XIXAX Film Forum

The Director's Chair => The Director's Chair => Topic started by: godardian on May 13, 2003, 02:03:06 PM

Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on May 13, 2003, 02:03:06 PM
SoNowThen and I were having an in-depth discussion of Blow Out on some other thread... and now I forget where... and I didn't see anything devoted to De Palma here... so I decided to start one up.

Anyone else think Blow Out is a great film?
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 13, 2003, 02:13:44 PM
I think Blow Out is a great film and one of De Palma's best works. What makes it even more fascinating is that it is a remake of sorts of Antonioni's Blow Up and when looking at the difference between both films, you can clearly see the difference between art cinema and the more commercial cinema. But instead of comercial cinema being portrayed as talentless, this is also a great film that stands next to Blow Up like a brother. I think there are some great works being made in comercial films by guys like Speilberg and De Palma that will hold up in a respectable way.

My favorite though is the highly underrated Femme Fatale, which incorporates De Palma's masterful directing into a story best suited for it.

~rougerum
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on May 13, 2003, 02:17:50 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
I think Blow Out is a great film and one of De Palma's best works. What makes it even more fascinating is that it is a remake of sorts of Antonioni's Blow Up and when looking at the difference between both films, you can clearly see the difference between art cinema and the more commercial cinema. But instead of comercial cinema being portrayed as talentless, this is also a great film that stands next to Blow Up like a brother. I think there are some great works being made in comercial films by guys like Speilberg and De Palma that will hold up in a respectable way.

My favorite though is the highly underrated Femme Fatale, which incorporates De Palma's masterful directing into a story best suited for it.

~rougerum


(Applause.)
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: SoNowThen on May 13, 2003, 02:18:43 PM
Scarface -- by a hair -- over Casualties Of War and The Untouchables.

But I don't think I saw Carlito's Way on that list. It's not my fav, but it deserves to be there.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on May 13, 2003, 02:20:24 PM
Quote from: SoNowThen
Scarface -- by a hair -- over Casualties Of War and The Untouchables.

But I don't think I saw Carlito's Way on that list. It's not my fav, but it deserves to be there.


I neglected to add it because, well, I forgot about it 'til the end. I will add it, but it won't be in chronological order, as I'd hoped...
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on May 13, 2003, 03:32:33 PM
As it turns out, I can't seem to edit the poll... this technical stuff don't make none sense to me.

So... Carlito's Way. Haven't seen it. Charles Taylor said it "came very close to being this generation's Casablanca." I do want to see it, and I will, eventually.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Keener on May 13, 2003, 04:21:43 PM
Carlito's Way is good. Unfortuntely, I've seen few of his work because video stores in Alabama (hell) don't carry them. I've seen Carrie, Scarface,  Wise Guys, Carlito's Way, Mission:Impossible and Snake Eyes and loved the first four.

I'm dying to see Blow Out since it's Tarantino's favorite movie...ever.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: MacGuffin on May 13, 2003, 04:39:07 PM
Quote from: godardian
As it turns out, I can't seem to edit the poll... this technical stuff don't make none sense to me.


I added it for you and even put it in order so your obsessive compulsive disorder can relax.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: joeybdot on May 13, 2003, 04:44:52 PM
Scarface. For the last sequence when he gos "Ok You WAnna Play Stupid Cock a roaches on to the end!  "Say ello to my lil friend" "Stupid fuckn maracon
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on May 13, 2003, 04:57:16 PM
Quote from: MacGuffin


I added it for you and even put it in order so your obsessive compulsive disorder can relax.


If only that was all it took.  :(
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on May 13, 2003, 04:59:40 PM
Quote from: Keener


I'm dying to see Blow Out since it's Tarantino's favorite movie...ever.


That makes a lot of sense and raises my middling estimation of Tarantino up a notch.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: cowboykurtis on May 13, 2003, 05:06:59 PM
i bought the sister's criterion disc a while back -- the thought of a saimese twin sisters murder mystery was intruiging -- i can safely say it was on of the worst film i've ever seen, absolutely horrible. acting,writing,directing, all around production value was worse than many student films i've seen -- just a horrible film --its  just under jeeper's creeper's for my list of hatred. why the hell did criterion release this sack of shit?
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on May 13, 2003, 05:09:56 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
What makes it even more fascinating is that it is a remake of sorts of Antonioni's Blow Up and when looking at the difference between both films, you can clearly see the difference between art cinema and the more commercial cinema. But instead of comercial cinema being portrayed as talentless, this is also a great film that stands next to Blow Up like a brother. I think there are some great works being made in comercial films by guys like Speilberg and De Palma that will hold up in a respectable way.

My favorite though is the highly underrated Femme Fatale, which incorporates De Palma's masterful directing into a story best suited for it.

~rougerum


I also see some striking similarities that would render Blow Out a cinematic sibling of The Conversation; in fact, De Palma's film may be the last of the great American political-paranoia films, which maybe began with Pakula's films in the earlier seventies (I'm not an expert on this, I'm just going from what I've seen).

Oddly, Spielberg (whom I cannot stand) is friends with De Palma, or at least he was during the writing of Julie Salmon's The Devil's Candy, in which their friendship- and their radically different perspectives on the motivations and art of making cinema- are gone into in some pretty interesting, albeit brief, detail.

Lastly, Gold Trumpet, I think your Femme Fatale vote got made into a Mission to Mars vote when Maguffin kindly added Carlito's Way to the poll... I hate to pester Maguffin, but... could you switch his vote back?
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on May 13, 2003, 05:14:06 PM
Quote from: cowboykurtis
i bought the sister's criterion disc a while back -- the thought of a saimese twin sisters murder mystery was intruiging -- i can safely say it was on of the worst film i've ever seen, absolutely horrible. acting,writing,directing, all around production value was worse than many student films i've seen -- just a horrible film --its  just under jeeper's creeper's for my list of hatred. why the hell did criterion release this sack of shit?


I found it odd and funny and creepy-psychosexual. It's overheated and cheesy-lurid like all De Palma's films, but that's his style. I loved the flashback sequence. Wonderful and strange.

Criterion releases films that are considered by those in the film-scholar community to be prescient or of some value to film history. That hardly means you're going to get multiplex-digital-Dolby quality every time. Their mission is highest possible quality presentation of films interesting to those looking to broaden their cinematic frame of reference. I think Criterion DVDs are more informative and tuned into film history and cinephilia than most film schools.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: cowboykurtis on May 13, 2003, 05:23:44 PM
Quote from: godardian
[Criterion releases films that are considered by those in the film-scholar community to be prescient or of some value to film history. .


thank you for the "criterion mission statement" but it was a rhetorical question... i thought the movie was garbage, and in no way important to the history of film. it doesn't measure up to the integrity of many other criterion releases -- maybe they wanted to congradulate de palma to be the one of the first to deliberately and unashaedly rip off hitchcock...
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on May 13, 2003, 05:32:59 PM
Quote from: cowboykurtis
Quote from: godardian
[Criterion releases films that are considered by those in the film-scholar community to be prescient or of some value to film history. .


thank you for the "criterion mission statement" but it was a rhetorical question... i thought the movie was garbage, and in no way important to the history of film. it doesn't measure up to the integrity of many other criterion releases -- maybe they wanted to congradulate de palma to be the one of the first to deliberately and unashaedly rip off hitchcock...


So... you think Carnival of Souls, Flesh for Frankenstein, Haxan, and The Blob- a vein of Criterion editions in which I would also place Sisters- have more "integrity?"

Where you say "ripping off," I would say "goofing on." I described in a different thread how De Palma tweaks the nose of film history, and I think what most people see as deficiencies are integral to his style, which does not work without a certain irrevent, playful, humorous approach. I guess the reason that people don't call, say, The Coen Bros. to task or get up in arms over them "ripping off" Preston Sturges and Robert Aldrich is because maybe people feel it's okay to goof on film noir and screwball comedy, but it's not okay when it comes to suspense/horror...? To me, the latter genres beg flip revaluation much more than the former ones.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: SoNowThen on May 13, 2003, 05:47:01 PM
I agree with you mostly, Godardian. But here's the reason why I don't think suspense/horror lends itself to the re-evaluation: the one almost unbending genre rule with these types of films is that the ending must be either Monster/Bad Guy gets killed by hero/heroine or Bad Guy lives to kill another day. It's so hard to come up with fresh endings for this kind of movie, which, incidentally, turns out to be my only problem with DePalma films.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Gold Trumpet on May 13, 2003, 06:03:36 PM
SoNowThen,
in your observance of the "rules" that seem to be put on horror films that make them not worth to be reevaluated, isn't your focus only on the smaller details to those films? Really, some of the most interesting work can be done with those things added. The things you said that needed to be there don't really fall into bringing down much of the material. Actually, in my own mind, it is just another rule for another genre that insivisibly is wrapped around most genres and being broken in small and various ways. In my review of Blow Out, I said it was like a brother film to the art film Blow Up, but was comercial instead. The main difference that seems to be between those two kinds of film is that the art film never really goes for answers, it goes for bringing up questions and ambiguilties. Nothing is more frowned upon in Hollywood than that because studio heads feel everything should be answered to please the audience and a lot of the most acclaimed films do this and many other little things that follow invisible rules. The thing is though, the rules never define most of the book, but only the smaller parts and thus movies by people like De Palma can and are interesting becaus of the talent put into the middle. The outcome, if maybe cliche, doesn't really determine the rest of the film.

~rougerum
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: cowboykurtis on May 13, 2003, 07:22:34 PM
Quote from: godardian
Quote from: cowboykurtis
Quote from: godardian
[Criterion releases films that are considered by those in the film-scholar community to be prescient or of some value to film history. .


thank you for the "criterion mission statement" but it was a rhetorical question... i thought the movie was garbage, and in no way important to the history of film. it doesn't measure up to the integrity of many other criterion releases -- maybe they wanted to congradulate de palma to be the one of the first to deliberately and unashamedly rip off hitchcock...


So... you think Carnival of Souls, Flesh for Frankenstein, Haxan, and The Blob- a vein of Criterion editions in which I would also place Sisters- have more "integrity?"

. I guess the reason that people don't call, say, The Coen Bros. to task or get up in arms over them "ripping off" Preston Sturges and Robert Aldrich is because maybe people feel it's okay to goof on film noir and screwball comedy, but it's not okay when it comes to suspense/horror...?


yes, i do feel all those films you listed are more important to the history of film than sisters.

regarding the coen bros: i think they rip alot off from other film makers -- it's crazy when watching a film like sullivan's travles or even some of frank capra's work (especially its a wonderful life) how much they have "borrowed" -- there are some scene's that they almost "borrow" shot by shot -- however i feel the big difference between the coen and depalma is; the coen take genre's and make them their own -- further, their films are extremely entertaining -- sister's isnt.... on the other hand, you have depalma who seems to "borrow" with mediocre results -- when i look at SISTER'S it looks like a poor attempt of re-making a hitchock film - -i don't feel it has any breath of it's own... i think a big reasons our opinions differ is: you seem to find that de palma is "goofing on" the suspense genre -- if that was the case, i think he failed even more miserably -- at no point did i feel it was a farse -- i just saw it as a failed attempt at a thriller.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Cecil on May 13, 2003, 09:34:04 PM
sisters is one of my fav depalma
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: rustinglass on May 14, 2003, 10:42:13 AM
Why isn't The Wedding Party here, I though it was pretty funny, with some very interesting experimental rythm (can I say it like this?).
It's not my favourite (Femme Fatale is) but I gess it could be up there.

Also it's pretty funny to see "Robert DENERO" on the credits
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: SoNowThen on May 14, 2003, 11:01:08 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
SoNowThen,
in your observance of the "rules" that seem to be put on horror films that make them not worth to be reevaluated, isn't your focus only on the smaller details to those films? Really, some of the most interesting work can be done with those things added. The things you said that needed to be there don't really fall into bringing down much of the material. Actually, in my own mind, it is just another rule for another genre that insivisibly is wrapped around most genres and being broken in small and various ways. In my review of Blow Out, I said it was like a brother film to the art film Blow Up, but was comercial instead. The main difference that seems to be between those two kinds of film is that the art film never really goes for answers, it goes for bringing up questions and ambiguilties. Nothing is more frowned upon in Hollywood than that because studio heads feel everything should be answered to please the audience and a lot of the most acclaimed films do this and many other little things that follow invisible rules. The thing is though, the rules never define most of the book, but only the smaller parts and thus movies by people like De Palma can and are interesting becaus of the talent put into the middle. The outcome, if maybe cliche, doesn't really determine the rest of the film.

