad considering its value.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Reinhold on May 05, 2005, 09:28:08 PM
when is your green screen journal going to be up?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: MacGuffin on May 05, 2005, 09:40:49 PM
Do you find it annoying to read things in size=9?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: jtm on May 05, 2005, 09:50:16 PM
what ur favorite porno?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 06, 2005, 11:36:34 AM
Quote from: Reinhold Messnerwhen is your green screen journal going to be up?

Expect the first article done this weekend. I know its been an insane process, but school has finally called me a free man (for the time being)

Quote from: MacGuffinDo you find it annoying to read things in size=9?

I never even noticed til all the bad jokes about it came. Some people have too much time on their hands. So no, I don't.

Quote from: Jay Tee Emwhat ur favorite porno?

Shockingly, I don't have one. I'm a cinemax person and thats hardly pornography. I do have a favorite porn title though: Lickety Clit.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Sleuth on May 06, 2005, 12:01:50 PM
Did you ever meet Stan Kubrick.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 06, 2005, 12:38:12 PM
Quote from: SleuthDid you ever meet Stan Kubrick.

No, but I did keep the Chicago Tribune that had his tribute for five years.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: RegularKarate on May 06, 2005, 01:05:03 PM
Did Sleuth ever meet Stan Kubrick?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: meatball on May 06, 2005, 01:27:52 PM
What is the capital of Lithuania?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 07, 2005, 10:28:09 AM
Quote from: RegularKarateDid Sleuth ever meet Stan Kubrick?

Sleuth meet stan kubrick and never brag? Impossible. He would have been crowned royalty around here if he did.

Quote from: MeatballWhat is the capital of Lithuania?

Check a fucking map.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: meatball on May 07, 2005, 01:32:08 PM
I like your avatar. Who is it?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gamblour. on May 07, 2005, 01:53:54 PM
For god sakes, it Rachel McAdams.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Stefen on May 07, 2005, 02:21:00 PM
Why does meatball post in small letters? Is he looking for attention or is a mod making him do it?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: meatball on May 07, 2005, 03:06:56 PM
It's pleasing to my eyes.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Myxo on May 07, 2005, 03:12:30 PM
Quote from: MeatballIt's pleasing to my eyes.

Really?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Reinhold on May 07, 2005, 07:42:49 PM
suppose they made a platinum trumpet. would you upgrade your username?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 08, 2005, 10:38:09 AM
Quote from: MeatballI like your avatar. Who is it?

Though Gamblor correctly said her christian name, she's by far the most attractive women in movies/tv/everything. If Lorelai Gilmore was a real person, she'd win but she isn't.

Quote from: StefenWhy does meatball post in small letters? Is he looking for attention or is a mod making him do it?

Of course its for some attention. There's no other reason to do it. Its just while everyone is up in arms over this, I really don't see the big deal. In fact, considering I've taken years of complaints for writing "too much", I should do it to make my posts seem shorter.

Quote from: Reinhold Messnersuppose they made a platinum trumpet. would you upgrade your username?

I don't want my name to feel like a credit card.

gracias for the questions.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Reinhold on May 08, 2005, 04:07:09 PM
i've been gone for a long time. what's the deal with "03"?

i like this thread because i don't feel like as much of a stupid newby asking questions where you're supposed to ask questions.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on May 08, 2005, 05:14:53 PM
Quote from: Reinhold Messner
i like this thread because i don't feel like as much of a stupid newby asking questions where you're supposed to ask questions.

That's why there's no Ask Pubrick.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: RegularKarate on May 08, 2005, 05:55:44 PM
Quote from: WalrusThat's why there's no Ask Pubrick.

http://www.xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=1456
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on May 08, 2005, 07:51:32 PM
Quote from: RegularKarate
Quote from: WalrusThat's why there's no Ask Pubrick.

http://www.xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=1456

Weakest redirect ever.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: RegularKarate on May 08, 2005, 08:58:42 PM
Weakest "weakest something ever" ever
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 08, 2005, 10:34:32 PM
Quote from: Reinhold Messneri've been gone for a long time. what's the deal with "03"?

As it stands right now, it seems he is "Ariel". But, as always, he's just doing his thing. I can't tell much of a difference between him way before and now. He provides satisfaction for that certain niche it seems only he can fill.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Reinhold on May 09, 2005, 01:01:34 AM
is it safe to drink milk while reading his posts?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on May 09, 2005, 10:01:33 PM
is it safe to drink the milk from GDIDM's posts?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 09, 2005, 10:34:21 PM
Quote from: Reinhold Messneris it safe to drink milk while reading his posts?

I don't drink anything but milk.

Quote from: Walrus?is it safe to drink the milk from GDIDM's posts?

When a liquid has the same color as milk does, it doesn't always mean its the same thing or a different grade.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on May 10, 2005, 02:21:54 PM
Does life imitate art or does art imitate life?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 12, 2005, 09:35:45 PM
Quote from: Walrus?Does life imitate art or does art imitate life?

I don't believe in either really. Both have life in the other, but the final idea in the relation of art to life is that art makes life more interesting.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: I Don't Believe in Beatles on May 12, 2005, 09:45:43 PM
What's your favorite Monty Python film?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 12, 2005, 09:48:21 PM
Quote from: GingerWhat's your favorite Monty Python film?

Ready to have a lower opinion of me? Haven't seen one in its entirety, but caught part of The Holy Grail long time ago.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: jtm on May 12, 2005, 09:51:50 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: GingerWhat's your favorite Monty Python film?

Ready to have a lower opinion of me?

my opinion of you has just been raised.  i hate Monty Python and everything it stands for.

so, what are you wearing?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pubrick on May 12, 2005, 09:53:43 PM
Quote from: Jay Tee Emi hate Monty Python and everything it stands for.
uh, and what horrible thing is that exactly?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: jtm on May 12, 2005, 09:55:12 PM
comedy that's not funny
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 12, 2005, 10:02:05 PM
Quote from: Jay Tee Emso, what are you wearing?

My not seeing any Monty Python film isn't an opinion, just a fact.

Wearing? Hah, uhmmm...boots, socks, boxer shorts, bum-like black baggy jeans, green bay packer t shirt and top of that, a red flannel long sleeve shirt. You better not ask for cyber sex next. but gracis for the question, it made me laugh.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: jtm on May 12, 2005, 10:07:03 PM
then i guess my opinion's back to where it was :yabbse-wink: .... i just assumed there was a reason why you didn't watch them.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gamblour. on May 12, 2005, 10:14:07 PM
GT, watch Life of Brian sometime. Please? I guess that's my question.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: jtm on May 12, 2005, 10:17:45 PM
don't do it GT. it will ruin you.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gamblour. on May 12, 2005, 10:21:08 PM
Quiet. Hordes of fans say otherwise. The creators of Monty Python went to Oxford and Cambridge, you didn't. (Assumption, but probably true)
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 12, 2005, 10:38:35 PM
Quote from: Gamblor Posts DrunkGT, watch Life of Brian sometime. Please? I guess that's my question.

Sure. I think my lil bro owns it even. I'll report back on this thread with a quick summation of what I thought.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Reinhold on May 13, 2005, 11:52:34 AM
Quote from: Jay Tee Emdon't do it GT. it will ruin you.

how can you say that life of brian is terrible? the window/mob scene alone is worth owning it.

gt:

is it better to love and lose or not love at all, for the time being?

where's the ask kotte thread when you need it. :|
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: RegularKarate on May 13, 2005, 01:02:01 PM
People who don't at least APPRECIATE Python clearly have no idea what comedy is and ever was.

Why are you having him start with Brian?  Because it's the least Python Python?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gamblour. on May 13, 2005, 01:07:06 PM
Brian is Python, but not as zany. Besides, if GT gets to the end, I think he will love it. I imagine if GT were to like anything Python, this would be it. That could be a horrible assumption, however.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: jtm on May 13, 2005, 01:20:18 PM
Quote from: Reinhold Messner
Quote from: Jay Tee Emdon't do it GT. it will ruin you.

how can you say that life of brian is terrible? \:|

becuase i clearly have no idea what comedy is and ever was.

:yabbse-rolleyes:
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 13, 2005, 02:35:20 PM
Quote from: Reinhold Messneris it better to love and lose or not love at all, for the time being?

To have love and lost, for sure. The pain can almost be unbearable. The future a lost cause. Its the clearest feeling I've ever had of growing up.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Reinhold on May 13, 2005, 02:47:59 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: Reinhold Messneris it better to love and lose or not love at all, for the time being?

To have love and lost, for sure. The pain can almost be unbearable. The future a lost cause. Its the clearest feeling I've ever had of growing up.

even if it'll be short-lived and undeveloped at best?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: kotte on May 13, 2005, 02:56:50 PM
Quote from: Reinhold Messner
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: Reinhold Messneris it better to love and lose or not love at all, for the time being?

To have love and lost, for sure. The pain can almost be unbearable. The future a lost cause. Its the clearest feeling I've ever had of growing up.

even if it'll be short-lived and undeveloped at best?

Yeah, it's in pain you learn.

So what if it'll be short-lived, the most fantastic things can happen during that intense time.

I'm like a fucking gold fish. I get my heart crushed, forget all about it and throw myself out there again as fast as I can.

And over to GT... :)
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Reinhold on May 13, 2005, 03:05:18 PM
Quote from: kotteSo what if it'll be short-lived, the most fantastic things can happen during that intense time.

I'm like a fucking gold fish. I get my heart crushed, forget all about it and throw myself out there again as fast as I can.

And over to GT... :)

you should change your name to emilio
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.movieconnection.it%2Fschede%2Fkill_bill%2Fkb-bb.jpg&hash=2524423b7db12d62472b27ac7cad6b7c2a492c5b)
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 13, 2005, 10:58:03 PM
Quote from: Reinhold Messner
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: Reinhold Messneris it better to love and lose or not love at all, for the time being?

To have love and lost, for sure. The pain can almost be unbearable. The future a lost cause. Its the clearest feeling I've ever had of growing up.

even if it'll be short-lived and undeveloped at best?

Why not. You obviously have a clear idea of what you want now in a relationship if your able to be so clear about this past one. Ask yourself this, do you really feel like you know what you want now? Its different than knowing. Anyone at age 16 can say they want a healthy relationship or whatever, but I think if you were hurt recently, you really feel what you want to the point it contains clarity.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: MacGuffin on May 15, 2005, 09:08:21 PM
It would seem that member participation is down, with lack of contributing reviews and threads looking for opinions and input. First off, do you agree, or is it just me? If in agreement, what do you think the cause is? Members have lost interest, too much in-fighting, fear that their opinion will be attacked... all of the above and/or other? And how do you think we can remedy that? How can we made xixax better or back to the way when forums would lit up with new posts?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: I Don't Believe in Beatles on May 15, 2005, 09:32:43 PM
Do you know what Mac's avatar is from?

How about Horse's?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: jtm on May 15, 2005, 11:18:45 PM
Quote from: MacGuffinIt would seem that member participation is down, with lack of contributing reviews and threads looking for opinions and input. First off, do you agree, or is it just me? If in agreement, what do you think the cause is? Members have lost interest, too much in-fighting, fear that their opinion will be attacked... all of the above and/or other? And how do you think we can remedy that? How can we made xixax better or back to the way when forums would lit up with new posts?

yeah this place is dead, what happened?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: kotte on May 16, 2005, 12:18:23 AM
Quote from: Jay Tee Em
Quote from: MacGuffinIt would seem that member participation is down, with lack of contributing reviews and threads looking for opinions and input. First off, do you agree, or is it just me? If in agreement, what do you think the cause is? Members have lost interest, too much in-fighting, fear that their opinion will be attacked... all of the above and/or other? And how do you think we can remedy that? How can we made xixax better or back to the way when forums would lit up with new posts?

yeah this place is dead, what happened?

