Author Topic: The new Orson Welles?  (Read 5748 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Spike

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 249
  • Respect: +3
The new Orson Welles?
« on: August 23, 2003, 07:15:01 AM »
0
What do you think?
Lots of people say that he's the new Orson Welles, perhaps better.

I think, definately yes.
I mean, he was 27 when he made "Boogie Nights". And look at this film! It's just such an amazing film, almost unbelievable that such a young director did this! Or "Magnolia", he was 29. Extremely complex and so fantastic.

What do you think will the people say in 30 years, when they hear the name Paul Thomas Anderson?
I think they will talk about him like cinephiles are now talking about Martin Scorsese. So?
"We're gonna celebrate St. Suck-My-Big-Fat-Fucking-Sausage'a!!!"

kotte

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2051
  • camera assistant. camera operator. carnivore.
  • Respect: +9
The new Orson Welles?
« Reply #1 on: August 23, 2003, 08:26:18 AM »
0
I think it's too early to tell what people will say in 30 years. Who knows what will happen. He has only done 4 films this far. I think we need to wait maybe 10 years before we know how he'll be remebered.

Maybe he'll be diagnozed with lungcancer...Only one out of ten survives. :cry:

But I know mentioning PTA will always put a smile on my face.

filmcritic

  • The Meeting with the Goddess
  • ***
  • Posts: 410
  • Respect: +1
The new Orson Welles?
« Reply #2 on: August 23, 2003, 08:26:59 AM »
0
Absolutely. And if he's not the new Orson Welles, he certainly the new Martin Scorsese. I think that if he keeps it up, he could eventually have as successful of a career as Scorsese. So far, he's doing great. "Boogie Nights" was his "Mean Streets" and "Magnolia" was his "Taxi Driver".
"You're too kind."
-Richard Roeper

"You're too cruel."
-Roger Ebert

kotte

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2051
  • camera assistant. camera operator. carnivore.
  • Respect: +9
The new Orson Welles?
« Reply #3 on: August 23, 2003, 08:45:01 AM »
0
Quote from: mogwai
he's the new paul thomas anderson.


Beats cancer.

Duck Sauce

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1986
  • Respect: +4
The new Orson Welles?
« Reply #4 on: August 23, 2003, 12:03:39 PM »
0
Why does everybody have to be the "next" somebody? Rediculous, except you Spike, you are the next ebeaman

ono

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 4209
  • ...
  • Respect: +180
The new Orson Welles?
« Reply #5 on: August 23, 2003, 12:27:40 PM »
0
Bleh.  I get so sick of people comparing PTA to anyone, especially Martin Scorsese.  First off, Scorsese is not that great a director (only Taxi Driver is worthy of note in my opinion; everything else he's done has been marginally accomplished at best).  Second, PTA is his own person, and his body of work can't be compared to any one director because of its diversity.  I've heard some people compare Hard Eight and Boogie Nights to Scorsese, Magnolia to Altman, and Punch-Drunk Love to Kubrick, but I really think they're stretching even though I can see why they say so.  What PTA is developing is his own original unique style, that 20 years from now, we'll be identifying as vintage Anderson, and comparing new young punk directors to him.  And there will be some people writing the same type of posts I've just written elaborating on how stupid it is to compare said "young punk" directors to Anderson.  Plus, unlike Welles Anderson doesn't act.  Double-bleh.

ębrad

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 4504
  • Respect: +216
The new Orson Welles?
« Reply #6 on: August 23, 2003, 12:30:48 PM »
0
Quote from: Onomatopoeia
Bleh.  I get so sick of people comparing PTA to anyone, especially Martin Scorsese.  First off, Scorsese is not that great a director (only Taxi Driver is worthy of note in my opinion; everything else he's done has been marginally accomplished at best). Second, PTA is his own person, and his body of work can't be compared to any one director because of its diversity.  I've heard some people compare Hard Eight and Boogie Nights to Scorsese, Magnolia to Altman, and Punch-Drunk Love to Kubrick, but I really think they're stretching even though I can see why they say so.  What PTA is developing is his own original unique style, that 20 years from now, we'll be identifying as vintage Anderson, and comparing new young punk directors to him.  And there will be some people writing the same type of posts I've just written elaborating on how stupid it is to compare said "young punk" directors to Anderson.  Plus, unlike Welles Anderson doesn't act.  Double-bleh.


i was really starting to like u onomato.

ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5894
  • :boxing:
  • Respect: +20
The new Orson Welles?
« Reply #7 on: August 23, 2003, 12:34:21 PM »
0
I agree with Onomatopoeia.  I can't compare PTA to anyone that I can think of because PTA is distinct.  I was talking to someone who said when they see a Scorsece flick, they know it's him.  Personally, other than Taxi Driver, he dosen't seem to have a notable style.  Aronofsky has a style that is notable.  But who in the hell could you compare him to?