~rougerum


You're kinda running round and round. And the outcome DOES determine the whole film, because watching films is a linear experience, and you know the old expression: save the best for last. I don't care if film events are in order, but the last bit of the film generally should pay off for the rest of it. I felt Blow Out turned goofy, hence ruining the rest for me. But what I was saying is that it's hard to craft a horror film that will really be satisfying in the end to people who have seen the same old thing time after time. The one really great ending to a horror film for me was Texas Chainsaw -- Leatherface raging in the middle of the road was creepy as all hell, and stayed with me for a while.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: SoNowThen on May 14, 2003, 11:12:00 AM
...and I said "doesn't LEND itself" to re-evaluation, not "isn't worth" re-evaluation. I would never say any genre isn't worth re-evaluation. Unless it's a shitty musical. And it's called Chicago. And it steals best picture from my favorite director. Die.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on May 14, 2003, 11:53:43 AM
I think goofiness is part of De Palma's charm... like Godard, De Palma is an extremely self-conscious and stylistic filmmaker, but where Godard attains that quality through rapidity and (apparent) randomness, De Palma gets it by always doing too much, always pushing it one step further than plausible, always pushing the funny into gruesome and back again.

When you say the end ruined it for you, is it because of the scene at the patriotic celebration where John Travolta arrives too late to save Nancy Allen, stabs John Lithgow against the American flag backdrop, and then cradles Allen's lifeless form as fireworks shatter the sky? 'Cos I think that scene is spectacularly gorgeous in so many ways; it's the payoff of the film, really. It's a purely tactile thing- it overloads your cinematic sense-memory. And that ending, with the scream... I think that's very impressive. It brings it back full circle; it's the epitomization of the film's mournfulness toward the divide between controlled fiction and uncontrollable reality. I absolutely love it.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on May 14, 2003, 11:55:14 AM
Quote from: rustinglass
Why isn't The Wedding Party here, I though it was pretty funny, with some very interesting experimental rythm (can I say it like this?).
It's not my favourite (Femme Fatale is) but I gess it could be up there.

Also it's pretty funny to see "Robert DENERO" on the credits


I don't think most people have seen Wedding Party or Hi, Mom- they're generally unavailable here, I think- so I didn't include them for that reason. If it's not your favorite, I won't bother Macguffin to add it to the poll.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: SoNowThen on May 14, 2003, 12:14:18 PM
Quote from: godardian
I think goofiness is part of De Palma's charm... like Godard, De Palma is an extremely self-conscious and stylistic filmmaker, but where Godard attains that quality through rapidity and (apparent) randomness, De Palma gets it by always doing too much, always pushing it one step further than plausible, always pushing the funny into gruesome and back again.

When you say the end ruined it for you, is it because of the scene at the patriotic celebration where John Travolta arrives too late to save Nancy Allen, stabs John Lithgow against the American flag backdrop, and then cradles Allen's lifeless form as fireworks shatter the sky? 'Cos I think that scene is spectacularly gorgeous in so many ways; it's the payoff of the film, really. It's a purely tactile thing- it overloads your cinematic sense-memory. And that ending, with the scream... I think that's very impressive. It brings it back full circle; it's the epitomization of the film's mournfulness toward the divide between controlled fiction and uncontrollable reality. I absolutely love it.


I liked everything about that movie until the chase (Travolta's jeep crashes) through to where he stabs Lithgow. Then from there on I liked the rest. Just that little window of time was too much for me, it took the thriller mood into hyper action overdrive. I didn't care about the over-the-top backgrounds, but what especially bothered me was how Travolta managed to find Nancy Allen so easily among that huge crowd at the end. It was like DePalma just threw up his hands and said "well, he's gotta find her now, or else I got no ending". I just feel like most of his movies could do with a little screenplay polish before the shoot, to smooth some of this clunkiness out.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: modage on July 11, 2003, 10:24:31 PM
i just saw DRESSED TO KILL for the first time, on my quest to see more depalma (whether i like it or not).  this now brings my total up to 12.

SPOILERS
it was okay. interesting choice to have the character you are with for the first 30 minutes killed off, leaving you to follow the rest of the story with a few characters that had only had a single scene each.  weird.  also, funny that michael caine took THAT part. this is another one that seems like a Donald Kauffman Creation, but was okay.  

END  SPOILERS

done talking now.  i'm planning on seeing Sisters next, despite mixed reviews. i havent seen much early stuff, mostly later, so thats next.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Cecil on July 11, 2003, 10:32:03 PM
Quote from: themodernage02
SPOILERS
it was okay. interesting choice to have the character you are with for the first 30 minutes killed off, leaving you to follow the rest of the story with a few characters that had only had a single scene each.  weird.  also, funny that michael caine took THAT part. this is another one that seems like a Donald Kauffman Creation, but was okay.  

END  SPOILERS


SPOILERS FOR "PSYCHO"

have you seen psycho?
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: modage on July 11, 2003, 10:33:54 PM
yeah, right. didnt even make that connection.  obviously the whole dressing up like a woman thing and split personalities and shower stuff all "borrowed", but yeah, you're right.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Cecil on July 11, 2003, 10:36:08 PM
not that dressed to kill isnt brilliant, though
Title: De Palma is AWFUL
Post by: adolfwolfli on July 12, 2003, 11:34:46 AM
Oh my God the single most puzzling thing to me is WHY this man is so revered.  If you take away the fancy camera tricks (which often serve NO purpose) you are left with bad dialogue, bad acting and bad editing.  DePalma seems to be the type of director who is worshipped by people who think talent begins and ends with the ability to stage long Steadicam tracking shots.

Femme Fatale was one of 3 movies in my life that I have turned off half-way through (the other 2 being The Mummy and Haunted Honeymoon).  It was just SO awful.  Pointless slo-mo, cheesy sub-B movie dialogue and cheap nudity, completely incomprehensible plot points, unbelievable coincidences, ridiculous time-jumps: "3 weeks later, 4 years later, 18 seconds later, etc.".  It was a MESS.  

I was actually laughing at how bad it was.  Was I supposed to be laughing?  The lesbian seduction scene at the beginning was something out of a cheap 80s made-for-cable exploitation film that you only see on Cinemax at 2 in the morning.

There's a scene where the chick gets out of a car and walks into a building with red boots on.  The WHOLE SHOT is in slo-mo.  Why?   Just to looks at legs?  Don't get me wrong, I like to look at legs as much as the next guy, but in the context of this movie it was just ludicrous.

I read a review that called this DePalma's "return to form".  So was this a return to REALLY bad movies like The Fury, as opposed to just BAD movies like Snake Eyes and Mission to Mars?  

Then there's the argument that these films are "tongue-in-cheek" and therefore, what?  This tongue-in-cheek argument seems like a desperate ploy to cover up the fact that these are just really bad movies.

In order to please his "fans" he feels the need to always include a scene where the camera pans over several rooms, which only amounts to revealing that we are looking at a crappy set without ceilings instead of actual spaces.

I am no film snob that feels to need to ridicule form over function.  There are plently directors I admire that are primarily masters of visual flair (Fincher, Aronofsky, etc.)

I apologize to any DePalma fans out there for this tirade, but Femme Fatale was the final nail in the coffin.  It just made me mad that I had actually spent 3 dollars to rent it.
Title: Re: De Palma is AWFUL
Post by: MacGuffin on July 12, 2003, 11:54:39 AM
Quote from: adolfwolfli
Femme Fatale was one of 3 movies in my life that I have turned off half-way through (the other 2 being The Mummy and Haunted Honeymoon).  It was just SO awful.  Pointless slo-mo, cheesy sub-B movie dialogue and cheap nudity, completely incomprehensible plot points, unbelievable coincidences, ridiculous time-jumps: "3 weeks later, 4 years later, 18 seconds later, etc.".  It was a MESS.  

There's a scene where the chick gets out of a car and walks into a building with red boots on.  The WHOLE SHOT is in slo-mo.  Why?


If you ever see the end, it'll all make sense.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: RegularKarate on July 12, 2003, 01:12:05 PM
Yeah, it makes sense, but it still sucks.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: bonanzataz on July 12, 2003, 02:12:02 PM
how could ANYBODY not like carrie or mission:impossible? snake eyes and dressed to kill i like too. they're fun, even if they are shitty.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: ©brad on July 12, 2003, 03:10:01 PM
alright i did see femme fetale last sunday i think, but i need to watch it again b/c i wasn't in the right mental state, if u will, to really get into it.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Pubrick on July 13, 2003, 02:27:28 AM
phantom of the goddamn paradise, childhood favorite. underrated classic like jessica harper was an underrated hot chick.

i saw Greetings a couple of nites ago, lot of talk, pretty funny sumtimes. very 60s. deniro's peeping tom character was ekzellent, haha he's such a seedy fucker.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: RegularKarate on July 14, 2003, 10:47:38 PM
Quote from: P
phantom of the goddamn paradise, childhood favorite. underrated classic like jessica harper was an underrated hot chick.


all about P of the P, P.

Really is a magnificent film.  That fuckin' mask alone is worth the price of the DVD.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: MacGuffin on November 10, 2003, 06:45:21 PM
Josh Hartnett in Talks for The Black Dahlia
Source: Production Weekly

Josh Hartnett is in talks for The Black Dahlia, an adaptation of James Ellroy's classic noir novel which Brian De Palma will direct.

The film, written by Josh Friedman, is a fictional account of the notorious murder in 1947 of an actress in Los Angeles and the investigation into the case. Based on a notorious, unsolved murder, the mystery begins in the late 1940s when the body of Elizabeth Short is discovered in a vacant lot with evidence she had been tortured for several days before dying. Two L.A.P.D. cops become obsessed with the victim.

De Palma replaces David Fincher who was long attached to direct but dropped out earlier this year.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on November 10, 2003, 07:07:41 PM
Any new DePalma film is very welcome 8)

By the way, I voted for Blow Out in the pool, but I'mnot sure it's my favourite. I think DePalma is a really cool filmmaker. Yes, cool is the word that comes out easily when Italk about him. Great visuals above all. The way he tells his stories are just so damn perfect.

Out of curiosity, you can see a lot of him in Kill Bill (split-screens, long shot at The House of Blue Leaves, etc...) as he's Tarantino's favourite director.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Ernie on November 10, 2003, 08:16:51 PM
Blow Out is definitely a great film but my fave is definitely Carrie - it's the most well shot horror film other than The Shining imo - I also like Dressed to Kill and Casualties a lot too. De Palma rocks. Mission: Impossible I actually just saw recently and I thought it was really cool, much better than the second one. I actually really wanna see Snake Eyes cause Cage is a genius. I'm actually not the biggest fan of Scarface. I liked it but Goodfellas and the first two Godfather's and then Mean Streets really killed it. They're so much better. I hate when people say Scarface is better than them just to be unique, my uncle does that, I hate that. I mean, they may very well feel that way but to me, it's inarguable, I don't know.

Quote
Out of curiosity, you can see a lot of him in Kill Bill (split-screens, long shot at The House of Blue Leaves, etc...) as he's Tarantino's favourite director


Yea, the split screen sequence was definitely influenced by De Palma...not sure which shot your talking about in the House of Blue Leaves scene though. Is it the one with the fountain thingy? That long shot?
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on November 11, 2003, 05:44:44 AM
Quote from: ebeaman
Yea, the split screen sequence was definitely influenced by De Palma...not sure which shot your talking about in the House of Blue Leaves scene though. Is it the one with the fountain thingy? That long shot?