Come on, it's not dead. Far from it...but Guffy has a point.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Brazoliange on May 16, 2005, 12:24:34 AM
Quote from: MacGuffinIt would seem that member participation is down, with lack of contributing reviews and threads looking for opinions and input. First off, do you agree, or is it just me? If in agreement, what do you think the cause is? Members have lost interest, too much in-fighting, fear that their opinion will be attacked... all of the above and/or other? And how do you think we can remedy that? How can we made xixax better or back to the way when forums would lit up with new posts?

I still generally read, I'm just usually either lazy or not caring much ><

I do extremely appreciate some tidbits people drop:kiss:  (largely MacGuff), I just don't usually feel like I have anything to add.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: jtm on May 16, 2005, 12:37:43 AM
Quote from: kotte
Quote from: Jay Tee Em
Quote from: MacGuffinIt would seem that member participation is down, with lack of contributing reviews and threads looking for opinions and input. First off, do you agree, or is it just me? If in agreement, what do you think the cause is? Members have lost interest, too much in-fighting, fear that their opinion will be attacked... all of the above and/or other? And how do you think we can remedy that? How can we made xixax better or back to the way when forums would lit up with new posts?

yeah this place is dead, what happened?

Come on, it's not dead. Far from it...but Guffy has a point.

i didn't mean literally dead, i was just making a point that it's not like it used to be.... maybe we need more advertising to get the word out about this place and to get some more people here.  the only places i'm aware of with links to here are PTA's and Cameron Crow's site.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 16, 2005, 12:53:17 AM
Quote from: MacGuffinIt would seem that member participation is down, with lack of contributing reviews and threads looking for opinions and input. First off, do you agree, or is it just me? If in agreement, what do you think the cause is? Members have lost interest, too much in-fighting, fear that their opinion will be attacked... all of the above and/or other? And how do you think we can remedy that? How can we made xixax better or back to the way when forums would lit up with new posts?

I'll say it very generally...I think the problem is this place became too much of a fraternity with the senior and most popular members. I think they still have interest in movies, but most of them have been on this board for a while. When the best moments of the old board are named, they quote the most useless thread..."Peace Out", a very general chat turned into a thread.

Sure, a lot of them weren't on that board. I just feel there is a membership being carried around to idolize the old board and have a certain perspective for this board. Though they don't always agree on details, they have a general view point that does attack posts and undermine others and find humor at the maybe the expense of someone else.

For those who weren't on the old board and want a different perspective, my opinion is that board was terrible. It was a core group of people who found a niche they called their own board and used it as social hour. Discussion was ten times less there than here and as time went on, I got the feeling the senior members wanted to protect what they had. They didn't want outsiders. The moderator closed the board down because the number of people who wanted to talk film prolly could have been counted on just one of his hands.

So, yea, I think the main reason that attendance and interest has dropped off is the feeling of exlcusion many people people feel from the few. And as those people find their life busy, they have even less of a reason to come here. I'll soon be in that category. I've been lucky all this time to lead an easy life. This fall, I really go to a tough university. I can't see myself being the full member I've been in the past anymore. I have little motivation to do so.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 16, 2005, 12:58:34 AM
Quote from: GingerDo you know what Mac's avatar is from?

Really no clue. I'm usually good at knowing his, but lately I've been really clueless to what movies they are from.

Quote from: GingerHow about Horse's?

It's a very Truffaut-looking gangster and considering his filmography, Shoot the Piano Player maybe?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: cowboykurtis on May 16, 2005, 03:12:39 AM
cant be Piano Player - its in color

it looks like a scene from some short film he made
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Brazoliange on May 16, 2005, 04:11:18 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: MacGuffinIt would seem that member participation is down, with lack of contributing reviews and threads looking for opinions and input. First off, do you agree, or is it just me? If in agreement, what do you think the cause is? Members have lost interest, too much in-fighting, fear that their opinion will be attacked... all of the above and/or other? And how do you think we can remedy that? How can we made xixax better or back to the way when forums would lit up with new posts?

I'll say it very generally...I think the problem is this place became too much of a fraternity with the senior and most popular members. I think they still have interest in movies, but most of them have been on this board for a while. When the best moments of the old board are named, they quote the most useless thread..."Peace Out", a very general chat turned into a thread.

Sure, a lot of them weren't on that board. I just feel there is a membership being carried around to idolize the old board and have a certain perspective for this board. Though they don't always agree on details, they have a general view point that does attack posts and undermine others and find humor at the maybe the expense of someone else.

For those who weren't on the old board and want a different perspective, my opinion is that board was terrible. It was a core group of people who found a niche they called their own board and used it as social hour. Discussion was ten times less there than here and as time went on, I got the feeling the senior members wanted to protect what they had. They didn't want outsiders. The moderator closed the board down because the number of people who wanted to talk film prolly could have been counted on just one of his hands.

So, yea, I think the main reason that attendance and interest has dropped off is the feeling of exlcusion many people people feel from the few. And as those people find their life busy, they have even less of a reason to come here. I'll soon be in that category. I've been lucky all this time to lead an easy life. This fall, I really go to a tough university. I can't see myself being the full member I've been in the past anymore. I have little motivation to do so.

Thanks for saying that.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gamblour. on May 16, 2005, 10:22:21 AM
I think Mac's is Upright Citizens Brigade. Or at least that actor is.

I think people still talk, but it's just spread out over the twenty something subdivisions of forums. Maybe because a lot of the loud (not in a bad way) opinions aren't being said anymore.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pas on May 16, 2005, 11:54:46 AM
Quote from: Gamblor Posts DrunkI think Mac's is Upright Citizens Brigade. Or at least that actor is.

That's from Bring it On, you know that cheerleader movie. Oh man if it's not I'll be so laughable.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Reinhold on May 16, 2005, 03:47:15 PM
pc or mac for college?

studying to be a video editor next fall.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: RegularKarate on May 16, 2005, 04:19:35 PM
GT, if you tell him to get a PC just to be different, I'm locking your thread.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on May 16, 2005, 04:34:55 PM
PC's are crap for music and video editing.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Brazoliange on May 16, 2005, 06:42:05 PM
Quote from: Reinhold Messnerpc or mac for college?

studying to be a video editor next fall.

if you have money (read: lots), get a Mac with Final Cut Pro for the best video editing software available (literally)

if you don't have much, get a PC
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 16, 2005, 07:03:10 PM
Quote from: Reinhold Messnerpc or mac for college?

studying to be a video editor next fall.

No clue. everyone else's opinion on this thread is more valid than mine ever could be.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on May 16, 2005, 07:46:51 PM
You'd be insane to buy a PC for video editing.

On a related note, I job shadowed at a music studio about a year ago and they were running ProTools on OS9.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on May 16, 2005, 08:37:50 PM
I really can't think of the pro for having a PC.  Macs are just better with everything.  Hindsight is 20/20, I guess.


What one book, that you're pretty sure I haven't read, should I read?

What one movie, that you're pretty sure I haven't seen, should I see?

What one album, that you're pretty sure I haven't heard, should I hear?

Just wondering what sort of obscure treasures you'd want to spread the word about.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 16, 2005, 09:41:40 PM
Quote from: Walrus?What one book, that you're pretty sure I haven't read, should I read?

Not sure how much you're into history, but I'd recommend Paul Johnson's Modern Times. Yes, the writer has a conservative slant, but its really the most engagaing and thought provoking historical critical assessment I've ever read. I've read a ton of historical and political books that are easy to agree with, but none forced me to think more than this one. I only read the edition that goes to the 80s, but the newer addition is an assessment of modern times from the 20s to the 90s.

Quote from: Walrus?What one movie, that you're pretty sure I haven't seen, should I see?

Fritz Lang's "M". I just watched it recently and it blew me away. I never imagined a film (made just in 1931) could tackle its subject with such imagination and focus and made that long ago. Certain shots easily were ripped in Citizen Kane and there's a Paul Thomas Anderson hallmark moment where the camera glides along through a room to capture all the characters. Yet, the film was the first sound film by a filmmaker who arguably peaked with his silent films. But he doesn't abandon characteristics of his silent films in this one. He meshes both together to create what has to be one of the best made and even thought provoking films I've ever seen. (The philosophical aspect should be spoken about another time entirely) Simply, a powerful and imaginative film that is still as effective to watch as any movie today.

Quote from: Walrus?What one album, that you're pretty sure I haven't heard, should I hear?

Rattle and Hum, by U2. I'm nearly a U2 disciple, but this album is even overlooked by most fans. I  think its one of their top 3 albums ever. It has the spirit and musical flavor of a Springsteen album, but done to touch with likely Bono's best writing for an album ever. He's never been sharper than this album. Also, its a great live album. I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For is done to great re-imagination and other tracks are amped up to better energy than their studio counterparts. Love Rescue Me, their collaboration with Bob Dylan, is the best song on the album.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: life_boy on May 17, 2005, 10:31:20 AM
Do you go to film festivals or do you prefer seeing films in other environments?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 17, 2005, 10:47:57 AM
Quote from: life_boyDo you go to film festivals or do you prefer seeing films in other environments?

i live nowhere near a film festival to go see one, but I couldn't imagine it to be the proper environment to see a film. Its one week of trying to see as many movies as you can. I can only handle two films a day at the most and I usually do that once every two weeks. I've watched too many movies too often before that I wouldn't watch a movie for a week or even a month afterword. I don't watch movies as often as other people. If I could go to Cannes though, I definitely would.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on May 17, 2005, 02:15:08 PM
I appreciate your suggestions, but not only do I own M, I agree with you, completely... do you suggest any other movies?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: life_boy on May 17, 2005, 07:09:14 PM
What is (are) the most annoying trend(s) you see in contemporary mainstream films?

What is (are) the most annoying trend(s) you see in contemporary independent films?

Maybe I have just missed it, but you don't seem too big on documentaries.  What is your favorite documentary and what does it take (in your opinion) to make a great one?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 17, 2005, 09:42:59 PM
Quote from: Walrus?I appreciate your suggestions, but not only do I own M, I agree with you, completely... do you suggest any other movies?

The Son, by the Dardenne Brothers. Done a few years back, the film is a miracle. It has no suggestions of cliche and plays out by simply following a character who is making a discovery that will reliquinish the pain of a tortured past. Never does the story tell us background information. Its an account of what he goes through, his own experience. That's it. To those who think Million Dollar Baby was simple storytelling really need to see this film and think if that position still stands. I can't see how it could. The Son is one of the best films in recent years.

Quote from: life_boyWhat is (are) the most annoying trend(s) you see in contemporary mainstream films?

Kingdom of Heaven and everything it stands for. First, the fact Orlando Bloom is getting work these days continues the assumption by some this guy can actually act. Every note he had in the film was sour. Every pretensious, overwritten speech he gave made me cringe. I never knew a simple blacksmith was so in depth with philosophical rhetoric when the printing press had some hundred years to be invented. Then, the relationship of religion to violence in American films. As much as the characters believe in God, they believe in the art of war. This film believes in that historical character's foolish thinking. For a film trying to tackle the Crusades, instead of taking a neutral stance to show how insane the entire situation was, it happily believes in the character's heroics and transitions that belief to the audience that War and God do mesh. Unlike most, I wasn't appalled by The Passion of the Christ for its extreme graphic nature. It was so graphic I felt it should have appealed to me. There's a reason Quentin Tarantino called it the best film by an actor-director since Night of The Hunter. And you know what, I hate the historical context mainstream films put most of these events in. (just realized I basically argued that point as well)

Quote from: life_boyWhat is (are) the most annoying trend(s) you see in contemporary independent films?