The long steadicam shot that follows the bride to what seems to be a bathroom, then follows the lady (who seems like the owner of the House of Blue Leaves) and the guy in the yellow suit, then goes to the 5.6.7.8.s playing, then follows Sofie into the same bathroom the Bride was in... You know, that shot  :wink:
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: modage on November 12, 2003, 12:10:34 PM
ellroy and depalma sounds fantastic.  how interesting that would be.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on November 12, 2003, 12:14:01 PM
Quote from: RoyalTenenbaum
Quote from: ebeaman
Yea, the split screen sequence was definitely influenced by De Palma...not sure which shot your talking about in the House of Blue Leaves scene though. Is it the one with the fountain thingy? That long shot?


The long steadicam shot that follows the bride to what seems to be a bathroom, then follows the lady (who seems like the owner of the House of Blue Leaves) and the guy in the yellow suit, then goes to the 5.6.7.8.s playing, then follows Sofie into the same bathroom the Bride was in... You know, that shot  :wink:


I thought the entire Darryl Hannah introductory sequence absolutely screamed Brian De Palma...
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: pinkerton310 on November 12, 2003, 05:21:51 PM
Quote from: ebeaman
Blow Out is definitely a great film but my fave is definitely Carrie - it's the most well shot horror film other than The Shining imo - I also like Dressed to Kill and Casualties a lot too. De Palma rocks. Mission: Impossible I actually just saw recently and I thought it was really cool, much better than the second one. I actually really wanna see Snake Eyes cause Cage is a genius.



Whatever  you do....don't see Snake Eyes. That's 90 minutes of your life that you will never get back. You will thank me later.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on November 12, 2003, 05:36:10 PM
Quote from: pinkerton310
Quote from: ebeaman
Blow Out is definitely a great film but my fave is definitely Carrie - it's the most well shot horror film other than The Shining imo - I also like Dressed to Kill and Casualties a lot too. De Palma rocks. Mission: Impossible I actually just saw recently and I thought it was really cool, much better than the second one. I actually really wanna see Snake Eyes cause Cage is a genius.



Whatever  you do....don't see Snake Eyes. That's 90 minutes of your life that you will never get back. You will thank me later.


...but different people have said that about all of De Palma's films. I haven't seen Snake Eyes, but I'd be more than willing to give it a chance. Hell, I'd be more than willing to give Mission to Mars a chance!

My favorite of his is Blow Out, but Carrie certainly is among the best horror films and, as ebeaman pointed out, it stands near The Shining as a well-shot horror film.

I'm watching The Fury today...
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: modage on November 12, 2003, 06:23:18 PM
Quote from: godardian
I haven't seen Snake Eyes, but I'd be more than willing to give it a chance.


well, proceed at your own risk.

Quote from: godardian
Hell, I'd be more than willing to give Mission to Mars a chance!


now you're just talking CRAZY MAN!?!?!? :crazyeyes:
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Gamblour. on November 13, 2003, 07:58:51 AM
Quote from: godardian

...but different people have said that about all of De Palma's films. I haven't seen Snake Eyes


Snake Eyes is worth it for the opening shot alone, another great long, long, long take from de Palma.

And also, for the longest time, pre-PTA, I absolutely fucking loved Mission: Impossible, it's still one of my favorites, I used to say it was the greatest movie ever, heh. MI is just a great spy, espionage, thriller movie, and the music is really good.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: soixante on November 22, 2003, 11:34:06 AM
Carrie is my favorite.  It came out when I was in high school, and it was refreshing to see a realistic movie about teenagers.  Great precursor to Heathers.  Movies like Carrie and Heathers explain why Columbine happened.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Pubrick on November 22, 2003, 11:41:26 AM
Quote from: soixante
Movies like Carrie and Heathers explain why Columbine happened.

no they don't.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on November 22, 2003, 12:02:19 PM
Quote from: P
Quote from: soixante
Movies like Carrie and Heathers explain why Columbine happened.

no they don't.


Yeah... I mean, both those movies have good things you could say about them, and they might extrapolate the essence of teenage  misery, but I would never call either of them "realistic" as such.

And Columbine... well, it's tempting to think that the psychotic pecking order of teenagers was the cause of that, but I'm sure the reasons are infinitesimally more complicated than that and, harder to take, may not ever be comprehensible. The worst kinds of awful human events are the kinds where there's no "lesson," only loss. Or the lesson is so banal ("it's hard being a teenager; teenagers are so cruel") that it could never really help us understand or come to terms.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: SoNowThen on November 22, 2003, 11:27:51 PM
Godardian, I think if you watch all of Snake Eyes, then turn the tv off when it comes to the climax, then walk around for a couple minutes, and come back and turn it on for the last scene and credits, you'll love the movie.

With the exception of a final plot twist hokeyness and stupidity, the rest of Snake Eyes is a nice little DePalma thriller, with some amazing camerawork. Unfortunately, if you're gonna pick one scene in your movie to be absolute shit, it probably shouldn't be the climax...
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: NEON MERCURY on November 22, 2003, 11:34:58 PM
SPOILERS

....... :arrow: The thing that made Snake Eyes so bad was the fact that you find out who the 'bad guy' is 1/2 way through the film and the rest justs sucks.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Weak2ndAct on November 22, 2003, 11:52:32 PM
I humbly admit I own Snake Eyes, but for the first half as SNT mentions.  What really cracks me up about the movie is how in the last shot, Gugino mentions Cage being 'under water,' which never even happened.  The original climax had some fight in the water between Cage and Sinise and they ended up scrapping it.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on November 22, 2003, 11:56:11 PM
Quote from: SoNowThen
Godardian, I think if you watch all of Snake Eyes, then turn the tv off when it comes to the climax, then walk around for a couple minutes, and come back and turn it on for the last scene and credits, you'll love the movie.

With the exception of a final plot twist hokeyness and stupidity, the rest of Snake Eyes is a nice little DePalma thriller, with some amazing camerawork. Unfortunately, if you're gonna pick one scene in your movie to be absolute shit, it probably shouldn't be the climax...


I'll have to check it out. I've heard that it has some really breathtaking camera stuff, like a 15-minute single take at the beginning? (Of course, this was before Russian Ark, but still...)

Someone else please vote for Blow Out! I can't stand that it's tied with Mission: Impossible!!
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Weak2ndAct on November 23, 2003, 12:02:29 AM
Quote from: godardian
Someone else please vote for Blow Out! I can't stand that it's tied with Mission: Impossible!!

Done.  It's in my 80's top ten and my favorite of his films.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on November 23, 2003, 06:18:51 AM
Snake Eyes is a film I cannot hate. Not even some ridiculous plot twists and dialogues can turn me of a movie that has some brilliant editing and camera movements and shots and all that. I just really like it. It's all about style, but in this particular case, I couldn't care less, 'cause I love his style  8)
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: soixante on November 23, 2003, 01:56:42 PM
I feel that De Palma was a great filmmaker through Blow Out, then beginning with Scarface he sold out -- Untouchables and Mission: Impossible were uninspired mainstream films that the De Palma of the 70's would have mocked.  Other than Casualties of War, his post Blow Out output has been mediocre.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: soixante on November 28, 2003, 01:13:23 PM
Finally got around to seeing Femme Fatale.  De Palma has a great eye, but in the service of what?  The story is dull.  And the twist at the end doesn't make it any more interesting.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: SoNowThen on November 28, 2003, 01:16:26 PM
Quote from: soixante
Finally got around to seeing Femme Fatale.  De Palma has a great eye, but in the service of what?  The story is dull.  And the twist at the end doesn't make it any more interesting.


Talk to Godardian and GT about this one. I used to think that, but then they turned me on to the flick, I watched it again, and now fucking absolutely love it.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: MacGuffin on January 08, 2004, 10:29:59 AM
De Palma, Wahlberg & Hartnett Making Black Dahlia
Source: Variety

Director Brian De Palma and actors Mark Wahlberg and Josh Hartnett will make The Black Dahlia, an adaptation of the James Ellroy crime novel framed around the infamous Hollywood murder of wannabe actress Elizabeth Short.

The film, written by Josh Friedman, is a fictional account of the notorious murder in 1947 of an actress in Los Angeles and the investigation into the case. Based on a notorious, unsolved murder, the mystery begins in the late 1940s when the body of Elizabeth Short is discovered in a vacant lot with evidence she had been tortured for several days before dying.

Like Ellroy's novel, the movie will use the famous murder as a backdrop. The core of the film is the relationship between the partners as they are exposed to corruption and deceit. They also become rivals for the affection of a woman who's a dead ringer for the murdered girl.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: SoNowThen on January 08, 2004, 10:35:50 AM
Kick --- fucking --- ASS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ellroy and DePalma is like a marriage in some perverse alternate dimension of heaven...
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: modage on January 08, 2004, 11:00:36 AM
yeah, that would be good if marky mark werent there to fuck it up.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: SoNowThen on January 08, 2004, 11:06:01 AM
:shock:


man, did he not own Boogie Nights? He proved all he ever has to prove right there...
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: modage on January 08, 2004, 11:17:52 AM
Quote from: SoNowThen
:shock:


man, did he not own Boogie Nights? He proved all he ever has to prove right there...


he did own Boogie, but has ruined just about every movie since then.  that was a one-time performance coaxed out of him by a mad-genius.  otherwise this movie would rule.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: SoNowThen on January 08, 2004, 11:27:57 AM
I thought he was pretty good in Three Kings...
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: modage on January 08, 2004, 11:44:30 AM
thats right.  i knew there was one more exception.  so for every 20 films, he doesnt screw up 2 of them.  still, the odds arent good, but its still possible.  the idea of ellroy and depalma sounds fantastic though, so ill see it either way.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Chest Rockwell on January 09, 2004, 05:22:03 PM
I like Marky-Mark. He has a great bod.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on January 09, 2004, 05:32:54 PM
I'm glad this thread was again brought to my attention (have to agree with Chest Rockwell, though Marky Mark's bod suffers from that Brad Pitt overexposure thing, which is kind of a turnoff).

I recently saw Casualties of War- last night, in fact- and I'm still articulating my thoughts on it. I'm wondering if anyone else has seen it and what their opinions are?
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: eward on January 09, 2004, 05:40:58 PM
i thought it was ehhh......but then again i saw it on TV, ill rent it soon enough
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: SoNowThen on January 09, 2004, 05:46:47 PM
I like Casualties. One of the best moments in a DePalma film is when MJ Fox is walking with his buddy and he gives that long monologue about doing the right things when you're so close to death. I like that part a lot.

The movie looks kinda shitty though...
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on January 09, 2004, 05:52:37 PM
Quote from: SoNowThen
I like Casualties. One of the best moments in a DePalma film is when MJ Fox is walking with his buddy and he gives that long monologue about doing the right things when you're so close to death. I like that part a lot.

The movie looks kinda shitty though...


I found that it had that blunt, bright-lit DePalma look, not much different from the rest of his films... garish, but obviously thought out and meant that way.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: SoNowThen on January 09, 2004, 05:57:39 PM
Yeah, and when you compare it to the other good 'nam movies (Apocalypse Now and Full Metal Jacket), it's visuals are sorely lacking.

But I do like that movie, despite the blah picture...
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: godardian on January 09, 2004, 06:27:12 PM
Quote from: SoNowThen
Yeah, and when you compare it to the other good 'nam movies (Apocalypse Now and Full Metal Jacket), it's visuals are sorely lacking.

But I do like that movie, despite the blah picture...


Well, do you find all DePalma's movies visually blah, though...? 'cos I completely recognized the compositions/framing/lighting. I mean, it's definitely his, you know? As much as those things in Full Metal Jacket are so recognizably Kubrick. Really over-hot instead of ice-cold precise.

I could understand taking issue with DePalma's visual style and preferences, but I didn't find this one much different from any of his others in that way. I wasn't surprised it looked the way it did, I guess is what I'm saying. It was the story and the characterizations that were different (or had a different effect) for him.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: SoNowThen on January 12, 2004, 09:31:19 AM
I find his compositions and visual style to be great, and his camerwork (movement) top notch. But I find that way the DP's light his movies often leaves something to be desired.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: billybrown on January 30, 2004, 10:40:01 PM
For those that have seen it, is Mission To Mars as wretched as all the critics made it out to be? If so, does it have any of the redeeming Depalma qualities like great visuals and camerawork to offset the bad script or what have you? The DVD is quite cheap, like 11 bucks brand new, and I am getting tempted to take the plunge, as I am a fan of his, and the DVD is quite loaded with extras. I might even hit up Bonfire this weekend for 7 bucks, also brand new, and complete the critcally maligned, bottom of the barrel, Depalma double-bill DVD experience. Guilty pleasures I suppose, in that Snake Eyes kinda way...
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Pubrick on January 30, 2004, 10:46:19 PM
don't buy it,. unless ur into buying things u only watch once.

snake eyes has sum replay value at least for the start.. mission to mars is just wack. but not as atrocious as the critics say, i saw it once when i was really hung over and it made me feel better. whatever that's worth.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: modage on January 30, 2004, 11:31:50 PM
i havent seen it since the theatre, but i seem to remember that there is cool camerawork and some long takes and such, but its pretty bad.  but, if you REALLY love depalma, maybe its 'good bad' where its watchable.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Stefen on March 17, 2004, 01:39:46 AM
I just watched casualties of war for the first time tonight. I never kenw this had so many people in it at easrly stages of their careers, C. Reilly, Leguizamo, David Keith (or is it Keith David, i know im not the only one who gets these two guys names confused). I liked it, but I didn't like Michael J Fox, he seemed very out of place. Plus I think I enjoyed it more because I bought it for $5.50 in the wal-mart bargain bin (along with Seinfelds Comedian) It didn't seem like Depalma at all for some reason, I can't pinpoint why though. Overall I give it a B-
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Henry Hill on March 25, 2004, 04:24:13 PM
stefen...no mention of sean penn? its my favorite role of his.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: modage on July 02, 2004, 10:52:25 AM
I just skimmed over the rest of this thread, because i started my De Palma week a few nights ago, and realized that somewhere between then and now i've been somewhat of a convert to the De Palma church.

(http://cdn.netflix.com/NetFlix_Assets/boxshots/large/60030818.jpg)

first we watched BODY DOUBLE, which was a shameless rip-off (combination) of VERTIGO and REAR WINDOW, but with tons of sex thrown in and an extremely 80's look.  but it was sort of good.  because some of the themes of the film like 'real vs artiface' that was set up in the first five minutes and returned at the end in the ditch, made you think maybe this piece of trash had a point?  and it was stylish as hell, and it was kind of cool.  
 
(http://cdn.netflix.com/NetFlix_Assets/boxshots/large/60010732.jpg)

next up was OBSESSION, which was a shameless rip-off (combination) of VERTIGO and REBECCA, but with Uncle Ben from Spider-Man and a pretty cool twist ending.  at this point i sort of realized that the feel of these movies isnt strictly a hip hitchcock update for the 70's or 80's, but somehow combined the feel of the more arty foreign films like BlowUp, etc. with hitchcocks suspense (and story ideas) and a modern (for the time) feel.  which was sort of cool, i thought.

(http://cdn.netflix.com/NetFlix_Assets/boxshots/large/60020931.jpg)

then it was time for THE FURY, which unfortunately wasnt a hitchcock rip-off, but a muddled storytelling combination of Carrie and a govt conspiracy.  the movie couldnt decide if it wanted to be with Kurt Douglas or Amy Irving.  it wasnt very suspenseful and i would say it was almost not worth watching had it not been for the AMAZING full body explosion at the end that happened at (i counted) THIRTEEN (thats right 13) different camera angles!  the last two minutes of the film should be shown as its own short film, and i would say 'brilliant!'

i guess, as i said to my girlfriend if you didnt know better, it might seem like his movies are terrible.  but somehow, if you happen to like what he does THE SHAMELESS HITCHCOCK STEALING EROTIC THRILLER, then you'll have a lot more fun.  i used to only like his more non-depalma movies like Untouchables, Mission Impossible, Carlitos Way etc. but ever since Femme Fatale sort of clicked with me i've been finding his movies a whole lot more interesting.  next up is Phantom of the Paradise and Bonfire of the Vanities.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: modage on July 07, 2004, 12:18:18 AM
(http://cdn.netflix.com/NetFlix_Assets/boxshots/large/323077.jpg) (http://cdn.netflix.com/NetFlix_Assets/boxshots/large/60010781.jpg)
okay, we finished off our DePalma week on quite a painful stretch with Bonfire of the Vanities, which was just...not good at all.  and Phantom of the Paradise which was ridiculously awful to the point of being almost watchable.  BOTV was just disatrous all around, bad overacting from everybody in the film, characters you couldnt give a shit about, etc.  i had heard what a disaster it was but still couldnt believe it might have something worthwhile about it.  it doesnt.  POTP might be good if you like camp like this, but i really dont.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: MacGuffin on July 07, 2004, 12:22:16 AM
Quote from: themodernage02
okay, we finished off our DePalma week on quite a painful stretch with Bonfire of the Vanities, which was just...not good at all.


Now that you've seen it, I highly recommend this book and you'll know why it was failed production right from the start:

(http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0385308248.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg)
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: picolas on July 07, 2004, 01:04:58 AM
could someone please tell me specifically why i also hate that movie?
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Henry Hill on July 31, 2004, 10:44:25 AM
Nobody should EVER see Raising Cain.  EVER!
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Pubrick on July 31, 2004, 12:15:47 PM
Quote from: filmboy70
Nobody should EVER see Raising Cain.  EVER!

i'm watching it right now!
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: eward on August 01, 2004, 12:20:23 AM
Quote from: filmboy70
Nobody should EVER see Raising Cain.  EVER!


no but they should, if they enjoy having fun.  intentional cheese to the max, just splendid.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: eward on January 15, 2005, 02:24:19 AM
so yeah, anyway, i just watched blow out again and i felt like posting here because that classic is keeping me from sleep.  De Palma is a master.  ive seen almost all of his films with the exceptions of mission to mars and  snake eyes, but im in no hurry to pick em up.  the few i dont like are scarface, body double, wise guys and bonfire.  blow out, carrie, the fury, untouchables i love beyond belief, and the rest are, at the very least, just great masterful bits of entertainment.  i love depalma.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: SHAFTR on February 16, 2005, 03:36:44 AM
Quote from: themodernage02


(http://cdn.netflix.com/NetFlix_Assets/boxshots/large/60030818.jpg)

first we watched BODY DOUBLE, which was a shameless rip-off (combination) of VERTIGO and REAR WINDOW, but with tons of sex thrown in and an extremely 80's look.  but it was sort of good.  because some of the themes of the film like 'real vs artiface' that was set up in the first five minutes and returned at the end in the ditch, made you think maybe this piece of trash had a point?  and it was stylish as hell, and it was kind of cool.  


I don't think I've ever seen a movie that was such a combination of great and bad.  There are many sequences in this film that are just great, Hitchcock inspired, but great.  Than there are sequences that are pretty bad and the writing is pretty bad at points but I still loved it.  I was either having fun watching it due to it's craft or to it's cheesy 80s parts.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Pastor Parsley on February 16, 2005, 02:45:04 PM
I voted for Blow Up... and Carrie is a favorite of mine.  A lot of his films are nicely shot and entertaining, but I would never say they are good films.

I have to agree with adolfwolfli on Femme.  It really is laughable as are many of his films.  I think he's so revered because most of the filmmakers who make a b-movies do so by accident, attempting something better.  Where De Palma's purpose from the beginning is to make a b-movie.  I always think of Tarantino as being another De Palma...he makes b-movies on purpose.

B-movies are a genere now and some directors actually try to make them.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: eward on February 16, 2005, 04:41:24 PM
Quote from: Pastor Parsley
I voted for Blow Up...


out, my boy, out.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Pastor Parsley on February 16, 2005, 05:26:48 PM
Quote from: eward
Quote from: Pastor Parsley
I voted for Blow Up...


out, my boy, out.


Blow Out always reminds me of Blow Up...I can't help it.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Gold Trumpet on February 16, 2005, 05:51:41 PM
Quote from: Pastor Parsley
Quote from: eward
Quote from: Pastor Parsley
I voted for Blow Up...


out, my boy, out.


Blow Out always reminds me of Blow Up...I can't help it.


They should. The former is a remake of the latter.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: eward on February 16, 2005, 07:41:31 PM
they're both masterpieces.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Film Student on February 16, 2005, 11:56:49 PM
I'm blindly posting which may not be a good idea, but I don't have the patience to read the entire thread...  All I can say is that De Palma has grown on me exponentially over the years.   I've seen everything except "Raising Cain" and "Phantom of the Paradise", and I find each film interesting and extremely re-watchable (with the exceptions of Mission to Mars and The Untouchables).  Even Snake Eyes is entertaining as hell.   "Sisters", "Blow Out", and "Carrie" are masterpieces,  "Dressed to Kill" and "Body Double" are close to, and the rest is gravy.   I don't know why the guy gets a bad rap...
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: eward on February 17, 2005, 09:32:51 AM
Quote from: Film Student
(with the exceptions of...The Untouchables).  


whaaaaaat?
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: tpfkabi on February 17, 2005, 06:16:36 PM
i was at a pawn shop and saw an old vhs of blow out. it was in the padded case, kind of like what Disney videos come in. unfortunately, when i opened it, there were three petrified weird looking spiders and i have a weird feeling that putting it in my VCR would reawaken them. i have wanted to see it since tarantino said it was one of his favorites.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: modage on February 17, 2005, 09:38:55 PM
haha, theres no need to risk deadly vcr spiders, its on dvd!
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: tpfkabi on February 18, 2005, 06:49:56 AM
Quote from: themodernage02
haha, theres no need to risk deadly vcr spiders, its on dvd!


yeah, i figured, but it was only $4 and i've never seen it anywhere before.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: 03 on February 18, 2005, 11:17:48 AM
hm isee
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Film Student on February 20, 2005, 07:33:38 AM
Quote from: eward
Quote from: Film Student
(with the exceptions of...The Untouchables).  


whaaaaaat?


"The Untouchables" has got to be the most bland, vanilla, middle-of-the-road gangster film ever to be given serious attention.  Costner sucks (as usual), Connery's a bore, De Palma has a few nice showy moments but for the most part plays it by the book, and Mamet's script is so by-the-numbers it's hard for me to believe the same guy wrote "Oleanna" and "House of Games".  

Of course, I'm one of (apparently) less than half-a-dozen people on the planet who find Scarface highly overrated (although still significantly more enjoyable than The Untouchables), so it may be a bias against De Palma doing for-hire studio gangster pics with sub-par scripts written by normally spectacular writers.  Who knows.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: MacGuffin on March 14, 2005, 07:06:10 AM
Eckhart joins 'Dahlia' force for De Palma
Source: Hollywood Reporter

Aaron Eckhart has booked a starring turn in Brian De Palma's "The Black Dahlia," which Millennium Films and Signature Pictures are producing. The movie is an adaptation of James Ellroy's 1940s-set novel about two LAPD cops who investigate the real-life case of the murder of fledgling actress Elizabeth Short. Eckhart will play one of the officers. Josh Hartnett portrays the other cop. Hilary Swank and Scarlett Johansson also have been cast. Shooting takes place next month in Bulgaria. Josh Friedman wrote the adaptation.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: eward on March 14, 2005, 02:23:20 PM
Quote from: Film Student
Quote from: eward
Quote from: Film Student
(with the exceptions of...The Untouchables).  


whaaaaaat?


"The Untouchables" has got to be the most bland, vanilla, middle-of-the-road gangster film ever to be given serious attention.  Costner sucks (as usual), Connery's a bore, De Palma has a few nice showy moments but for the most part plays it by the book, and Mamet's script is so by-the-numbers it's hard for me to believe the same guy wrote "Oleanna" and "House of Games".  