The feeling that good writing is continually getting pushed back in what should be important for a film. As much as a camera trick can keep me interested or disillusioned, they come up more hollow these days than ever before. For me, a few directors are sheer filmmaking hollowness. Wes Anderson at the very top. Reason why I didn't really critique him my Life Aquatic review is that it would have been useless. He's a pure cult director so I gave up on the idea of thinking and tried to enjoy that movie. I just could never watch it again. It took Sydney Lumet 10 years or so to realize his camera was at the behest of his screenplay. Few filmmakers are transmitting the visual image and pure editing (without reliance on a strong screenplay) to actual good work.

Quote from: life_boyMaybe I have just missed it, but you don't seem too big on documentaries. What is your favorite documentary and what does it take (in your opinion) to make a great one?

I'm really not into documentary films that much. Its not that I surveyed as many as I could and came to a grand conclusion, but I've seen a general amount and came to a good enough one. As much as I do like certain documentaries, i've never seen a documentary that was better than the best non fiction book I've read. So many documentary feel like cliff notes for really good non fiction books.

But, I'm also pleading ignorance. There are some documentaries I want to see. Many many Holocaust films (from what I've read) have the most sane idea of what a documentary should be: just the recording of an interview or an experience that doesn't chain the film down to facts or data. Thats my perfect idea of a documentary right now. I just need better motivation to get them. The problem is many docs don't interest me.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: w/o horse on May 17, 2005, 11:11:35 PM
What is really interesting to me is the idea of telling a story, of a man or a place, through vignettes, that a story can have an emotional undertone, a current, rather than physical reactions, a physical  current.  As in; Gummo.  The first couple of times I saw Gummo I thought it was trying way too hard to smash the ball out of the park, but when I watch it now I realize that I know this town.  I know these people, and they are defined to me by the things they aren't doing in the movie as much as by what they are doing, as in the seemingly random activities (cat hunting, arm wrestling, working out, etc) eventually amount to a psyche.  I use Gummo as an example because I am from Xenia and know people like those in Gummo (even though it was not filmed in Xenia) and at the end of the movie I feel the same as I do when I hang out with those people.  In that way, the movie has made an emotional connection with me, which is the purpose of storytelling.

I bring this up because that is how I see The Life Aquatic.  I think that, more than his other movies, Anderson was telling a story, a rather exact story, about Steve Zissou.  When I am done watching Raging Bull I vicariously feel invigorated, through having been through so much with Jake La Motta.  When I am done watching The Life Aquatic, I feel drained (please no clever puns about my use of drained), as Steve Zissou does in the film.  In fact, I think Raging Bull and The Life Aquatic are very similar, not in their narrative structure, but in their aims.  Both movies are microcosms of male cultural.  While Raging Bull has an amped, energetic feel; Life Aquatic is apathetic, it is whimsical, but focused.  The movie never loses track of where it is in Steve Zissou's struggle, or, as it may be, his anti-struggle.  As to say that the confrontations are mainly internal, again like Raging Bull, and that Zissou is mainly battling himself.

What about this do you find disagreeable?

Also, are you all guys from another board, or have you been together for a long time, etc?  Because I live in LA, I am a film student, I know many film lovers, and I have not encountered such bottle necked ideology as I have here.  Shouldn't film communities be fluid, constructive places, in which ideas are challenged, not in which more or less the same opinion is buttressed?  Or is this just a newcomer's perception of things entirely, and the group of people are quite open to unorthodox ideas?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ghostboy on May 17, 2005, 11:18:23 PM
I think, for the most part, the latter is the case.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: modage on May 18, 2005, 08:53:56 AM
yeah i agree with ghostboy.  and everyone else agrees with me.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: w/o horse on May 18, 2005, 11:32:27 AM
Hey, are you guys being ironical.  I get it.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 18, 2005, 12:29:30 PM
About Life Aquatic...

My fault with the film isn't in the structure of the storytelling. It's in the story and everything else. Where you connect with the film, I just see gloss. It's truly a cult film. You either get it or you don't.

About the board....

I definitely see a majority viewpoint for many arguments, but if you dig deeper, people have different tastes. Its just there are little arguments going on right now. It seems out of fashion to extend oneself to really argue with someone else other than through a petty fight.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Reinhold on May 18, 2005, 03:39:43 PM
what's your favorite peanutbutter-and-____________  sandwich?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 18, 2005, 11:07:37 PM
Quote from: Reinhold Messnerwhat's your favorite peanutbutter-and-____________  sandwich?

Peanutbutter and peanuttbutter. Combination of things on bread never go well with my stomach, so just the peanuttbutter, please.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: 03 on May 18, 2005, 11:13:55 PM
should i have a thread like this?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 18, 2005, 11:19:06 PM
Quote from: 03should i have a thread like this?

Absolutely. It would be 10 times more interesting than mine. To those who know my writing, my answers are always somewhat predictable.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Reinhold on May 19, 2005, 10:05:26 PM
what would you do with $600 that you couldn't save or spend on dvd's?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 21, 2005, 02:25:19 PM
Quote from: Reinhold Messnerwhat would you do with $600 that you couldn't save or spend on dvd's?

Think about buying a lot of books, but not because I have too many to read as is. In the end I'd just pay off my school debt. How boring I can really be.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: meatball on May 23, 2005, 02:26:41 PM
Why did you return after your hiatus last year? Boredom, depression, or both?


Also, how do you feel about the success of 03's Thread?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on May 23, 2005, 11:50:49 PM
Should I have a thread like this?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 26, 2005, 12:35:27 PM
Quote from: magic school busWhy did you return after your hiatus last year? Boredom, depression, or both?

More boredom of the two, but also a new found interest in film. The problem of return has been to capulate my interest into something.


Quote from: magic school busAlso, how do you feel about the success of 03's Thread?

Happy for him. It's a good outlet.

Quote from: Walrus!Should I have a thread like this?

Sure. If you really want it. Its just their interest is so sporadic for everyone here. Be able to accept a failed thread.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Stefen on May 26, 2005, 12:46:41 PM
Should I have a thread like this?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Brazoliange on May 26, 2005, 02:21:55 PM
it'll be fun when everyone has a thread and noone is posting in the others because "it'd look like they don't know these things, and make their thread invalid"

= gg xixax
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: life_boy on May 26, 2005, 02:23:02 PM
I'm sure most of us on Xixax are familiar with your thoughts on Star Wars, GT, but I'm curious if you have any plans on seeing Episode III?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pubrick on May 26, 2005, 07:40:15 PM
threads like this started years ago with ask moniker jones, and all his buddies.

so much for history's mistakes..
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 28, 2005, 01:03:55 AM
Quote from: StefenShould I have a thread like this?

Yes. This board needs a sports reference. Just don't bash Brett Favre. I'll be the expert on him.

Quote from: life_boyI'm sure most of us on Xixax are familiar with your thoughts on Star Wars, GT, but I'm curious if you have any plans on seeing Episode III?

I finally saw the third one yesterday. Terrible, but not egregious. I make no attempt to apologize for the series. Every episode has been terrible. George Lucas is not a filmmaker. Fan boys know no other filmmaker and apologists understand the limitation of the films, but obviously have more passion to devour these films than others. And then their top ten lists just reflect every major critics list anyways.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: life_boy on May 28, 2005, 10:11:45 AM
Judging from some of your favorite films lists and other films you praise that Akira Kurosawa is a very important filmmaker to you.  What fascinates you about Kurosawa?  Also, what can/should a relative newcomer to Kurosawa (such as myself) hope to pull from his work on first viewings?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: meatball on June 10, 2005, 09:49:39 PM
What are you up to?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Reinhold on June 10, 2005, 11:13:41 PM
how do you feel about brett favre making the list of the 100 greatest americans? he's in the company of MLK, Jr.; Ellen DeGeneres, George W. Bush, and Charles Lindbergh; etc.

i was boycotting it because Mr. Rogers didn't make the list. matt lauer pointed Mr. Rogers' absence out in a daily show interview. that made me feel somewhat better.

your thoughts?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Stefen on June 10, 2005, 11:27:57 PM
What are your thoughts on Matt Lauer?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on June 16, 2005, 06:10:45 PM
Quote from: life_boyJudging from some of your favorite films lists and other films you praise that Akira Kurosawa is a very important filmmaker to you.  What fascinates you about Kurosawa?  Also, what can/should a relative newcomer to Kurosawa (such as myself) hope to pull from his work on first viewings?

Kurosawa is a master at his genre but late in his career transcended it to not make some of the very best films, but topping his own previous work. If he would have stopped at Ran, it would have been the perfect ending. He is the shakespeare of the action adventure and has not only made films that still top that genre to this day, but molded the genre in such a way most films made today have influence from what Kurosawa did for storytelling. This refers to dramas, comedies, and even romance films. The structures for most of those films is the gradual build up, the push of tension in the storyline to a larger finish. Certainly, Hitchcock is no stranger to this, but Hitchcock never made plot so tied into the characters. Kurosawa did. You look at the best Kurosawa has done you can see elements of every type of film within them.

Quote from: Reinhold Messnerhow do you feel about brett favre making the list of the 100 greatest americans? he's in the company of MLK, Jr.; Ellen DeGeneres, George W. Bush, and Charles Lindbergh; etc.

All lists so ambitious are dumb. None are exceptions. I'm surprised Favre made the list. Obviously he represents a demographic of American culture and obviously the list being made now favors his inclusion over Joe Montana who has been long retired. I'm happy he made it, even if I know he wouldn't care to have. Arguably one of the best football players, he does adaquately represent more in being the true sportsman who plays through personal strain and is respectful to all. Though its obvious Manning has the numbers right now, Favre is still in the top 5 for most popular athletes in America with a team that has little advertising dollars to really help him. He also has not faultered much in his personal game. That says something and I think he'll have a legacy that will live on.

Quote from: Stefen Posts Drunker What are your thoughts on Matt Lauer?

I almost have none, but anyone who makes news for a haircut over anything else does have issue with how serious he should be taken. Plus, the morning show format is a shit one. Bob Costas anyday.

Quote from: KLAUS NOMI What are you up to?

Right now without a computer to call my own. A certain situation that will last all summer. Its a nice freedom to do other things, among them calling reading a true hobby. Still watching films and still an asshole about what I see. I plan to return to more adaquate representation here, even though I realize I may not be able to do everything I had once hoped to do. I still do want to make a dent on this board. Its also nice to not know whats going on so please, continue updating my Criterion thread.

Oh, and I loved Batman Begins. Pure genre fun that finally got me excited to call a big summer action film my own the way Star Wars fans do.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ravi on June 16, 2005, 06:57:38 PM
What's your opinion of Tim Burton?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Reinhold on June 17, 2005, 12:03:29 AM
what's your favorite way to pick up chicks?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on June 18, 2005, 01:20:34 AM
Quote from: RaviWhat's your opinion of Tim Burton?

I appreciate his work, but I'm not really a great fan. For instance, I'm enthusiastic about his upcoming remake of a film considered by everyone a hallmark classic but to me a drab of a film. I think Burton can injest the right energy and imagination into Charlie and the Chocolate Factory to elevate it beyond the second rate musical the original is. Its just I'm not a fan of his accepted classics, like Edward Scissorhands. The story is dry and I never felt much emotion. Burton has talent, but nothing to make me believe he is a great director. He's a great stylist to elevate films to a certain point.

Its like my opinion for Robert Rodiguez and Danny Boyle. Don't care for their usual work, but love their ventures into films less serious and more imaginative, like Spy Kids and Millions. Big Fish happens to be my favorite Burton film.

Quote from: Reinhold Messner what's your favorite way to pick up chicks?