Of course, I'm one of (apparently) less than half-a-dozen people on the planet who find Scarface highly overrated (although still significantly more enjoyable than The Untouchables), so it may be a bias against De Palma doing for-hire studio gangster pics with sub-par scripts written by normally spectacular writers.  Who knows.


i know this is late, and i don't agree with you on the untouchables, but i agree with you wholeheartedly on scarface.  i've seen it three times and i still just don't see what all the fuckin fuss is about.  it's so boring, so often.  too excessive, even for depalma.

black dahlia is going to rock, tho.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: MacGuffin on May 14, 2005, 01:25:03 PM
Uni picks up De Palma's 'Black Dahlia'
Source: Hollywood Reporter

CANNES -- In the first big North American sale at Cannes this year, Universal Pictures has picked up distribution rights to director Brian De Palma's $60 million 1940s crime thriller "The Black Dahlia," starring Josh Hartnett, Scarlett Johansson, Aaron Eckhart and Hilary Swank.

Universal paid $10 million-$15 million, according to sources.

After visiting the Bulgaria set en route to Cannes, Universal vice chairman Marc Shmuger became convinced that the film "was vintage De Palma material like 'The Untouchables,' " he said. "I was wowed by everything I saw. It's a rare opportunity to find a project with such great talent and a masterful story, self-financed and available. The director, the cast, the key departments that they put together are extraordinary."

Art Linson, one of the film's producers, hailed Shmuger as not only the best marketing mind in the business but also a "great creative partner."
 
The production team includes a Tiffany roster of Oscar winners including production designer Dante Ferretti, cinematographer Vilmos Zigmund, composer James Horner and costume designer Jenny Bevan. k.d. lang is singing the title song and has a bit part, Linson said.

Based on the 1987 James Ellroy murder mystery, "Black Dahlia" stars Hartnett and Eckhart as two boxers-turned-cops who become obsessed with finding the brutal killer of ingenue Elizabeth Short, aka "Black Dahlia." Her murder in 1947 led to one of the biggest manhunts in L.A. history. "It's one of the great all-time crime stories ever told," Shmuger said.

Johansson stars as the woman in the middle between the two men; in a turn away from her recent mannish roles, Swank plays a "sexy bad girl," said Linson, who is pleased to be working again with his "Untouchables" partner De Palma. "This kind of material harkens back to his work on 'Scarface.' It's playing right to his strengths."

After shooting in Sofia, the production will return to Los Angeles for two weeks June 11.

Adapted for the screen by Eric Bergren and Josh Friedman, the film was produced by Linson, Moshe Diamant and Rudy Cohen of Signature Pictures along with Avi Lerner of Millenium Films.

Diamant and Cohen developed the book for 10 years; Linson and Signature also partnered on last year's "Imaginary Heroes." Diamant said he put together the financing through foreign presales, the German fund Equity Pictures and gap financing. Linson started working with De Palma on the project 2 1/2 years ago. Linson believes that as the studios "get more conservative, it opens up risk-taking in other areas," which is why the project began with independent financing.

Diamant and Shmuger negotiated the deal for North America, the last of the territories to be sold. Shmuger was also involved in the acquisition of the Oscar-winning "Ray." Universal plans to release the film in theaters next year.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: w/o horse on June 10, 2005, 09:17:25 PM
Anyone have any thoughts on Hi, Mom!?  Fry's had it in their $10 bin.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: I Don't Believe in Beatles on June 10, 2005, 11:18:41 PM
It's very funny.  If you can get it for 10 bucks or so, I'd say go ahead and buy it.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: MacGuffin on June 28, 2005, 05:40:36 PM
De Palma Making Capone
A prequel to The Untouchables.
 
Brian De Palma has just signed a deal with Paramount Pictures to direct The Untouchables: Capone Rising, a prequel to his 1987 film The Untouchables, according to today's Variety.

De Palma, whose other credits include Scarface and Carlito's Way, replaces Antoine Fuqua who had been previously linked to the project. The Untouchables: Capone Rising, will center around Al Capone and Irish cop Jimmy Malone and track Capone's rise as king of the underworld.

Screenwriters David Levien and Brian Koppelman have been working on the script. When the project was initially announced, Levien told Variety, "The film starts on the eve of Capone's arrival, and while Malone wasn't the most corrupt cop, he operated at a time when every cop was on the take.  Once he crosses paths with Capone, he sees a level of violence and criminality that causes him to have a moral awakening."

The '87 film, which starred Kevin Costner and Robert De Niro (as Al Capone), and the Untouchables TV series, which aired in the late '50s/early '60s and starred Robert Stack, were both based on Oscar Fraley's novel of the same name.

De Palma has just wrapped up work on The Black Dahlia for Universal and may make Capone his next project.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Pubrick on June 28, 2005, 11:18:40 PM
prequel prequel fucking prequel.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: modage on June 29, 2005, 12:03:09 AM
haha.   :yabbse-thumbup:
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: soixante on June 29, 2005, 12:06:10 AM
I just rented De Palma's obscure 1980 cult film Home Movies.  It is like his late 60's experimental films Hi Mom and Greetings.  It is quite different from his horror and action films.
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: socketlevel on June 29, 2005, 12:29:29 AM
i love how across the board the poll was

that has to say something good about the man

-sl-
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: MacGuffin on July 21, 2005, 03:57:00 PM
(http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/miscgfx/covers4/carlitoswayultimatedvd.jpg)

Oct. 25
Title: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Weak2ndAct on July 21, 2005, 03:59:01 PM
:multi:  :multi:  :multi:  :multi:  :multi:  :multi:  :multi:  :multi:  :multi:  :multi:  :multi:  :multi:
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: The Red Vine on February 14, 2006, 02:45:18 PM
My favorite Brain De Palma movie is probably Scarface. Carrie is probably his best achievement as a director but it's just too depressing to be my favorite. And it's disturbing as hell.

Poor Carrie  :yabbse-sad:
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: modage on February 14, 2006, 02:51:50 PM
when can we hear your mixtape?  or should we wait till it hits the streets!

just kidding, you know, because rappers love scarface.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: JG on February 14, 2006, 02:58:58 PM
every christmas i get at all this scarface paraphonilia.  i now have like three posters and two figurines of a movie that is just pretty good.  my parents think that because i love movies scarface is like my favorite movie.   
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Split Infinitive on February 14, 2006, 05:13:41 PM
every christmas i get at all this scarface paraphonilia.  i now have like three posters and two figurines of a movie that is just pretty good.  my parents think that because i love movies scarface is like my favorite movie.
If my parents bought me Scarface paraphernalia every Christmas, I would carve them up in the bathtub with a chainsaw.

No, seriously.  I hate the movie that much.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: eward on February 14, 2006, 11:04:27 PM
yeah, i love alot of depalma but scarface sucks...but we can blame it on oliver stone and not feel so bad!
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: The Red Vine on February 15, 2006, 12:07:40 AM
Scarface isn't a GREAT movie, but I liked Al Pacino's wild performance. It seems to be a real love/hate movie for a lot of people.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: grand theft sparrow on February 15, 2006, 09:47:14 AM
It seems to be a real love/hate movie for a lot of people.

It's OK.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: JG on February 15, 2006, 02:10:52 PM
A lot of the reason that i think it's hated is that douche bags love it.  it's not bad  but it's certainly not great. 
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: killafilm on February 15, 2006, 02:36:46 PM
I think we all can admit that if any of us were on MTV Cribs we'd bust out our Scarface dvd and be like, "I'd like to give props to Scarface and Xixax fo' making me gangsta'."
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Split Infinitive on February 15, 2006, 06:42:53 PM
I think we all can admit that if any of us were on MTV Cribs we'd bust out our Scarface dvd and be like, "I'd like to give props to Scarface and Xixax fo' making me gangsta'."
Actually, I'd say that not owning Scarface is my own little personal insurance policy that I'll never be asked to appear on MTV Cribs. 
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: MacGuffin on July 25, 2006, 08:19:27 PM
New Body Double DVD Due
De Palma's porn-themed thriller double dips in Oct.

On October 3, 2006, Sony Pictures Home Entertainment will release Body Double (Special Edition) on DVD. This double dip DVD of the sexy thriller-cum-murder mystery features a hearty helping of bonus materials, and will be available for the MSRP of $19.94.

The Body Double (Special Edition) DVD will feature the following bonus materials:

Interviews with Brian De Palma, Melanie Griffith, Deborah Shelton, Gregg Henry and Dennis Franz
The Seduction
The Set-Up
The Mystery
The Controversy

(http://dvdmedia.ign.com/dvd/image/article/720/720897/body-double-special-edition-20060725033302921-000.jpg)
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: MacGuffin on September 19, 2006, 09:44:05 AM
The Lives of Brian
The movies of Brian De Palma -- The ''Black Dahlia'' director shares war stories, defends his female characters, and reveals which of his movies he can't help watching on TV by Chris Nashawaty
Source: Entertainment Weekly
 
No director has had as many ups and downs as Brian De Palma. In the early '70s, the New Jersey native was the ringleader of a group of Hollywood boy wonders that included George Lucas, Steven Spielberg, and Martin Scorsese. He also helped launch the careers of Robert De Niro, John Travolta, and Sissy Spacek. But by the end of the '80s, De Palma had come to symbolize the glorious (Scarface) and not-so-glorious (The Bonfire of the Vanities) excess of the decade. Since then, De Palma has gone in and out of fashion more often than long sideburns. His latest comeback bid is The Black Dahlia, a lavish noir starring Josh Hartnett, Hilary Swank, and Scarlett Johansson. De Palma describes the bruise-black period film as a look at ''the dark side of the Hollywood myth factory.'' And after more than 40 turbulent years in that factory's engine room, he should know what it looks like. We sat down with the 66-year-old director to discuss his legacy behind the camera.

Sisters 1973
Reeling from the disaster of his first studio film, 1972's Get to Know Your Rabbit, De Palma retrenched with this bloody, low-budget thriller about a pair of separated Siamese twins. While some critics praised the film as ''Hitchcockian,'' others thought he was ripping off the master — a familiar refrain during his career.
''Get to Know Your Rabbit was a catastrophe. I had an unhappy star, Tommy Smothers, who looked at Warner Brothers as the enemy. And pretty soon, I was the enemy too. He didn't even want the movie to come out. I said to the studio, 'My way or the highway,' and they showed me the highway. I had to start my career all over again. That's why I made Sisters independently. I made a conscious attempt to learn how to tell stories with images, and Hitchcock is the master of that. I used some of his ideas. I have no apologies for it. Most times when critics say I'm ripping off Hitchcock, it's a shorthand way of describing me when you haven't really thought about what I've been doing.''

Carrie 1976
Based on Stephen King's debut novel, Carrie was De Palma's first hit, thanks to a lot of pig's blood and its famous hand-from-the-grave ending. But the cast, which included Sissy Spacek, Amy Irving, and John Travolta, almost landed in a Galaxy Far, Far Away.
''George Lucas and I were both looking for young actors at the same time, so we held our casting sessions together. We both really wanted Amy Irving — he wanted her for Princess Leia. I don't know where I got the idea for the ending of Carrie. In the original script, the big climax was Carrie giving her mother a heart attack. I remember saying to the producer, 'This is the big scene?! Carrie looks at her mother and she clutches her chest?! I don't think so!' You know, it's actually Sissy's hand that reaches out from the grave. They put her in a box under the ground. I planned on using someone else. I mean, who would know if it was her hand? But she wanted to do it.''

Dressed to Kill 1980
Right from its opening — a shower scene with Angie Dickinson that left little to the imagination — De Palma was branded a misogynist. That didn't stop audiences from making the controversial thriller a hit.
''Angie's not shy about appearing without her clothes, but she felt that a younger body might look better in the shower scene. She was like, 'I'll do it, but I think you'll be better off with a body double.' So that's what we did. In any movie, as soon as you see a girl, you're waiting for her to take her clothes off. You'll sit there and watch her forever for this to happen. I get attacked for putting women in jeopardy and having them get attacked, but I'm sorry, if I'm going to photograph someone in peril, showing a woman in a negligee holding a candelabra is a lot more interesting to me than some guy walking around with a flashlight.''

Blow Out 1981
A riff on Antonioni's Blow-Up, Blow Out stars John Travolta (at the height of his fame) as a movie sound man who overhears what may have been a murder. De Palma's obsession with surveillance pops up in several films; he traces the theme to an incident in his youth.
''When I was 17, my mother thought my father was cheating on her. And she kind of recruited me to follow him. When he made a date with this girl, I followed him and took some photographs, like a little detective. Ultimately I confronted him when I broke into their love nest and caught him with the other woman.... Blow Out was supposed to be a little picture, but John had just done Saturday Night Fever and Grease back-to-back. So when he wanted to do it, that made it a much bigger picture. He was terrific, but it was expensive and when you have a bummer ending like Blow Out's... I'll never forget when the distributor saw it, they almost had a coronary.''

Scarface 1983
The Oliver Stone-penned saga of Cuban drug lord Tony Montana features more bullets, blow, and bad accents than you can shake a rolled-up dollar bill at. But it remains De Palma's most iconic and lasting film.
''It just goes to show you never know which are the films people will still be talking about 25 years later. Oliver Stone almost got himself killed researching it. He was hanging out with a bunch of drug dealers and they thought he was an undercover agent. The movie's grand opera, so of course Pacino played it big. He's on cocaine, for chrissakes! When he took Michelle Pfeiffer's hat in that scene with the two of them in the car, he did that spontaneously. It's one of those magical moments. The thing I'm proudest of is Al's performance. If I'm watching TV and I come across that film, I'll sit and watch it for a while.''

The Untouchables 1987
Written by David Mamet, De Palma's period epic about Eliot Ness' crusade against Al Capone features an impressive cast — in retrospect.
''Originally, I had Bob Hoskins as Capone. And I told the head of the studio, 'We have a cast for an episode of Masterpiece Theatre. We need a big star as Capone.' So we went to De Niro. I spent weeks trying to convince him because he would have to put on weight and he had a couple of other pictures he was doing. No one had heard of Kevin Costner yet. And Sean Connery — he hadn't had a hit since 007. Now the cast looks great, but at the time, it wasn't quite as hot. In the end, Hoskins had a pay-or-play deal, so he got paid $300,000 for not doing the movie. To this day, he says to me, 'It's the best job I ever had!'''

Casualties of War 1989
De Palma's Vietnam film had the misfortune of hitting theaters after Full Metal Jacket and the same year as Born on the Fourth of July. Despite powerhouse performances by Sean Penn and Michael J. Fox, it got lost.
''The other Vietnam movies had something to do with it. And also that Michael J. Fox was considered a comedy star at the time. When you make a movie like Blow Out or Casualties of War, which is unending agony to make and to watch, your audience isn't going to sit up and go, 'God, that's great! I'm going to go tell my friends about this one!' I mean, the movie's devastating. It's about a girl that gets raped and killed. Vertigo is one of my favorite movies. Hitchcock was mortified when it wasn't a success. Maybe it's a bummer, but you have to look beyond that. You have to stick with your instincts. And sometimes, unfortunately, you go down with them.''

The Bonfire of the Vanities 1990
Speaking of going down, Bonfire was not only a turkey but one with a bull's-eye painted on its tail feathers. Critics had it in for De Palma's take on Tom Wolfe's novel from the get-go. Not that they were being unfair; the film's a mess — as De Palma himself admits.
''We tried to make Sherman McCoy likable. That was my first mistake. That's why we hired Tom Hanks. But Sherman McCoy is a prick and an arrogant aristocrat. And that's the way it should have been. Ultimately, Tom was wrong for the movie. The reaction to the film was mortifying. You love this book, you make some decisions you regret, and you think, well, you just have to go on. In my career, I've been burned down to the ground about every 10 years. Finished! And somehow I've managed to rise up out of the ashes. It's not a particularly pleasant cycle.''

Carlito's Way 1993
Al Pacino's world-weary Carlito Brigante is like Tony Montana lite. The standout in the film is Sean Penn as Pacino's nerdy, psychotic, coked-out lawyer. De Palma says the actor was just as intense as the character.
''I was reluctant to read the script because it was gangsters again. Do I really want to go back there? But when I got Sean Penn into it, it got much more exciting. The only person who was close to getting Sean's role — because Sean has never been a favorite of the studios — was Kevin Spacey. I know some people have problems with Sean, but I never have. I remember in one scene he got very unhappy with the way it was being done and he wanted to do a lot of takes. It was the scene where he's all coked up, trying to convince Al to go on the boat with him. Sean was crazy that whole day. He was so into character. We'd done about 15 takes and I said, 'Let's move on.' But Sean wanted to do 15 more. I looked over at Al and he was fine with it, so we did 15 more.''

Mission: Impossible 1996
The franchise's first installment features several signature De Palma sequences, like the break-in at CIA headquarters with a dangling Tom Cruise. De Palma liked Cruise, but says one Mission was enough for him.
''Tom asked me to come back for the second one, but I said no. I saw the sequels. The second is very much a John Woo picture. I can hardly remember anybody else in it besides Tom Cruise. I think that's a mistake. The problem with the Mission: Impossibles is they've been copied so much on television now. And then in the third one, where you have a television director [J.J. Abrams] directing it, you're going to get a long episode of 24. I don't understand why people are ganging up on Tom. I've worked with two of the biggest Scientologists — Travolta and Cruise — and I don't think people understand Scientology. As for Paramount recently canceling their deal with his company, well, you've got me in a difficult spot because I'm trying to do a sequel to The Untouchables there."
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: MacGuffin on September 24, 2006, 09:26:56 PM
The death-deifying De Palma
Brian De Palma's never-say-die brio.
Source: Los Angeles Times

"Nothing stays buried forever," says a cop in the new Brian De Palma thriller "The Black Dahlia." This basic rule of homicide investigation also applies to De Palma's career. One of his very first movies was called "Murder à la Mod," and the murders have continued almost unabated ever since. So have the exhumations.

In De Palma's House of Pain, corpses have a way of springing back to life, if only in fever dreams. In "Carrie," Sissy Spacek's blood-soaked prom queen exerts her revenge from beyond the grave — or, to be more exact, from inside it. At the end of "Blow Out," Nancy Allen's throttled death scream, recorded on a surveillance tape, pulls apart the psyche of the man who failed to save her, a sound recordist for cheapie horror movies played by John Travolta. At the end of "Casualties of War," a slaughtered Vietnamese girl, or her look-alike, beckons Michael J. Fox's Pfc. Eriksson, the man who failed to save her. In movie after movie, De Palma keeps returning to the scene of the crime — he digs up his obsessions and buries them and hauls them up again.
 
At 66, De Palma has been at it a long time, since the mid-'60s. While the other major directors of his generation — Steven Spielberg, Martin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola — have ranged high and low, De Palma keeps hitting the same groove. Like Hitchcock, to whom he has often been compared, and not always favorably, his name represents a brand.

For all that, the dread he parlays has never quite devolved into shtick because, even in a film as roundly slammed and wildly unsatisfactory as "The Black Dahlia," there are moments when his ecstatic love of filmmaking comes through. But his ardor can be a mixed blessing. De Palma's technique alone can hold you, but sometimes we must ask: Technique in the service of what?

In the mid-'80s he said in an interview, "I don't start with an idea about content. I start with a visual image." In the same interview he said, "I'm interested in motion, sometimes violent motions, because they work aesthetically in film."

But surely this patter about pure cinema is a decoy. A sports film, for example, offers abundant opportunities for dynamic movement, and yet De Palma has never attempted one of those. As a rule, things really get rolling for him when his camera tracks are slicked with fresh blood. The fact that the blood most often belongs to women, who are perceived as prey, or that sex is often the lure for violence in his films, fouls the air.

THE WAGES OF SIN

In "Dressed to Kill," probably his most controversial movie, an unhappily married woman played by Angie Dickinson has a hot tryst with a dark stranger and gets sliced to death in an elevator for her troubles. The camerawork throughout all this is — no other word for it — gorgeous. It's an emblematic sequence for De Palma and the sickest of jokes: Sex, even good sex, can only end badly.

Despite the super-sophistication of his technique, in essence De Palma's movies express, at least for men in the audience, how sex was experienced as an adolescent. An early adolescent. They capture the rage and mortification, the guilt, the tingle of voyeurism. In "Carrie," the slo-mo glide through the girls' locker room that opens the movie is every boy's porno fantasia.

One of the most unnerving things about De Palma's films, even more than their eruptive, gargoyle terror, is the suggestion that these adolescent anxieties are naggingly ever-present. The tyranny of sexual desire, woman as the Other — for most men, these fears still fly. And because De Palma came of age as an artist in a consciousness-raising era when the women's movement was in full swing, he has always been the whipping boy of those who flaunt their liberal bona fides. It was predictable that "Femme Fatale," his most recent movie before "The Black Dahlia," would be cheered by his detractors, many of whom believe he is the ungodly creation of his greatest champion, Pauline Kael. Aside from being his best movie in years, it also showcased a rare species for De Palma — the sexually in-control female hero, the pansexual praying mantis.

Equally unnerving in his movies is the cackle often underscoring the terrors. In a De Palma movie, the worst-possible-case scenario is almost always the only scenario, and there's a kind of ghastly comic justice in that. Carrie isn't just humiliated at her prom, she's doused in pig's blood. In return, she incinerates her classmates.

In one of his early, revue-sketch movies, "Hi, Mom!," De Palma stages a sequence that, for sheer satiric audacity, is unmatched by anything else of that era. A gaggle of white, liberal, middle-class theatergoers attend an off-off-Broadway happening called "Be Black Baby" in which African American militants, in white face, darken the audience members' faces and proceed to school them in what it's like to be black. They're terrorized, brutalized; there's even a rape. When it's all over, the dazed but grateful playgoers give the evening high marks. "It really makes you stop and think," says one.

In his early prime, De Palma was singled out for opprobrium, it seemed, because he did extremely well what the schlock horror-meisters, with their scantily clad victims and bogie men, did badly. He was also, as the draft-dodger comedy "Greetings" and "Hi, Mom!" and the rock-horror jape "Phantom of the Paradise" showed, closer to the Zap Comix ethos than is generally recognized: Like R. Crumb, with his pageant of brazen racial and sexual stereotypes, De Palma was unapologetically upfront about the lurid inappropriateness of his fantasy life.

Unlike Crumb, he doesn't always make it clear if he is "commenting" on those gonzo stereotypes or buying into them. Probably a little of both. But he is a much more calculating artist than Crumb, who is so entranced by his own perversities that he can't quite imagine anyone being shocked by them. De Palma, by contrast, always has his public in mind. The diabolical streak in his thrillers comes from the fact that he is not as shocked as we are about what he is showing us. And boy, does he want us to know it.

And yet there is much more to De Palma than puppet-mastery, just as there was with Hitchcock, who suffered a similar criticism. The adverse comparisons to Hitchcock have for the most part been unfair. While it's true that the distinction between rip-off and homage is sometimes stretched a bit thin in De Palma's films — "Body Double," that bargain-bin "Rear Window," comes to mind — the whole feeling tone of his movies is much more voluptuous and surreal and malign. With Hitchcock, no matter how garish he gets, even in "Psycho," we are still in the hands of someone who regards the murder genre as a bad-mannered branch of British etiquette. The horror thriller for him represents an aesthetic conundrum to be worked out.

De Palma's thrillers, at least as a point of origin, are more temperamentally aligned with cheapo exploitation pictures and pulp fiction. His effrontery is that he can, sometimes, as in "Carrie" or "The Fury," make art from dross.

What happens to De Palma in these films is similar to what happens to Hitchcock in a film such as "Vertigo." The scaffolding of plot and logic fall away and the movie seems to slide into a fugue state. It becomes almost suffocatingly personal. The real point of comparison between Hitchcock and De Palma may be this: The extreme rigor of their technique masks a deep derangement.

De Palma's movies are best when they spook him too — when they inhabit his private places. He can turn out a highly slick entertainment like "Scarface," "The Untouchables" or "Carlito's Way" and you can sit back and enjoy it without once believing that it means much of anything to the director. (It must tickle the creator of "Be Black Baby" to know that "Scarface" has become a gangsta touchstone.)