That question suggests I have a routine adaquetely placed for a situation where the only thing to do is to pick up chicks, like a bar or a night club. Don't hang out there much nor really don't understand their appeal so I really don't have a "pick up" line. One thing I have learned recently is that the beautiful are a facade. You may think if you tried your hardest to get a great looking girl you just saw, you prolly won't "get" her. Chasing isn't the purpose. The idea is if you are yourself around her and there is any chance she will be attracted, she will be. She'll allow for a connection to open up in some way. Progress like that works and makes taking chances easier and pick up lines non-essential.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Reinhold on June 18, 2005, 08:58:13 PM
who do you think will be the first writer/director on xixax to make a feature for a huge studio?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: jtm on June 18, 2005, 09:40:56 PM
Quote from: Reinhold Messnerwho do you think will be the first writer/director on xixax to make a feature for a huge studio?

i'll answer this for him.

me.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Reinhold on June 19, 2005, 10:31:18 AM
haha. i figger'd someone'd do that.

not specifically jtm, but someone.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pubrick on June 19, 2005, 08:23:23 PM
Quote from: Reinhold Messnerfigger'd
move over, silias..
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: deathnotronic on June 20, 2005, 02:08:48 AM
Elk or moose? Why?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Jeremy Blackman on June 20, 2005, 02:10:08 AM
Everyone knows that elk are more majestic.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: deathnotronic on June 20, 2005, 03:14:48 AM
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanEveryone knows that elk are more majestic.
Haha. My background is a vector of an elk named after a Weakerthans song (Psalm for the Elks Lodge Last Call) and it's just an elk sitting in water. I guess you could say it inspired the question.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on June 20, 2005, 10:11:40 PM
Quote from: Pubrick
Quote from: Reinhold Messnerfigger'd
move over, silias..

agrees
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Stefen on June 20, 2005, 10:17:46 PM
I just read that joke, it was fantastic. i don't have anymore thoughts. that is all.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: 72teeth on August 01, 2005, 02:11:32 AM
hey, GT, What happened, on Wed Jul 20, 2005, at 10:01 am, that it actually made 72 xixaxars drop everything they were doing and hop aboard?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ on August 02, 2005, 10:26:31 AM
Quotehey, GT, What happened, on Wed Jul 20, 2005, at 10:01 am, that it actually made 72 xixaxars drop everything they were doing and hop aboard?

http://www.xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=2&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=210

About the middle of the page.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: 72teeth on August 02, 2005, 10:30:51 AM
ohhhh, okay, thanks :yabbse-thumbup:
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Reinhold on August 06, 2005, 05:06:06 PM
when was the last time you were personally in the presence of greatness?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ravi on August 06, 2005, 06:50:19 PM
Quote from: Reinhold Messnerwhen was the last time you were personally in the presence of greatness?

He's not James Lipton.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Reinhold on August 14, 2005, 12:02:45 AM
do you see golf courses as a waste of land?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on August 15, 2005, 06:20:45 PM
Quote from: Reinhold Messnerwhen was the last time you were personally in the presence of greatness?

Just this past Thursday attending the Packer preseason game against the Chargers. Favre is nowhere near over the hill.

Quote from: Reinhold Messnerdo you see golf courses as a waste of land?

Yes. And not only for the space, but also for the chemicals injected into the ground to keep up a "lush" appearance.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: hedwig on August 15, 2005, 06:23:58 PM
who is the most beautiful first lady ever?
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on August 17, 2005, 08:26:39 PM
Quote from: Hedwigwho is the most beautiful first lady ever?

Pat Nixon only when portayed by Joan Allen.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ravi on August 17, 2005, 08:27:58 PM
Eleanor Roosevelt was fine.
Title: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Reinhold on August 19, 2005, 11:30:39 AM
where the hell did you go?

why don't you post anymore?
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Find Your Magali on November 29, 2005, 12:25:15 AM
1. What's the best new movie you've seen in the past 60 days

2. What's the best movie you've revisited on video in the past 30 days.

Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pubrick on November 29, 2005, 01:36:48 AM
Find Your Magali.. find your sense!

we really didn't need to revive this fad.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gamblour. on November 29, 2005, 02:28:19 AM
Yeah, no one post anything ever.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pubrick on November 29, 2005, 02:32:31 AM
uh oh a rivalry (re?)emerges..
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gamblour. on November 29, 2005, 12:11:21 PM
No rivalry. It's just you're just so goddamn quick to be negative and formulate what and how something should be talked about. it was this kinda sarcastic jabbing at first, now it's dictatorial. it's like you try and cleanse the boards of stupidity or whatever you consider vapid. sure, it keeps dumbass newbs in check, but why extend it beyond that? i dunno, i could live without it.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: polkablues on November 29, 2005, 04:52:56 PM
We should change the name of this thread to "Don't Ask Pubrick".
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on November 30, 2005, 05:55:28 PM
Quote from: Find Your Magali on November 29, 2005, 12:25:15 AM
1. What's the best new movie you've seen in the past 60 days

2. What's the best movie you've revisited on video in the past 30 days.

Many apologies for not getting to this sooner. I always think I need more time to think about these questions than I really do, but I love responding nonetheless.

1.) I'd have to say Good Night, and Good Luck. While I respect Shaftr for calling it the best film of the year, I wouldn't go so far. The closeness the film has to its subject, a dated one, is a good and bad predicament. The good is that Clooney adjusts the filmmaking to suit that closeness. He makes this film like a performance film where he allows the gravity of the situation and scenes to play out. He hardly relies on usual set ups that would suggest usual storytelling methods, but allows the camera to record the nuances in the scenes. The editing is fabulous. A great attempt to convey experience for a situation many of us who have no identity to. A second viewing only confirmed that for me. The negative is that the closeness does not allow him to convey themes that transcend the period and situation. It's a historical document to those who are curious enough. With a film like Downfall, the aspect of historical document is there but the pronoucement of Hitler's demise is so great and challenging it begs difficult questions we see in our world today. It makes us to take into account the idea of humanity in criminals we rather deem evil because it makes us sleep better at night.

2.) The Wild Bunch. I've always really liked this film, but I rented it again and am having a hard time not believing it is one of the best American films ever made. There is also a context to why this film stands so high for me right now. Recently I wrote an essay on Quentin Tarantino in the realm of Post-Modernism. The definition of Post-Modernism is tricky. Every theorist has a different idea. The one I keep with is the loss of morality in cinema and the subsequent challenge many modern films put to the taboos and mores of our society. With the Wild Bunch, you have a film that defines Hollywood because it is a western. The change is that the killers are the heroes. Before Hollywood would romanticize bad guys but give into right and wrong by the end. This film, like Bonnie and Clyde, paints the killers as heroes to the bitter end. Unlike Bonnie and Clyde, The Wild Bunch appeals to the true sense of mythic in Hollywood. Bonnie and Clyde is identifiable to our times because killers still exist like them so the identification in the audience can be lost because we are taught to sympathize with the victims. The Wild Bunch is for another time. As films have made killers and violence easy entertainment since then, Peckinpah makes this The Wild Bunch as it was his passionate belief in philosophy. The filmmaking is poetic and the killer's drive to violence is so identifiable that it reminds us of our identification to excess and the pride we can take in their brotherhood. 
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: JG on November 30, 2005, 07:29:00 PM
Do you like any Wes Anderson movies?  If so, which one?  If none, why not?  Do you think Wes Anderson has had a negative effect on movies in the past few years?

Would you concur with me when I say City of God is the best movie of the decade? 

What are your thoughts Ang Lee's masterpiece:  The Ice Storm?

What's your favorite Fellini? 
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: pete on December 01, 2005, 01:14:56 AM
Quote from: polkablues on November 29, 2005, 04:52:56 PM
We should change the name of this thread to "Don't Ask Pubrick".

backfired!
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: polkablues on December 01, 2005, 02:17:49 AM
Quote from: JimmyGator on November 30, 2005, 07:29:00 PM
What's your favorite Fellini? 

I can't speak for GT, but I would have to go with Federico.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pubrick on December 01, 2005, 04:44:31 AM
Quote from: pete on December 01, 2005, 01:14:56 AM
Quote from: polkablues on November 29, 2005, 04:52:56 PM
We should change the name of this thread to "Don't Ask Pubrick".

backfired!
why? because polkablues is poorer than u?
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gamblour. on December 01, 2005, 09:11:38 AM
haha
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Alethia on December 01, 2005, 11:10:55 AM
Quote from: JimmyGator on November 30, 2005, 07:29:00 PM
Would you concur with me when I say City of God is the best movie of the decade? 

I can't speak for GT either, but FUCK NO.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: JG on December 01, 2005, 01:52:43 PM
Do you just not like it or you just don't think it's worthy of that praise.   I could respect the latter. 

City of Gods is great and i love it. 
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Find Your Magali on December 01, 2005, 03:42:09 PM
Thanks, GT. .... Living where I live, I'll have to wait for the DVD of Clooney's latest film. ... But, in the meantime, I can check out Wild Bunch, which believe it or not I've never seen.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Alethia on December 01, 2005, 04:41:57 PM
Quote from: JimmyGator on December 01, 2005, 01:52:43 PM
Do you just not like it or you just don't think it's worthy of that praise.   I could respect the latter. 

City of Gods is great and i love it. 

you couldn't respect both?  i really hated it, i have to say.  the praise just makes me hate it even more.  you should check out pixote.  ahh pixote.  pixote is one of my all time favorite pictures.  just too many great scenes.  a classic, without a doubt.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: JG on December 01, 2005, 04:52:34 PM
to be fair i haven't seen nearly as many movies as you guys.  especially from this decade  and, i haven't seen city of god since it's release on DVD.  But I can't think of any other movies that top it.  Certainly nothing from this year.  I really liked Minority Report, PDL, Eternal Sunshine (a couple cliche responses I know)...but I really loved City of God.   

I'm interested (maybe we should head over to the city of god thread to continue this), what do u hate about it?   last i remember, it was pretty amazing and hard to hate.   i really should revisit it before i throw something like that around.   it's certainly a subjective question, so i unno. 

Anyways, I thought I remembered reading that GT loved it.  so i just wanted to know his thoughts on it. 
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: ono on December 01, 2005, 07:17:31 PM
Quote from: JimmyGator on December 01, 2005, 04:52:34 PMI'm interested (maybe we should head over to the city of god thread to continue this), what do u hate about it?
Yes please.  Though I doubt you'll find too many people who want to argue anymore about why they dislike a movie, here are some of my thoughts:

http://xixax.com/index.php?topic=56.msg92596#msg92596
http://xixax.com/index.php?topic=7063.msg168725#msg168725

And SHAFTR's argument: http://xixax.com/index.php?topic=5583.msg167266#msg167266
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: pete on December 02, 2005, 12:59:04 AM
Quote from: Pubrick on December 01, 2005, 04:44:31 AM

why? because polkablues is poorer than u?

no, mainly because you're fat.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on December 02, 2005, 12:59:50 AM
haha
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pubrick on December 02, 2005, 01:10:25 AM
Quote from: pete on December 02, 2005, 12:59:04 AM
Quote from: Pubrick on December 01, 2005, 04:44:31 AM

why? because polkablues is poorer than u?

no, mainly because you're fat.
i'm not, tho.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on December 02, 2005, 01:57:03 AM
Quote from: JimmyGator on November 30, 2005, 07:29:00 PM
Do you like any Wes Anderson movies?  If so, which one?  If none, why not?  Do you think Wes Anderson has had a negative effect on movies in the past few years?