"Blow Out," often regarded as his masterpiece, is marred by an overreliance on penny dreadful plot twists once John Lithgow's bull goose loony appears on the scene. But it's still amazing. Of all De Palma's movies, it's the one that cuts closest to the bone. Travolta's performance may be a big reason why. Playing the sound effects technician who accidentally witnesses a political assassination and can't save the girl he loves from its annihilating consequences, he is atrociously responsive to De Palma's torment. De Palma's movies are often riddled with dualities and doppelgangers, but in "Blow Out" it is Travolta and De Palma who are in deep communion.

Filmed in his hometown of Philadelphia, the movie released something intensely private in him. The murders are often shot from very high up, from a vulture's perspective, as if to anatomize the obscenity. De Palma was a teenage physics whiz and several of his movies, especially "Dressed to Kill," feature geeky boy geniuses. Piecing together the truth of the assassination from bits of sound and picture, Travolta's Jack is a kind of scientist too, but the upshot of the movie is that in the end science can't help you. The irrational will always trump the rational.

HEART OF DARKNESS

Some of the most powerful, and powerfully violent, American movies ever made — such as "Bonnie and Clyde," "The Godfather" films and "The Wild Bunch" — are personally felt on a very deep level and yet also seem to have a large purchase on the zeitgeist. They express a national mood. De Palma's films are not like that. (Neither are the films of David Lynch, another fabulist of his own innerscape.) Even "Casualties of War," which is based on the true account of the rape and murder of a Vietnamese girl by an American patrol, is less a movie about that war than it is a grand-scale reenactment of De Palma's recurring nightmare — the torture of not being able to rescue a loved one. The scene in which the girl is torn from her family for a little "portable R & R" is the most powerful sequence he has ever shot because for once there is nothing standing between us and the horror, no cackles, no sleight of hand, no baroque frissons.

I do not mean to slight those ingredients. Back in 1978, coming off "Carrie" and "The Fury," De Palma said that "I imagine that in the next 10 or 20 years I'll start moving into more intellectually complicated things." In fact, those films were plenty complicated; the insistently Catholic sense of dread in "Carrie," with its almost hallucinatory imaginings of the wages of sin, is far more complex than most of what passes in the movies for "intellectual." One reason that the arbiters of critical taste have not always given De Palma his due as an artist is because he has worked predominantly in disreputable genres.

But there is a case to made against De Palma for other reasons. His apprehension of the night doesn't allow much daylight to seep through. If Steven Spielberg, in his "E.T" and "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" days, was our chief purveyor of transcendental goodness, De Palma's MO has been almost unrelentingly Manichean, with the dark side hogging all the glory. (Be black baby, indeed.) As "The Black Dahlia" makes clear, a complacency has worked its way into De Palma's heart of darkness. The movie seems anesthetized by its own aura of menace.

Six years ago De Palma made "Mission to Mars," which alone among his films is supernally hopeful and was almost universally panned. Were the critics maybe expecting "Invaders From Mars"? Making his way in Hollywood through four decades, De Palma has had to try for the big score just like everybody else. "Mission: Impossible" was his penance for the debacle of "Bonfire of the Vanities," and "The Black Dahlia" looks like an attempt to revive the De Palma brand. Compared to the overheated gore-o-ramas of David Fincher and Quentin Tarantino, his two most conspicuous acolytes, De Palma seems almost like a classic now. He's imprisoned by his own legend, but I'm betting he has the Houdini moves to escape and astonish us — astonish himself — once again. For a director who prizes resurrections, that would be the neatest trick of all.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: MacGuffin on January 05, 2007, 05:04:35 PM
De Palma’s ‘Redacted’ version of War
Source: Production Weekly

Brian De Palma’s next film is aimed to tackle the same subject matter as his 1989 drama “Casualties of War,” set during the Vietnam war, where a girl is taken from her village by five American soldiers. Four of the soldiers rape her, but the fifth refuses. The young girl is killed. The fifth soldier is determined that justice will be done. The film is more about the realities of war, rather than this single event.

De Palma is schedule to begin production early April on “Redacted,” a film based on the recent events surrounding the rape and murder of a 14-year old Iraqi girl, and the killing of three of her family members by four US soldiers. The soldiers were sleep-deprived and living on energy drinks and sleeping pills in a situation where anyone outside the fence was considered the enemy. The killings have been the most provocative in a series of war crimes that have tarnished the reputation of US armed forces in Iraq.

The films narrative will be told using a mixture of video from news broadcasts, documentary footage, trial coverage, YouTube posts and excerpts from one of the soldier’s video blogs.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: MacGuffin on May 21, 2008, 12:20:20 AM
Cannes 2008: De Palma Prints the Legend
Director plans second Iraq film.

Following on from last year's Iraq flick Redacted, Brian De Palma has announced a second film set in the region and dealing with the fall-out from the war.

According to Screen Daily, Print the Legend will explore the process of selling the war to America, and revolve around a Jennifer Lynch-like character whose heroic exploits on the battlefield are later exposed to have been concocted by the US military.

Canadian outfit The Film Farm announced the project in Cannes, where they also unveiled plans to produce a second De Palma film, this time an untitled political thriller with a budget of around $15m.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: MacGuffin on June 04, 2008, 01:05:17 AM
Brian De Palma to helm 'Stranglers'
Adapted from Susan Kelly's nonfiction book
Source: Hollywood Reporter
 
Brian De Palma has long had a thing for the notorious.

The "Scarface" director has signed on to helm "The Boston Stranglers" for producer Gale Anne Hurd's Valhalla Motion Pictures.

The film is adapted by Alan Rosen ("Head of the Class") from Susan Kelly's nonfiction book "The Boston Stranglers: The Public Conviction of Albert DeSalvo and the True Story of Eleven Shocking Murders."

The thriller will detail the early-'60s Beantown killings and their controversial resolution.

Hurd will produce, and Kevin Kelly Brown will exec produce.

De Palma similarly plumbed real-life-derived atrocities in "Casualties of War," "Redacted" and "The Black Dahlia."

The Strangler case continues to stir debate. Many question whether Albert DeSalvo -- a publicity hound who confessed to the murders and was later stabbed to death while incarcerated on unrelated charges -- was the actual killer.

The murders were the basis of a 1968 movie that starred Tony Curtis as DeSalvo and Henry Fonda as the detective pursuing him. That version was based on an earlier book by Gerold Frank. Several TV and DVD movies have been derived from the events.

Valhalla and Hurd produced "The Incredible Hulk" for Marvel and Universal, which will release the film June 13.

De Palma has been the writer and/or director of "The Untouchables," "Carlito's Way" and "Dressed to Kill," but his recent films have underperformed. His last hit was "Mission: Impossible" in 1996.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: hedwig on June 04, 2008, 01:46:07 AM
i'll see it.

i rewatched Carrie the other night for the first time in about 10 years and fell in love all over again. with de palma and with carrie herself.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Reelist on January 25, 2011, 02:41:16 AM
anyone ever see Blue Manhattan? It wasn't very good, so you don't have to. The best part was the "Be Black Baby" sequence. The rest of it was kinda, meh. Like "Travis Bickle: Before he went to 'Nam" at the very end he even comes home and starts ranting about how gore and mutilated bodies there changed his view on things. That was the only other thing I found mildly amusing about this.

I'm checking out Depalma's old stuff, just to see if there's anything else I like as much as Body Double.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: MacGuffin on August 18, 2011, 06:02:58 PM
Brian De Palma To Helm QED's 'The Key Man'
BY MIKE FLEMING | Deadline

EXCLUSIVE: QED International and Safehouse Pictures have set Brian De Palma to direct the Joby Harold-scripted thriller The Key Man. That film was recently set for U.S. distribution with Tom Ortenberg's Open Road Films and will begin production by year's end. QED is financing the movie, about a single father who's targeted by U.S. government agents because his body contains answers to important national secrets. The style is a throwback to paranoid 70s movies like Three Days of the Condor and Marathon Man.

The Key Man will be produced by Bill Block, Paul Hanson, Tory Tunnell and Harold. Harold's recent script work includes Awake, Army of the Dead and All You Need Is Kill. De Palma, who was part of that paranoid 70s thriller movement, last directed the 2007 Iraq drama Redacted and before that The Black Dahlia. He's also responsible for Scarface, The Untouchables, Carrie and Mission: Impossible. De Palma's repped by ICM.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: MacGuffin on February 08, 2012, 03:35:59 PM
Jason Statham To Star In Brian De Palma-Directed Re-Heated Burt Reynolds Film ‘Heat:’ Berlin
Source: Deadline

Jason Statham will star in Heat, a remake of the 1987 Burt Reynolds film that Brian De Palma will direct from a script by the great scribe William Goldman. Goldman who wrote the original script from his novel. Statham plays the recovering gambling addict who makes his living providing protection on the rough edges of the gambling world. When a female friend is beaten by a high-rolling mobster, the enforcer kicks some ass and gets in over his head. Sierra/Affinity will sell in Berlin. When I first got this release, I thought they were remaking the Michael Mann classic Heat, which would have been a travesty. This sounds okay. Statham stars in the Taylor Hackford-directed Parker, also financed by Sierra/Affinity. Steve Chasman and Statham are producing the re-heated Heat, which shoots in France by year’s end.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: wiped_out on April 22, 2012, 04:34:56 PM
I am so fucking jazzed for the new De Palma movie and the fact that he has the Heat remake with Jason Stratham lined up is a bonus. I have been waiting for a De Palma movie for the LONGEST, he is one of the best living directors and its shame he has made a film since Redacted,which I enjoyed.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on April 23, 2012, 05:31:06 AM
Not so happy with the fact that his next two movies will be remakes, but I completely agree with him being one of the best living filmmakers and that Redacted was way underrated. Hope he still has a couple of great movies up his sleeve. Over the last few years, I kept hearing about a project of his titled Toyer with Colin Firth, which kept me very curious but, like Scorsese with Silence, it's starting to look like it will never happen.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: socketlevel on April 23, 2012, 02:20:53 PM
redacted was made 6 years too late, in the same way when romero did diary of the dead, or craven with scream 4. it's old guys having the idea "oh the internet, found footage, and home video. let's construct a narrative about that." long after it's cool to do it.

i'm not saying that it isn't a good device to use, but people have to stop tipping their hats to it, like winking at the audience saying 'hey this could be you.' rely on seeing a stupid scene that tries to recreate a pseudo-real moment of someone recording themself, and all it really is, is exposition for why the camera is on at that given moment. that's a director being unsure of the material, and covering it up with a quirky gimmick.

last good found footage movie was chronicle, one of the main reasons being that the film spent far less time doing this kinda stupid shit (though there are a couple moments) and the kids want to record what is happening to them. it's far more believable that whatever is going on in the plot causes a reason to be captured, then a series of "oh shit, thank god we got that on tape" moments.

besides that criticism, redacted is horribly acted.

so good enough script, but bullshit direction and acting.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on April 23, 2012, 05:07:58 PM
Redacted is, in many ways, a study by one of the world's greatest filmmakers on his own themes and obsessions. I don't think it is, at all, a cool found footage movie attempt, but instead a way to reflect on the images that are constantly present in our lives. It's about the manipulation of images, it's about how they are used in the context of war, as a weapon, as propaganda. It is, finally, a ferocious attack on the media coverage of that particular war, and on that respect, no "found footage" movie ever had a scene as strong as Redacted's final scene, where a completely wrecked soldier who saw a major attrocity being commited on war, ends up posing for a photo in the end, and that's the moment that prevails: the soldier's smile, as could be sold by news stations to sell the war in Iraq. So, to call it bullshit direction when De Palma clearly knows exactly what he's doing and who he's doing it to is... well, bullshit. It's a great movie about the flux of information, and even about what information means today. It's as De Palma as De Palma gets.