I really don't. I use to enjoy Bottle Rocket but trying to watch it the other day was tough. The main reason I dislike his films is because there is nothing to them besides the style his fans have come to love. He is really making no progression at all besides in set design and he seems to have no interest to do so. I was flipping through Rebels on the Backlot the other day at a friends house and I noticed how self serving he and other young filmmakers are to their own greatness. They already attend award ceremonies that honor their careers. It's trendy. If I think he is having a bad influence, I'm not sure. On my campus the film buffs love him. He's easily the most quoted director for favorites and everyone who plans to make serious professions in film swear by him. That doesn't bother me. I don't expect the majority to have my opinion whether Wes Anderson exists or not. If Wes Anderson is transformed into genius filmmaker in 20 years like many filmmakers from the 70s then that will be bad. But bad movies will over whelmingly be made if he exists or not.

Quote from: JimmyGator on November 30, 2005, 07:29:00 PMWould you concur with me when I say City of God is the best movie of the decade?

I would definitely say it has a "best of" quality. Best film so far? I wouldn't agree. It is a genre work and I do separate genre from film, but it bleeds so much talent I'd understand some saying it was a true art film. If you look at its identity it is inundated with so much violence that it reflects most average violent films as well. Meirelles is starting to move away from genre. Constant Gardener ultimately gives in, but is a major step nonetheless. City of God will continue on as a testament in being a step above anything Hollywood will likely put out for the genre.

Quote from: JimmyGator on November 30, 2005, 07:29:00 PMWhat are your thoughts Ang Lee's masterpiece:  The Ice Storm?

I need to watch it again. The original viewing was OK. I remember enjoying the pathos of the story, but feeling it was served through dialogue in the manner of American Beauty. The drama felt like it was on the surface, but kudos to Ang Lee for proving the most adaptable director out there. Take that summation at face value. I haven't seen it in a while.

Quote from: JimmyGator on November 30, 2005, 07:29:00 PMWhat's your favorite Fellini? 

It will be hard to get beyond 8 1/2. It is one of the five foreign films I first saw that got me into film seriously and still has so much enjoyment to it after all these years. I do think Amarcord is the better film, but my bad luck is 8 1/2 was my introduction to Fellini. In ways it will always remain my identity to Fellini.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: JG on July 26, 2006, 08:44:41 PM
Bump.

GT, I've loved your posts recently, so if u don't mind i have a few questions. 

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on December 02, 2005, 01:57:03 AM
It is a genre work and I do separate genre from film

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 26, 2006, 12:38:55 AM
The world of European cinema has given a context to genre that is lacking in the United States. It can allow for greater themes and discussions to be pursued.

Could you elaborate a little bit on your 'genre versus film' theory?   You've mentioned Melville lately in your posts, and here's a director who, despite being essentially a genre filmmaker, never conformed to any of the genre's conventions, which must give him some credence as an art filmmaker.   feel free to discuss your feelings on melville's films in general.   

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 23, 2006, 12:51:12 AM
Ang Lee is growing on me all the time.

Have you since reviewed The Ice Storm since I last asked your opinion on it? 

Lastly, you mentioned Bresson in the Antonioni thread.  How do you feel about his films? 
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on July 26, 2006, 09:48:51 PM
gt, i am going to ask you some fun questions....these are the kind that you can sit back and drink cola and eat pretzel sticks while you type.

question one:

do you like drift racing?


question two:

how old were you when you stopped wetting the bed?  [i was kind of old actually ...15 to be exact..my doctor said my bladder wasnt big like most kids]

question three:

which xixax member to you think is most like you?

question three:

do you kind of hate me?

question four:

how come gamers have pale skin, and look emaciated, and have the worst tastes in music?

question five:

do you like white people that act black?

question six:

if you had to choose a sex partner between these three full house stars ..who would it be...and why?:  1) uncle jesse  2) uncle joey  3)  viper [d.j.'s reckless boyfriend]   

question seven:


do you think any of us are fake?..if so, who?

question eight:

what forum do you think is pointless?

question nine:

do you think it would be cool if i took a bubble bath w/ lance bass now knowing that likely he would say yes if i asked him?

question ten:

alot of times i cant understand your posts b/c your grammar is very good and i need to look at a dictionary to understand what you say...are you naturally girfted or do you read alot?



Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on July 27, 2006, 03:19:27 AM
Quote from: JG on July 26, 2006, 08:44:41 PM
Could you elaborate a little bit on your 'genre versus film' theory?

I'm not sure I have a theory. I do have a few ideas though. 

I look at genre as an extension of melodramatics. Melodrama, before it was a romance subgenre, held a literary position as the lower tier to tragedy. Melodrama based conflict on good vs evil. Tragedy based conflict on ideas and character. The parimeters of melodrama extend beyond that simple description. When Bernard Shaw wrote the play Saint Joan he did so on the idea there was no such thing as a villian. Every characterization of Joan of Arc before held up her tale as a moral battle of not only good vs. evil, but also a battle confined to a ending that was always her burning at the stake. Shaw's play takes exception to that ending. Saint Joan is interested in the larger ideas and philosophy behind Joan of Arc. It has no interest to be a realistic retelling of the events that everyone already knows.

Melodrama does concern itself though with those events. It doesn't need to merely see Joan of Arc's story as a moral battle, but more importantly as a crime story. Illustrating as such means that the most important element is her burning because it is the result of her supposed crime. Genres in film wrap themsleves around a similar identity. They don't need to be simple characterizations to be genre works. The important element is that they are defined by the outer layers of their story, whether it be a crime or revenge or horror story. The tragedy realizes though that those actions are not the means to an end. The questions in between the beginning and end are the true focus.

When I differentiate European thrillers, I mean to say they are more ambitious. They attempt to combine the element of genre with a focus on ideas and character. I'm not going to say these films can't ever rise above the greatest films ever made. Its just in my experience I haven't seen one that has. Its like a critic who goes to see a science fiction film and only reminsciences on the better science fictions books he has read. He doesn't necessarily believe that there will never be a science fiction film that holds up to the best science fiction book he read. Its just that he doubts there will be. As I doubt a genre film will hold up to the very best of Bergman, Fellini and Antonioni.

Quote from: JG on July 26, 2006, 08:44:41 PM   
You've mentioned Melville lately in your posts, and here's a director who, despite being essentially a genre filmmaker, never conformed to any of the genre's conventions, which must give him some credence as an art filmmaker. feel free to discuss your feelings on melville's films in general.   

I'm not a true Melville convert yet. I still think Antonioni was miles ahead of him in just Blow Up. My opinion comes from having seen Bob Le Flembeur, Le Samourai and Le Cercle Rouge. Melville's progression from Bob Le Flembeur is striking though. I've been reading about him lately and am very much looking forward to Army of Shadows. I do think he conformed to some genre conventions. Alain Delon plays a samurai in Le Samourai and is obediant to the code to the very end, but the stiff portrayal of him calls for remarks of similarity to Eastwood's man with no name character. I admit Eastwood's character is exploited for easy identification, but Delon seems cast for a look and bravado as well. The difference is that Melville doesn't see to cheapen that look to an easy advertisement of rugged masculinity.

Quote from: JG on July 26, 2006, 08:44:41 PM
Have you since reviewed The Ice Storm since I last asked your opinion on it? 

Not yet. I plan to revisit it very soon.

Quote from: JG on July 26, 2006, 08:44:41 PM
Lastly, you mentioned Bresson in the Antonioni thread.  How do you feel about his films? 

I like Pickpocket and even admire Au Hasard Balthazar, but my impression is that he was a better academic filmmaker of breaking technical norms in films than anything else. Again, though, allow me to see more of his stuff.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on July 27, 2006, 03:47:07 AM
Quote from: pyramid machine on July 26, 2006, 09:48:51 PM
question one:

do you like drift racing?

Geez, I'm not even sure what that is.

Quote from: pyramid machine on July 26, 2006, 09:48:51 PM
question two:

how old were you when you stopped wetting the bed?  [i was kind of old actually ...15 to be exact..my doctor said my bladder wasnt big like most kids]

I actually remember this. I was 6 or 7. Frequent nightmares kept forcing me to do it. After my dreams calmed down so did my urine track at night.

Quote from: pyramid machine on July 26, 2006, 09:48:51 PM
question three:

which xixax member to you think is most like you?

I sadly don't know many Xixax members. I talk to 4 people outside this board....so I'll go with Stefen. All we do is talk sports. Which is what I mainly do anyways.

Quote from: pyramid machine on July 26, 2006, 09:48:51 PM
question three:

do you kind of hate me?

Not even close. You've always been one of my favorites. The great supporter of my thread and a genuinely good guy.

Quote from: pyramid machine on July 26, 2006, 09:48:51 PM
question four:

how come gamers have pale skin, and look emaciated, and have the worst tastes in music?

Their hobby has a male/female differential of 50 to 1. Nerd activities recluse all kids to their parent's basements. Lets just be happy that the results aren't worst.

Quote from: pyramid machine on July 26, 2006, 09:48:51 PM
question five:

do you like white people that act black?

Absolutely. Its because I live in the middle of the woods and around white people who wear flannel all the time so the irony is too good not to laugh at.

Quote from: pyramid machine on July 26, 2006, 09:48:51 PM
question six:

if you had to choose a sex partner between these three full house stars ..who would it be...and why?:  1) uncle jesse  2) uncle joey  3)  viper [d.j.'s reckless boyfriend]

uncle jesse. he was hardcore rock guy but underneath a sensitive soul. I also imagine he was the only one of the bunch who knew what they were doing. i imagine joey did bad impressions to make up for lackluster skills.

Quote from: pyramid machine on July 26, 2006, 09:48:51 PM
question seven:

do you think any of us are fake?..if so, who?

Like I said, I don't know many of you. I do think a lot of people do fake their interest in film and this place is just a social haven for them. I think because they watch a lot of films they think they obviously want to talk about it. I doubt it. Movie going is a premiere hobby for everyone and yet hardly anyone frequents these forums. I use to go to others boards for social reasons. I was 17 and was banned from all of them within a year. Now my life is too busy to do that.

Quote from: pyramid machine on July 26, 2006, 09:48:51 PM
question eight:

what forum do you think is pointless?

This forum isn't useless. It just has a bad name. 'News and Theory' hardly ever gives me exactly that. News, sure, but what forum or thread has MacGuffin not gone to? As for theory...I think i can name about 10 threads at most that even deal with that. The forum use to be named, "Everything Else Cinema" Thats an appropriate title but I say rename it 'MacGuffin and Trends'

Quote from: pyramid machine on July 26, 2006, 09:48:51 PM
question nine:

do you think it would be cool if i took a bubble bath w/ lance bass now knowing that likely he would say yes if i asked him?

Not going to lie. I'm wondering how you picked the scenario and the person.

Quote from: pyramid machine on July 26, 2006, 09:48:51 PM
question ten:

alot of times i cant understand your posts b/c your grammar is very good and i need to look at a dictionary to understand what you say...are you naturally girfted or do you read alot?

Neither. I habit dictionary.com obsessively while posting to make sure the words I use even make sense. Usually while posting a word pops up in my head and sounds right. I'm just not sure what it exactly means or if I'm exactly right so I always look it up and if I'm wrong I just try again. I usually fail at finding a new word so I completely rewrite the sentence so I can rely on using an easier word.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: MacGuffin on July 27, 2006, 05:31:46 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 27, 2006, 03:47:07 AM
Quote from: pyramid machine on July 26, 2006, 09:48:51 PM
question nine:

do you think it would be cool if i took a bubble bath w/ lance bass now knowing that likely he would say yes if i asked him?

Not going to lie. I'm wondering how you picked the scenario and the person.

Lance Bass of 'N Sync reveals he's gay

NEW YORK - Lance Bass, band member of 'N Sync, says he's gay and in a "very stable" relationship with a reality show star. Bass, who formed 'N Sync with Justin Timberlake, JC Chasez, Joey Fatone and Chris Kirkpatrick, tells People magazine that he didn't earlier disclose his sexuality because he didn't want to affect the group's popularity.

"I knew that I was in this popular band and I had four other guys' careers in my hand, and I knew that if I ever acted on it or even said (that I was gay), it would overpower everything," he tells the magazine.

'N Sync is known for a string of hits including "Bye Bye Bye" and "It's Gonna Be Me." The band went on hiatus in 2002. Bass has also found headlines for undertaking astronaut training and failing to raise money for a trip into space.

Bass says he wondered if his coming out could prompt "the end of 'N Sync." He explains, "So I had that weight on me of like, `Wow, if I ever let anyone know, it's bad.' So I just never did."

The singer says he's in a "very stable" relationship with 32-year-old actor Reichen Lehmkuhl, winner of season four of CBS' "Amazing Race."

Bass and Fatone, 29, are developing a sitcom pilot inspired by the screwball comedy "The Odd Couple," in which his character will be gay.

"The thing is, I'm not ashamed — that's the one thing I went to say," Bass says. "I don't think it's wrong, I'm not devastated going through this. I'm more liberated and happy than I've been my whole life. I'm just happy."
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: polkablues on July 27, 2006, 06:35:27 PM
Quote from: MacGuffin on July 27, 2006, 05:31:46 PM
Lance Bass of 'N Sync reveals he's gay

And I for one could not be more surprised.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on July 27, 2006, 08:52:56 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 27, 2006, 03:47:07 AM


Quote from: pyramid machine on July 26, 2006, 09:48:51 PM
question three:

do you kind of hate me?

Not even close. You've always been one of my favorites. The great supporter of my thread and a genuinely good guy.




:yabbse-grin:  ditto


_________________________________________________________________________________________




here are some more:



question eleven:

the current state you reside in, ......would you be happy living there until death...? or do you want to move?

question twelve:

do you dabble w/recreational drugs...or are you, like ,myself, one of nacy reagan"s "just say no" generation?

question thirteen:

if there was a mass gathering of xixax members who decided to meet at one place and have a festival [like the twin peaks festival] where we would all hang out and shit...would you go to it?....if not, why?

question fourteen:

my favorite drink is a jack & coke...whats yours?........or do you not drink?


question fifteen:

if uwe boll had a talk show would you watch it?


question sixteen:

have you ever watched a film dealing w/relationships and felt that those onscreen characters were relatable to your real life  relationship?  if so, what film and how?

question seventeen:

do you think the fountain is  going to meet, excede, or let down eveyones preconceived mega hyped expectations for this film?

question eighteen:

what was the most meanest thing you've done to someone and not regreted?

question nineteen:

did you ride the school bus in high school?

question twenty:

can you unscramble this sentence.........


avdid nlcyh fgkunic srlue!



Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: squints on July 27, 2006, 09:21:47 PM
David Lynch Fucking Luser?
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on July 27, 2006, 10:29:26 PM
Quote from: pyramid machine on July 27, 2006, 08:52:56 PM
question eleven:

the current state you reside in, ......would you be happy living there until death...? or do you want to move?

I want to move. Can't acquire a decent career here. I wouldn't mind retiring back here though.


Quote from: pyramid machine on July 27, 2006, 08:52:56 PM
question twelve:

do you dabble w/recreational drugs...or are you, like ,myself, one of nacy reagan"s "just say no" generation?

Right now I don't. I did earlier this year but it never was much of a habit.

Quote from: pyramid machine on July 27, 2006, 08:52:56 PM
question thirteen:

if there was a mass gathering of xixax members who decided to meet at one place and have a festival [like the twin peaks festival] where we would all hang out and shit...would you go to it?....if not, why?

Sure. I think it would be cool to meet anyone from this board. Plus it would give me a chance to be myself.

Quote from: pyramid machine on July 27, 2006, 08:52:56 PM
question fourteen:

my favorite drink is a jack & coke...whats yours?........or do you not drink?

I sadly don't drink. I do go through a gallon of milk every 2 days. Thats an expensive habit to keep up.

Quote from: pyramid machine on July 27, 2006, 08:52:56 PM
question fifteen:

if uwe boll had a talk show would you watch it?

Definitely. People waste their time trying to criticize his films. He's a man who needs to be enjoyed while he has time to have a public persona.

Quote from: pyramid machine on July 27, 2006, 08:52:56 PM
question sixteen:

have you ever watched a film dealing w/relationships and felt that those onscreen characters were relatable to your real life  relationship?  if so, what film and how?

Fever Pitch was pretty relatable at the time I saw it. I'll just say I never expected to see myself in a Jimmy Fallon character. Haha, thats really all I can say.

Quote from: pyramid machine on July 27, 2006, 08:52:56 PM
question seventeen:

do you think the fountain is  going to meet, excede, or let down eveyones preconceived mega hyped expectations for this film?

Sure. This film looks like it will be the visual stud of the year. Everyone buys into that. The New World was as hollow of a film as I've seen but it had that filmmaking charisma everyone loves. I like Darren Arnofsky and I think he is much more capable director than Terrence Malick so I expect good things. I just have no gage for how high my expectations are. I just know the film has that certain aura about it that will get an enthusiastic responce.

Quote from: pyramid machine on July 27, 2006, 08:52:56 PM
question eighteen:

what was the most meanest thing you've done to someone and not regreted?

One time I was working at a job and the department I was working in was having prank wars. Everyone was going to prank everyone and the cycle would be neverending. I told everyone not to fuck with my car so they all promised me it would be target #1 just for me saying that. I told them if they did anything to it I'd get them back so bad they wished they'd never touched it. To prove my point I got 3 one gallon containers of milk and put it in my closet for a week. The milk became sour and I poured it all inside the hood of a co-worker's car. I did it on purpose so the milk would sink into the carborator (sp?) and leave a smell so rotten in the car that it would never go away. It never did go away. The poor guy drove the car around for 6 months with all windows open trying to just air it out. He bought every fragrance and cleaning product he could to get rid of the smell. Finally he had to just get rid of the car and buy a new one. The worst thing is that we were friends and he was never involved in the prank wars. He was innocent and I picked him because I wanted show the guys I was working with I didn't care who I did it to.

I should feel bad for that one but I don't. If I was arrested or sued I would have regretted it. I got away with it so I don't care.

Quote from: pyramid machine on July 27, 2006, 08:52:56 PM
question nineteen:

did you ride the school bus in high school?

Nope. Proud walker my from 3rd to 12th grade. Meant even more because of where I live and how much snow we get.


Quote from: pyramid machine on July 27, 2006, 08:52:56 PM
question twenty:

can you unscramble this sentence.........


avdid nlcyh fgkunic srlue!

I got it before Squints even posted. David Lynch Fucking Rules.

Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: NEON MERCURY on August 01, 2006, 10:50:12 PM
question twenty-one:

after all that mess w/mel gibson...do you think he deserves forgiveness?  and do you think apocalypto is going to be one of the most important films of this decade?

question twenty-two:

when you think of "the south"...what word first comes to mind?

question twenty-three:

if you could change one thing about this site...what would it be..and why?

question twenty-four:

off all the members who have been banned..who do you miss the most?...........least?

question twenty-five:

when having sex and if you cum early what would be a good thing to say to your partner for an excuse for cum'n too soon? [your answer will help alot of people here]

question twenty-six:

who was the closest relative to you that has passed away?

question twenty-seven:

are you an only child?

question twenty-eight:

do you think this woman is authentic?
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.burningangel.com%2Farchives%2Fkylee_emo_slut_11.jpg&hash=f3123e0098e61aa3862a98e48fcd8eb48e649ce4)

question twenty-nine:

do you believe in aleins?

question thirty:

do you know who this is?
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwwwimage.cbs.com%2Fdaytime%2Fbb%2Fstar_images%2Factors%2Fdt_bb_act_large_mlopez.jpg&hash=fb12fa8547efc03f5c6dbcdbdfd1b0821e56baa2)
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on August 02, 2006, 12:32:03 AM
Quote from: pyramid machine on August 01, 2006, 10:50:12 PM
question twenty-one:

after all that mess w/mel gibson...do you think he deserves forgiveness?  and do you think apocalypto is going to be one of the most important films of this decade?

1.) I absolutely do believe he deserves forgiveness. I've always liked Mel Gibson. Even in his recent political era he manages to be a conservative version of George Clooney. Both are semi arrogant about their political thoughts but both manage to come off as decent guys. Gibson fucked up in that arrest big time but I still like him and am able to give him the benefit of the doubt he just made a mistake. I don't think he's a racist. 

2.) I think the greatest thing Apocalypto can be is a good film. No film will be more important than The Passion of the Christ for this decade. The discussion that it inhabits to this day about the place of Christianity in our society is well beyond the controversy I knew any film ever to be a part of. Apocalypto seems like it won't be cashing in on The Passion of the Christ either. There seems to be little very little in this film that churches will be able to promote. The main challenge for Apocalypto is to be a great historical film. Those films are some of the hardest to make these days. They challenge the aesthetics of thought and story all at once. I was surprised both Good Night and Good Luck and The New World were able to garner major critical acclaim but yet not garner large critical thought. They are both serious historical films and ask for more attention than just whether they are good films. Either way, I didn't think much of either film anyways (I'm currently writing a large piece on The New World). Downfall was a true great film in filmmaking and story and larger thought.

Quote from: pyramid machine on August 01, 2006, 10:50:12 PM
question twenty-two:

when you think of "the south"...what word first comes to mind?

humidity

Quote from: pyramid machine on August 01, 2006, 10:50:12 PM
question twenty-three:

if you could change one thing about this site...what would it be..and why?

I'd change an in-between-the-lines problem. What I dislike about this board is the way a simple opinion can be handled my members who disagree. It will start with a newbie saying, "Oh I love this filmmaker." Then someone else will not only disagree with him, but also assume the newbie doesn't know any better because he is just a newbie. The problem is they don't offer anything themselves that is any more insightful than the original opinion. It gets down to my basic belief I think people here use their post count as leverage against others.

Quote from: pyramid machine on August 01, 2006, 10:50:12 PM
question twenty-four:

off all the members who have been banned..who do you miss the most?...........least?

I can't think of anyone right now. I barely knew JJ and everyone else I knew who was banned seemed like trolls instead of actual posters. I definitely miss a lot of people who use to post here but there absences were self inflicted.

Quote from: pyramid machine on August 01, 2006, 10:50:12 PM
question twenty-five:

when having sex and if you cum early what would be a good thing to say to your partner for an excuse for cum'n too soon? [your answer will help alot of people here]

First, you don't make an excuse. All you accomplish by trying to think of a great excuse is more pressure on yourself to perform. Don't look for excuses. Just realize this problem happens to everyone and any girl who has anything of a sexual history will know it as well and will not care that much so they definitely don't want the guy making a big deal out of it by jittering a half assed excuse afterward.

Quote from: pyramid machine on August 01, 2006, 10:50:12 PM
question twenty-six:

who was the closest relative to you that has passed away?

No one really. The grandmother I am closest to is dying and will likely not see the end of the year. When she passes away that will be very tough to deal with.

Quote from: pyramid machine on August 01, 2006, 10:50:12 PM
question twenty-seven:

are you an only child?

Nope, I have two younger brothers. Everyone is grateful they are nothing like me.


Quote from: pyramid machine on August 01, 2006, 10:50:12 PM
question twenty-eight:

do you think this woman is authentic?
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.burningangel.com%2Farchives%2Fkylee_emo_slut_11.jpg&hash=f3123e0098e61aa3862a98e48fcd8eb48e649ce4)

I hate to judge based on a picture, but I'd say no. Not only does she get a tattoo on her stomach, but she gets it of guns. Does she actually live a Navy Seal type of life that forces her to use guns daily? I highly doubt it. Someone watched too many Rambo type movies or just got too drunk with the wrong hill billy when they were younger.