As for the acting, nothing bothered me as far as I remember.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: MacGuffin on January 16, 2013, 04:52:49 PM
Scarface’s Al Pacino, Brian De Palma Tackle Penn State Coach Joe Paterno In Feature
BY Deadline

EXCLUSIVE: The Scarface team of director Brian De Palma and Al Pacino are re-teaming for Happy Valley, the working title of a film that will tell the story of Penn State head football coach Joe Paterno. Paterno’s legend was undone by revelations he and others in the football program were aware that former defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky was molesting children, and did little  to stop it, supposedly fearing bad publicity for the powerhouse gridiron program they presided over. Wall Street producer Edward R. Pressman has optioned the bestselling book Paterno by Joe Posnanski. Dave McKenna (American History X and Blow) is making a deal to write the script. The Edward R. Pressman Film Corporation is backing the project.

Pacino became attached to play Paterno when a package including the book was shopped by ICM last fall. Pressman will produce with Pacino’s manager, Rick Nicita, who was part of that original package. They are keeping a somewhat low profile on the focus of the film for now. “Happy Valley reunites the Scarface and Carlito’s Way team of De Palma & Pacino for the third time and I can’t think of a better duo to tell this story of a complex, intensely righteous man who was brought down by his own tragic flaw,” said Pressman in confirming the deal to Deadline.

Paterno’s fall from grace was Shakespearean and when he died shortly after his firing, many felt it was from a broken heart as much as cancer. He was in the twilight of a coaching career that left him the winningest coach in college football history, an iconic and beloved campus figure. Until his former defensive coordinator Sandusky was revealed to be a prolific pedophile, something that Paterno had been told about. While he informed an administrator, they did not call police, even after a graduate assistant and future assistant coach witnessed Sandusky sodomizing a child in the locker room showers.

An investigation led the university to abruptly fire Paterno, and his cherished football program was crushed. Penn State is reeling after unprecedented sanctions dropped by the NCAA. The university tore down a fabled statue of Paterno, and the NCAA stripped the coach’s wins going back to the coverup. Posthumously, he is no longer the winniningest college coach in history. More importantly, Sandusky was found guilty on 45 counts of sexual abuse against young boys and is expected to spend the rest of his life in prison.

There are so many themes to deal with here, from Paterno’s rise and his loyalty to a football program he spent his life building, to the obvious question of how a molder of young men could possibly have stood silently by when told that one of his former coaches started a charity for underprivileged kids and used it as a way to ingratiate himself into vulnerable young fatherless boys for sexual encounters? The failure of Paterno and university officials to act allowed Sandusky to continue molesting boys for years, which was borne out in court testimony leading to his conviction and incarceration. Posnanski was working on a book about Paterno and was well into it when the scandal broke. The book is as much about what made Paterno tick as anything else, and capturing complex characters is something Pacino does well. He played a conflicted pro football coach in Any Given Sunday, and Jack Kevorkian in the HBO film You Don’t Know Jack.

De Palma most recently directed Passion, the Rachel McAdams/Noomi Rapace-starrer that premiered at the Venice Film Festival. Pressman’s COO Jon Katz will be exec producer and Posnanski co-producer. De Palma is repped by ICM, Pacino by CAA and Nicita, McKenna by Paradigm and Mosaic.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: Reelist on January 16, 2013, 05:00:13 PM
Finally a role where Pacino keeps his big mouth shut.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: wilder on September 20, 2014, 12:53:27 PM
HBO Suspends Pre-Production On Joe Paterno Movie With Brian De Palma & Al Pacino
via Deadline

It’s been 20 months since Deadline broke the story of the Scarface duo of director Brian De Palma and Al Pacino’s re-teaming for Happy Valley. The film chronicles the fall of Penn State head football coach Joe Paterno, whose legend was undone by revelations he and others in the football program were aware that former defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky was molesting children, and did little to stop it.

We can exclusively report that the project, based on the bestselling book Paterno by Joe Posnanski, had been quietly picked up by HBO, where Pacino has done two movies, portraying controversial figures: You Don’t Know Jack, about Jack Kevorkian, and Phil Spector. Happy Valley has been undergoing casting, with John Carroll Lynch recently tapped to play Sandusky. Other cast deals had been in different stages too, but we’ve heard that casting sessions on the project had been cancelled and other prep work put on hold, triggering speculation whether the hot-button movie, reopening one of the darkest pages in college football history, may have been scrapped.

That is not the case, a rep for HBO said. “We have not killed the project, so to say so inaccurate,” the network said in a statement to Deadline. “We have suspended pre-production for a moment to deal with budget issues, but the project is still intact at HBO with the entire creative team as before.”

According to sources, the suspension would also be used for additional script work. Wall Street producer Edward R. Pressman, who had optioned the book, is producing Happy Valley with Pacino’s manager Rick Nicita. Jon Katz is executive producing.

Paterno’s fall from grace was Shakespearean and when he died shortly after his firing — many felt it was from a broken heart as much as cancer. He was in the twilight of a career that left him the winningest coach in college football history, an iconic and beloved campus figure. Until his former defensive coordinator Sandusky was revealed to be a prolific pedophile, something that Paterno had been told about. While he informed an administrator, they did not call police, even after a graduate assistant and future assistant coach witnessed Sandusky in an encounter that looked like an act of sodomy with a child in the locker room showers.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: wilder on November 05, 2014, 08:02:14 PM
Brian De Palma & Al Pacino To Reteam On Retribution
via The Playist

"Scarface"/"Carlito's Way" duo Brian De Palma and Al Pacino have evidently been trying to find a way to work together again. Over at HBO, the pair was working on "Happy Valley," a project about the 2011 Penn State scandal until the network halted production in September, and there has been zero word since. But the pair have lined up another gig.

Screen Daily reports that De Palma and Pacino are teaming for "Retribution." Loosely based on the 2003 Belgian thriller "The Memory Of A Killer" (trailer below), the story follows a cop and a hitman who work together to stop a child prostitution ring.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhqWvEhYjkA
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: OpO1832 on August 27, 2015, 11:59:09 AM
any news ?
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: wilder on November 09, 2015, 05:57:07 PM
AFM: Brian De Palma Switched On To China’s ‘Lights Out’
via Variety

Brian De Palma is to direct action thriller “Lights Out,” which is backed by China’s Huace Pictures and Arclight Films.

The film is the story of a blind Chinese girl unknowingly caught in a plot to expose a top-secret assassination program. Although blind, she is able to use her other heightened senses to fight back and become a hero.

Casting is currently underway for top roles, including an A-list Chinese actress to star as the female action hero lead.

The film is the first to be made by Aurora Alliance Films the joint venture banner between Huace, one of China’s leading TV producers, and Sydney- and Los Angeles-based Arclight. The joint venture company was announced in September with a $300 million slate of high concept action pictures.

De Palma, an iconic member of the ‘New Hollywood’ wave, is one of Hollywood’s top brand name directors. He was recently honoured with the Jaeger-LeCoultre Glory to the Filmmaker award at the 2015 Venice Film Festival. Directing credits include “Scarface,” “The Untouchables,” “Carlito’s Way,” “Mission: Impossible” and “Carrie.”

“De Palma is a proven master of suspense; in the hands of the legendary director, ‘Lights Out’  promises to be a thriller for the ages, full of empowering messages, harrowing plot turns and great action sequences,” said Ying Ye, MD of Aurora Alliance.

“Lights Out,” now in pre-production, will be produced by Huace Media Group; Ye of Aurora Alliance; Gary Hamilton, Mike Gabrawy, Elliot Tong of Arclight; with Toronto-based Jennifer Weiss and Simone Urdl of The Film Farm. Arclight Films is handling international sales.

Brian De Palma is represented by John Burnham of ICM and attorney Donald Steele.

The screenplay is by Lamont Magee and Jeff W. Byrd, who are represented by Ryan Saul at APA. French-born director Xavier Gens was previously attached to direct.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: wilder on April 13, 2016, 05:45:38 PM
Brian De Palma To Direct Thriller 'The Truth And Other Lies'
via The Playlist

Deadline reports that De Palma will helm an adaptation of Sascha Arango's novel "The Truth And Other Lies." The black comedy, which will have a script from the author, follows a man, whose wife secretly authors his best-selling novels, who can't let go of his mistress. Here's the book synopsis:

Henry Hayden seems like someone you might admire, or even come to think of as a friend. A famous bestselling author. A loving and devoted husband. A generous and considerate neighbor. But Henry Hayden is a construction, a mask. His past is a secret, his methods more so. Only he and his wife know that she is the actual writer of the novels that made him famous.

When his hidden-in-plain-sight mistress becomes pregnant, it seems his carefully conceived façade is about to crumble. And on a rain-soaked night at the edge of a dangerous cliff, his permanent solution becomes his most terrible mistake.

Now not only are the police after Henry but his past — which he has painstakingly kept hidden — threatens to catch up with him as well. Henry is an ingenious man, and he works out an ingenious plan, weaving lies, truths, and half-truths into a story that might help him survive. Still, the noose tightens.
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: wilder on June 07, 2016, 04:50:00 PM
Brian De Palma's guilty pleasures (http://www.filmcomment.com/article/guilty-pleasures-brian-de-palma/)
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: wilder on August 08, 2016, 04:30:24 AM
Changing Cain: How A Fan-Edit Became A Brian De Palma Director's Cut (http://www.directorama.net/2016/07/changing-cain-fan-edit-brian-de-palma-directors-cut/)
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: wilder on May 03, 2017, 04:27:40 PM
Brian De Palma Returns To Directing With Thriller Starring Nicolaj Coster-Waldau From ‘Game Of Thrones’
via The Playlist

Not all that long ago, Brian De Palma was a bankable A-list helmer, with hits like “Scarface,” “The Untouchables” and “Mission: Impossible” under his belt. But the last ten years have been a bit rough for the filmmaker: he’s only made two movies, the semi-experimental “Redacted,” which won the Golden Lion at Venice but proved divisive in the extreme with critics, and little-seen Rachel McAdams thriller “Passion.”

The latter was five years ago, but De Palma’s been talked about in his absence from filmmaking, thanks to the patronage of younger filmmakers who grew up on his work, like Edgar Wright, who frequently sings his praises, and Noah Baumbach, who made last year’s excellent documentary “De Palma” about the helmer and his work. And the latter might just have inspired a new surge of interest in the filmmaker, because it looks like the 76-year-old helmer is getting back behind the camera.

The Hollywood Reporter reveals that De Palma will direct the thriller “Domino”, with Nicolaj Coster-Waldau (best known as Jamie Lannister from “Game Of Thrones”) and “Mad Men” star Christina Hendricks in talks to star.

Penned by “Kon-Tiki” screenwriter Petter Skavlan, the film will see Coster-Waldau play a Danish police officer seeking vengeance for his partner’s murder, teaming up with his late partner’s mistress (Hendricks) to take the man down, only to be caught up with the CIA along the way. The project will be seeking sales at Cannes
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: WorldForgot on August 06, 2017, 02:42:02 AM
Just joined CineFile.
Ready to go through their entire catalog. Started off with HEAD by Bob and Jack, and Phantom of the Paradise.

I geeked out mucho over both, but the Arrow Blu Ray of Phantom is so, so sweet.
(https://68.media.tumblr.com/6ba41b67ba590aaec17028c23a67f71f/tumblr_ou96nqYFYX1qimgjko1_1280.jpg)
(https://68.media.tumblr.com/436e6122109b6e6dcd252e3d4f3e89a5/tumblr_ou96f7KW3g1qimgjko4_1280.jpg)
(https://68.media.tumblr.com/90e3bbd0bff9ede3b7ccdcae9f73e846/tumblr_ou96f7KW3g1qimgjko1_1280.jpg)
(https://68.media.tumblr.com/103b0664ba334e016274ae566c7bac16/tumblr_ou96f7KW3g1qimgjko5_1280.jpg)
(https://68.media.tumblr.com/aec0eb1db3aca82397208907b531c393/tumblr_ou96f7KW3g1qimgjko6_1280.jpg)
Title: Re: BRIAN DE PALMA
Post by: jenkins on August 06, 2017, 11:57:32 AM
they have Frederick Wiseman movies and where the hell else are you going to find those