Quote from: pyramid machine on August 01, 2006, 10:50:12 PM
question twenty-nine:

do you believe in aleins?

Yes. There's too much we don't know. It should be highly probable there is other life out there then. In 1968 Stanley Kubrick said we only knew 3% about the universe. I doubt we know that much more now.


Quote from: pyramid machine on August 01, 2006, 10:50:12 PM
question thirty:

do you know who this is?
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwwwimage.cbs.com%2Fdaytime%2Fbb%2Fstar_images%2Factors%2Fdt_bb_act_large_mlopez.jpg&hash=fb12fa8547efc03f5c6dbcdbdfd1b0821e56baa2)

The sensitive version of A.C Slater who goes gets married but fucks a stripper at his bachelor party and thus kills the marriage when his wife finds out weeks later. Did he forget how good looking his wife to be was? Idiot.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: polkablues on August 02, 2006, 01:18:14 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on August 02, 2006, 12:32:03 AM
1.) I absolutely do believe he deserves forgiveness. I've always liked Mel Gibson. Even in his recent political era he manages to be a conservative version of George Clooney. Both are semi arrogant about their political thoughts but both manage to come off as decent guys. Gibson fucked up in that arrest big time but I still like him and am able to give him the benefit of the doubt he just made a mistake. I don't think he's a racist. 

Do you believe that alcohol causes anti-Semitic statements?  If not, would you like to reevaluate your previous answer?
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pubrick on August 02, 2006, 01:33:39 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on August 02, 2006, 12:32:03 AM
I'd change an in-between-the-lines problem. What I dislike about this board is the way a simple opinion can be handled my members who disagree. It will start with a newbie saying, "Oh I love this filmmaker." Then someone else will not only disagree with him, but also assume the newbie doesn't know any better because he is just a newbie. The problem is they don't offer anything themselves that is any more insightful than the original opinion. It gets down to my basic belief I think people here use their post count as leverage against others.
please provide an example of a newbie who this year has been attacked so unjustly as you describe. i direct you to this statement:

Quote from: Pubrick on July 04, 2006, 08:49:51 PM
a newbs "hazing" experience is a direct reflection of the abhorrence of their posts.

like i've said millions of times, post count doesn't mean shit. Noyes was instantly a more respectable poster than brazoliange will ever be. who are the big hitters in post count that abuse this so called leverage only you seem to think they possess? i'm bothered by these antiquated notions of victimization you have. it's cool that maybe you don't think you are a vicitim so much anymore but now with this statement it's like your looking for a new non-cause to fight for.

to summarize: post count doesn't mean anything (other than a cool number like 10000, and even that's just a novelty), and i don't see how anyone uses their post count to bash others (i fully encourage good newbs to educate dumb newbs). it's ALWAYS been about quality, not quantity.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on August 02, 2006, 01:34:23 AM
Quote from: polkablues on August 02, 2006, 01:18:14 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on August 02, 2006, 12:32:03 AM
1.) I absolutely do believe he deserves forgiveness. I've always liked Mel Gibson. Even in his recent political era he manages to be a conservative version of George Clooney. Both are semi arrogant about their political thoughts but both manage to come off as decent guys. Gibson fucked up in that arrest big time but I still like him and am able to give him the benefit of the doubt he just made a mistake. I don't think he's a racist. 

Do you believe that alcohol causes anti-Semitic statements?  If not, would you like to reevaluate your previous answer?

I believe alcohol causes inhibition. See, racism teeters in between hatred and politically incorrect humor. The honesty of George Mencia with racial and political stereotypes is the only ingrediant he has that makes him funny for me. Clerks 2 was also very funny with its racist jokes as is South Park is for its absurdist approach to racism. My friends and I also think racist humor can be very funny. I know one friend specifically who takes racial jokes and slandering to all time low when he gets drunk. We all get mad at him for it, but do I think he's racist? No. He's suppose to also hate gays but his best friend is gay. Do I know whether or not Mel Gibson is an anti Semite? No. I just don't believe he is and I don't take this incident as definitive proof that he is.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on August 02, 2006, 01:48:14 AM
Quote from: Pubrick on August 02, 2006, 01:33:39 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on August 02, 2006, 12:32:03 AM
I'd change an in-between-the-lines problem. What I dislike about this board is the way a simple opinion can be handled my members who disagree. It will start with a newbie saying, "Oh I love this filmmaker." Then someone else will not only disagree with him, but also assume the newbie doesn't know any better because he is just a newbie. The problem is they don't offer anything themselves that is any more insightful than the original opinion. It gets down to my basic belief I think people here use their post count as leverage against others.
please provide an example of a newbie who this year has been attacked so unjustly as you describe. i direct you to this statement:

Quote from: Pubrick on July 04, 2006, 08:49:51 PM
a newbs "hazing" experience is a direct reflection of the abhorrence of their posts.

like i've said millions of times, post count doesn't mean shit. Noyes was instantly a more respectable poster than brazoliange will ever be. who are the big hitters in post count that abuse this so called leverage only you seem to think they possess? i'm bothered by these antiquated notions of victimization you have. it's cool that maybe you don't think you are a vicitim so much anymore but now with this statement it's like your looking for a new non-cause to fight for.

to summarize: post count doesn't mean anything (other than a cool number like 10000, and even that's just a novelty), and i don't see how anyone uses their post count to bash others (i fully encourage good newbs to educate dumb newbs). it's ALWAYS been about quality, not quantity.

First off, I'm going not going to give an example. I have little interest in calling anyone out at this time.

Second, you misalign my statement. I didn't say newbies were being attacked. All my analogy pointed to is that I think some members are carrying themselves with an arrogance that has no justifcation and I think it is sometimes because of the post counts. Do I think post counts matter? Absolutely not. Do I think you think they matter? No. Do I think others think they matter? Sometimes, yes.

I have no interest to drag this out into anything. Considering that my original post has drawn more questions, let me be final right now:

I don't see much discussion going on anywhere for movies. I see a lot of people giving gut reactions to what they feel about a given movie. Usually that involves nothing more than a muddled paraphrase. Threads for movies start to turn into a consensus of whether everyone agrees to like or hate a movie. Sometimes when an unkown comes out and disagrees with the consensus someone will say something back that doesn't attack him but does aim to at least devalue his opinion. That is what I don't like.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: hedwig on August 02, 2006, 02:15:12 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on August 02, 2006, 01:34:23 AM
The honesty of George Mencia with racial and political stereotypes is the only ingrediant he has that makes him funny for me.
oh yeah, carlos mencia is hilarious with his honesty. it's about time someone got up there and SPOKE THE TRUTH. i like how he tells it -- LIKE IT IS. people get offended because he presents the harsh reality of dumb ass minorities and the truth hurts. and that's what mencia is, a hysterical and irreverent warrior of truth. here's some quotes of pure gold:

"Why did the 14-year old Mexican girl end up pregnant? Because her teacher told her to go do an essay!!!!!"   :lol:
"Now I admit I like Gold Digger, but Kanye West is a crazy nigger!!!!!!"  :laughing:
"Hispanics don't blow sh*t up, they clean it up and build it up after you blow it up!!!!!" :rofl:

i just love it! as a white person it's great to see a latino onstage making fun of latinos. it's like, SEE? HE DOES IT! IT'S OKAY FOR US TO DO IT TOO!! it's so liberating.. you know what i mean? it makes me wanna spread my caucasian wings and soar high up into the heavens of like, omg, being anti-PC. fuck PC, okay? fuck the PC movement.

this is what freedom is about, my friend. it's what we fight for, it's why people have to die in iraq, it's why america is the best country in the world. THERE I SAID IT.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on August 02, 2006, 02:18:35 AM
Quote from: Hedwig on August 02, 2006, 02:15:12 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on August 02, 2006, 01:34:23 AM
The honesty of George Mencia with racial and political stereotypes is the only ingrediant he has that makes him funny for me.
oh yeah, carlos mencia is hilarious with his honesty.

Damn, I didnt even get the name right. I should have just said Mind of Mencia.

Thanks for the post Hedwig! Enjoy the backlash! :)
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: polkablues on August 02, 2006, 02:23:52 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on August 02, 2006, 01:34:23 AM
Quote from: polkablues on August 02, 2006, 01:18:14 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on August 02, 2006, 12:32:03 AM
1.) I absolutely do believe he deserves forgiveness. I've always liked Mel Gibson. Even in his recent political era he manages to be a conservative version of George Clooney. Both are semi arrogant about their political thoughts but both manage to come off as decent guys. Gibson fucked up in that arrest big time but I still like him and am able to give him the benefit of the doubt he just made a mistake. I don't think he's a racist. 

Do you believe that alcohol causes anti-Semitic statements?  If not, would you like to reevaluate your previous answer?

I believe alcohol causes inhibition. See, racism teeters in between hatred and politically incorrect humor. The honesty of George Mencia with racial and political stereotypes is the only ingrediant he has that makes him funny for me. Clerks 2 was also very funny with its racist jokes as is South Park is for its absurdist approach to racism. My friends and I also think racist humor can be very funny. I know one friend specifically who takes racial jokes and slandering to all time low when he gets drunk. We all get mad at him for it, but do I think he's racist? No. He's suppose to also hate gays but his best friend is gay. Do I know whether or not Mel Gibson is an anti Semite? No. I just don't believe he is and I don't take this incident as definitive proof that he is.

This is honestly mind-boggling to me.  So when Mel Gibson was pulled over by the cops and spouted such non-sequiturs as "Fucking Jews" and "The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world," he was merely offering up a little impromptu "edgy" humor?  Is that the inferrence I'm to make here?  You wrote that "alcohol causes inhibition", which I'm sure was a simple misstatement, you meant that alcohol lessens inhibitions, which is absolutely true.  So, assuming Gibson was not joking, which I'm happy to assume because it makes no sense to think that he was, doesn't it then follow that the statements made when under the influence of these lowered inhibitions could be construed as being more honest than those made when sober?  It is our inhibition that causes us to bury our unpopular opinions and beliefs from those who find them unpopular, so doesn't it make sense that the opinions and beliefs that spill out when our inhibitions are lowered might be a more accurate reflection of who we really are and what we really think?

Now I, like you, don't take this one incidenct as "proof" of Gibson's anti-Semitism.  At the same time, when thrown in with other examples from Gibson's life and work, there is what the police colloquially refer to as an "orgy of evidence".  I have no doubt that Mel's a perfectly nice man who would be fun to have a beer with (maybe just a Coke instead...), but to deny that he has serious, dangerous, deep-seated biases that should certainly preclude him from exec-producing Holocaust documentaries is to overlook a massive, Caligula-esque orgy of evidence.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Pubrick on August 02, 2006, 02:55:33 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on August 02, 2006, 01:48:14 AM
First off, I'm going not going to give an example. I have little interest in calling anyone out at this time.

Second, you misalign my statement. I didn't say newbies were being attacked. All my analogy pointed to is that I think some members are carrying themselves with an arrogance that has no justifcation and I think it is sometimes because of the post counts. Do I think post counts matter? Absolutely not. Do I think you think they matter? No. Do I think others think they matter? Sometimes, yes.
ok.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on August 02, 2006, 01:48:14 AM
I don't see much discussion going on anywhere for movies. I see a lot of people giving gut reactions to what they feel about a given movie. Usually that involves nothing more than a muddled paraphrase. Threads for movies start to turn into a consensus of whether everyone agrees to like or hate a movie. Sometimes when an unkown comes out and disagrees with the consensus someone will say something back that doesn't attack him but does aim to at least devalue his opinion. That is what I don't like.
i agree with that except the last part. i can't think of any examples to back up what you're saying about newbs and their opinions on films being discounted any more than the other worthless ones. but it's true barely anyone says anything interesting about movies. it's always like they're reviewing a refreshment..

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi5.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy154%2Fpubrick%2Fsimps%2Ffg_097.jpg&hash=b294359ad27878b887bd6470dcaf4f9712a039c0)
"sweeeet"
pleasing taste, some monsterism.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on August 02, 2006, 03:00:32 AM
Quote from: polkablues on August 02, 2006, 02:23:52 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on August 02, 2006, 01:34:23 AM
Quote from: polkablues on August 02, 2006, 01:18:14 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on August 02, 2006, 12:32:03 AM
1.) I absolutely do believe he deserves forgiveness. I've always liked Mel Gibson. Even in his recent political era he manages to be a conservative version of George Clooney. Both are semi arrogant about their political thoughts but both manage to come off as decent guys. Gibson fucked up in that arrest big time but I still like him and am able to give him the benefit of the doubt he just made a mistake. I don't think he's a racist. 

Do you believe that alcohol causes anti-Semitic statements?  If not, would you like to reevaluate your previous answer?

I believe alcohol causes inhibition. See, racism teeters in between hatred and politically incorrect humor. The honesty of George Mencia with racial and political stereotypes is the only ingrediant he has that makes him funny for me. Clerks 2 was also very funny with its racist jokes as is South Park is for its absurdist approach to racism. My friends and I also think racist humor can be very funny. I know one friend specifically who takes racial jokes and slandering to all time low when he gets drunk. We all get mad at him for it, but do I think he's racist? No. He's suppose to also hate gays but his best friend is gay. Do I know whether or not Mel Gibson is an anti Semite? No. I just don't believe he is and I don't take this incident as definitive proof that he is.

This is honestly mind-boggling to me.  So when Mel Gibson was pulled over by the cops and spouted such non-sequiturs as "Fucking Jews" and "The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world," he was merely offering up a little impromptu "edgy" humor?  Is that the inferrence I'm to make here?  You wrote that "alcohol causes inhibition", which I'm sure was a simple misstatement, you meant that alcohol lessens inhibitions, which is absolutely true.  So, assuming Gibson was not joking, which I'm happy to assume because it makes no sense to think that he was, doesn't it then follow that the statements made when under the influence of these lowered inhibitions could be construed as being more honest than those made when sober?  It is our inhibition that causes us to bury our unpopular opinions and beliefs from those who find them unpopular, so doesn't it make sense that the opinions and beliefs that spill out when our inhibitions are lowered might be a more accurate reflection of who we really are and what we really think?

Now I, like you, don't take this one incidenct as "proof" of Gibson's anti-Semitism.  At the same time, when thrown in with other examples from Gibson's life and work, there is what the police colloquially refer to as an "orgy of evidence".  I have no doubt that Mel's a perfectly nice man who would be fun to have a beer with (maybe just a Coke instead...), but to deny that he has serious, dangerous, deep-seated biases that should certainly preclude him from exec-producing Holocaust documentaries is to overlook a massive, Caligula-esque orgy of evidence.

Polka, good post. Any further defense on my part would be just rationalization for a situation I really don't know very well. I'll leave this at that. Your post was convincing.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Chest Rockwell on August 03, 2006, 01:30:55 PM
I don't personally think anything someone says while intoxicated or drowsy is any indication of their deeper feelings. While about to doze off I've apparently mumbled stuff about wanting to take over the world, and that could be perhaps a subconscious feeling (who am I to know?), but consciously I don't think that way so it shouldn't matter. I think it's more or less the same way with intoxication, from my experience. It's hard to judge though, because they could be unconscious attitudes I have, but if I'm aware that those aren't my conscious feelings, then why does it matter? Humans are also instinctually violent and sexual, but our conscious, social lives do not necessarily reflect that.

I think Mel's problem isn't racism but alcoholism.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: RegularKarate on August 03, 2006, 02:36:14 PM
Wow...

I guess I'm really surprised you like Carlos Mencia...  I mean you've given hints here and there about your sense of humor, but saying you like Carlos Mencia is pretty much admitting you like hack racist humor.

Carlos Mencia isn't his real name... he's not even really Mexican.. he pretends to be so he can say "Beaners" all the time and because he decided he wanted to connect with a mexican audience.... he's not even remotely funny... his act consists entirely of saying something racist so he can pretend he's "edgy" then mugging for the camera/crowd as if to say "I can't believe I just said that!"... there's no honesty in it because it's all poorly executed formula.  The fact that he's allowed to be on television saying the things that he does is amazing to me... he really is an incredible shit.

I talk shit about hack comics all the time... Dane Cook is a piece of crap because he's the Dave Mathews Band of comedy and steals jokes, George Lopez is fucking boring as hell, etc... but people like Mencia and Larry the Cable Guy represent all that is wrong in entertainment.

I'm just really surprised when someone who's not literally retarded likes Mencia.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ravi on August 03, 2006, 02:45:18 PM
I watched 5 minutes of Mencia's special on Comedy Central and was appalled at the audience lapping it up and applauding.  He's the Crash of stand-up comedy.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Chest Rockwell on August 03, 2006, 02:55:20 PM
Now I don't like Mencia and I don't like racially-themed comedy that much either. But this is his biography according to IMDb http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0578788/bio
Quote from: IMDbBirth name
    Ned Arnel Mencia
Nickname
    The Punisher
Height
    5' 7½" (1.71 m)
Mini biography

    Carlos Mencia was born on October 22nd 1967 in San Pedro Sula, Honduras. His mother, Magdelena Mencia, from Mexico & his father, Roberto Holness, from Honduras came to America when Carlos was about 3-7 months old and decided to give Carlos to his aunt and uncle Consuelo and Pablo Mencia who lived next door to raise as their own because they weren't able to have children of their own plus his birth-parents small house was so packed already because his mother had so many children... They renamed him Carlos. Carlos grew up most of his life in the Maravilla Projects of East L.A.. Because of his exceptional school grades he had the chance to be skipped up to 10th Grade after the 6th Grade, but for fear of the older kids turning him on to the gang culture and thug life that dominated East Los Angeles he was sent to live in Seiko, Honduras between the ages 12 & 15. Carlos says he was a good kid, and managed to stay out of any serious trouble with the help of his family. Being the 17th of 18 children, he always found family to be of the "utmost importance". After returning back to East L.A. he graduated high school and attended Cal State L.A. where he majored in electronic engineering.
Then the rest of it just boils down to his career. Seems a little more authentic than you say. I must reiterate that I'm not a fan at all.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: RegularKarate on August 03, 2006, 03:45:34 PM
Quote from: Chest Rockwell on August 03, 2006, 02:55:20 PM
Ned Arnel Mencia  
  Carlos Mencia was born on October 22nd 1967 in San Pedro Sula, Honduras. His mother, Magdelena Mencia, from Mexico & his father, Roberto Holness, from Honduras came to America

Not Mexican... name is Ned Holness.. the IMDB profile is approved by him
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Chest Rockwell on August 03, 2006, 08:41:44 PM
Oh, you're probably right. Hadn't considered that the person approves the biography, which is plausible.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on August 03, 2006, 09:28:20 PM
Quote from: RegularKarate on August 03, 2006, 02:36:14 PM
Wow...

I guess I'm really surprised you like Carlos Mencia...  I mean you've given hints here and there about your sense of humor, but saying you like Carlos Mencia is pretty much admitting you like hack racist humor.

"The honesty of George Mencia with racial and political stereotypes is the only ingrediant he has that makes him funny for me."

I really don't like him that much. His honesty reminds me of backyard conservations I have with friends or people at work. Honesty that cuts past bullshit gets to me. The bad thing is most comedians are like that.

If you truly, truly truly want to know who my favorite comedian is, its Dennis Miller. I'm sure thats also dissapointing for you but it at least makes more sense.


Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: JG on August 03, 2006, 09:42:49 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on August 03, 2006, 09:28:20 PM
If you truly, truly truly want to know who my favorite comedian is, its Dennis Miller.

somebody's gotta keep the ratio alive. 
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Ravi on August 08, 2006, 11:46:03 PM
What do you think of this? (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060808/ap_en_tv/people_dennis_miller)
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on August 09, 2006, 01:08:29 AM
Quote from: Ravi on August 08, 2006, 11:46:03 PM
What do you think of this? (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060808/ap_en_tv/people_dennis_miller)

Eh, I feel very little of anything.

I hardly ever watch Hannity and Colmes but I've seen him on the show before. He use to do friday segments for them where he'd rant on one subject or another. The ranting wasn't the same as his heyday in the 90s on his HBO show. On Hannity and Colmes, he was given 2 minutes at best to package everything he wanted to say. The segments came off as forced and the breath was too short for Miller's tongue. Besides, you never knew when the segment would be so you'd have to stomach Sean Hannity for longer than anyone should.

I love Dennis Miller. I love he will be doing something beyond touring, but Hannity and Colmes is hardly the answer. I can't see how being a "contributer" will be any better or different. CNBC and Monday Night Football were downgrades for him, but they were still him being able to go off. I still go back and read transcripts of things he said during Monday Night Football. He was actually doing stellar work and was better situated for the job than most give him credit for. Its just hard to find any format to top his HBO show. That was as perfect as perfect could be for him. Now I'm just waiting for the DVDs of that show to come out....
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Sigur Rós on August 09, 2006, 05:17:39 AM
What is the last film that made you cry?
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on August 09, 2006, 10:16:05 AM
Quote from: Sigur Rós on August 09, 2006, 05:17:39 AM
What is the last film that made you cry?

He Got Game, actually.

I watched it recently at like 4am when it was on TV. I hadn't seen it in years and while I remembered it as not being the best film, I remembered it as being enjoyable. It still is. I just didn't expect to start crying. I don't know. I grew up a protege of my father to be good in sports. He was the one who pushed me the hardest and seemed to take it the hardest when I quit sports. The only redemption he has now is that I follow and am enthusiastic about sports, but I know I missed out on opportunities for grandeur in my community. It also meant me missing out on him being more involved in my life. I've been going college for years with goals in mind and he still asks me what type of degree I am going for. He's a good guy, supports me when I need it, but emotionally distant to many things I am.

Also, Denzel Washington in that film, the way he can act serious and cocky in all in a matter of seconds, is an exact replica of how my father acts.
Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Gold Trumpet on January 21, 2008, 02:51:57 AM
Didn't know where else to put this, but something Losing the Horse said in another thread about me in the "Stupidest Thing You've Heard Someone Say" should be posted here.

Quote from: w/o horse on September 17, 2007, 10:35:58 AM
Sometimes I just have to laugh at the amount of dedication you have towards reestablishing the parameters by which we're all supposed to be judging films.

At first I disliked this and the rest of his post, but I've come to discover that I am riding on the ambition to challenge standard methods of film appreciation. As someone headed toward graduate school, I have to take into consideration subjects and ideas that are close to me.

I've been formulating ideas about moralism in cinema. It's something loosely discussed in relationship to certain writers and filmmakers, but I'll try to write something more conclusive and official. All my ideas will be amassed into an essay for posting on Green Screen sometime soon. A majority of the essay will deal with arguments on the board about scholarism and cinema.

The point of me writing this is that I'm prolonging my stay on the board. I'm not going to post with the frequency of other members, but I'll be around for good. I just needed time to reconsider my interest and effectiveness on the board. If I am sappy enough announce my retirement again please make fun of me for it. Tell me I'm an asshole and as honest as Roger Clemens. He has a tendency to announce his too.

All kidding aside, I feel good about this decision.

Title: Re: Ask The Gold Trumpet
Post by: Chest Rockwell on January 21, 2008, 08:10:03 PM
 :yabbse-thumbup: Can't wait to read it.