David Lynch has a style, the list goes on.  When you can compare a director with another, that means one (or maybe both of them) aren't very creative.
"As a matter of fact I only work with the feeling of something magical, something seemingly significant. And to keep it magical I don't want to know the story involved, I just want the hypnotic effect of it somehow seeming significant without knowing why." - Len Lye

ono

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 4209
  • ...
  • Respect: +180
The new Orson Welles?
« Reply #8 on: August 23, 2003, 12:49:00 PM »
0
Quote from: ębrad
Quote from: Onomatopoeia
First off, Scorsese is not that great a director (only Taxi Driver is worthy of note in my opinion; everything else he's done has been marginally accomplished at best).

i was really starting to like u onomato.

Yeah, well, I figured that was an unpopular opinion to have around here, so let me explain it a little better:

Saw Gangs of New York in a theatre, enjoyed it, but felt it went on for too long, and should've ended with Bill killing DiCaprio's character.  Plus, the fight scene was weak, and Scorsese tried to jam too much in to the end, resulting in mass chaos and confusion.  Ultimately it makes for a passing movie that could've been much greater, especially with the time he put in to it.  One would think maybe the material got stale.

Goodfellas, I loved first time through.  Second time, I watched it with my bro, and realized how weak it was in certain parts.  I agree with Kael ultimately; it's a good film, not a great one.  It relies too much on narration, it drags at times, and at the end I think it falls apart (though I think some people like the end most).

Casino: Goodfellas in Las Vegas.  I know some people balk at this, considering it is three hours long, and it does have a bit different story, but I just wish Scorsese would do more than just these same old gangster type stories.  I know he's done comedies, but I haven't been able to see 'em.  There were many memorable scenes in Casino, it at the same time made you want to go to Vegas and stay the hell away.  It proved Sharon Stone could act, in certain parts.  And Deniro and Pesci were great.  But despite that, because they played similar characters in Goodfellas, despite the longer running time, it made this seem like "Goodfellas lite."

Haven't seen Raging Bull in full.  Flipped through channels late and came across it on ESPN classic, and was bored by it.  I know I need to see the whole thing.  But I can't fathom this being the best film of the 80s when Ran exists.

The King(s?) of Comedy.  Deniro again.  Looks promising, but Kael had some scathing things to say about it.

So obviously, I've had minimal experience with Scorsese, and yes, I liked Taxi Driver very much, but obviously I do need to see more of his stuff.  Like his comedies from the 70s and Bringing out the Dead.

Oh, and has anyone seen his film from NYU, The Big Shave?  If you've seen Ghostboy's Looking for Love, it borrows heavily from that.  Although, I don't know if Ghostboy intended it.  Basically, a man shaves and cuts himself.  A lot.  And, well, it's supposed to be some sort of war protest type film, too.  It, too, was very good.

So yeah, there you have it: how I feel on Scorsese in a nutshell.

Quote from: Walrus, KooKookajoob
Aronofsky has a style that is notable.  But who in the hell could you compare him to?

Kubrick for Requiem for a Dream (smacks of A Clockwork Orange), and Lynch for Pi (heard it smacks of Eraserhead; haven't gotten to see that yet to judge for myself).  But Aronofsky said he wanted to get away from those visual tricks after he got that out of his system, so that's definitely a good thing.

filmcritic

  • The Meeting with the Goddess
  • ***
  • Posts: 410
  • Respect: +1
The new Orson Welles?
« Reply #9 on: August 23, 2003, 12:57:50 PM »
0
Onomatopoeia, the way you feel about Scorsese is the way I feel about Robert Altman. But what about "Mean Streets", "Last Temptation" and "After Hours"???
"You're too kind."
-Richard Roeper

"You're too cruel."
-Roger Ebert

ono

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 4209
  • ...
  • Respect: +180
The new Orson Welles?
« Reply #10 on: August 23, 2003, 01:07:18 PM »
0
Quote from: filmcritic
Onomatopoeia, the way you feel about Scorsese is the way I feel about Robert Altman.

Indeed.  I think Nashville is a pile of crap (another unpopular opinion, I know), but I love The Player and really admire Short Cuts, even though Magnolia is better.  Altman has made a lot of clunkers, not the least of which is Gosford Park... bleh.  But Ultraviolet and The Company look so good that if they deliver, I'll forgive him easily.  He ebbs and flows like that.
Quote from: filmcritic
But what about "Mean Streets", "Last Temptation" and "After Hours"???

Haven't seen any of those.  :(  My resources are limited at the moment, and I'm away from my university library, and I have so many movies I want to see.  Hopefully I'll be getting Netflix soon, so that'll help, and I'll definitely be putting those other Scorsese films at the top of the list.

filmcritic

  • The Meeting with the Goddess
  • ***
  • Posts: 410
  • Respect: +1
The new Orson Welles?
« Reply #11 on: August 23, 2003, 01:12:32 PM »
0
You really should. After you see "Last Temptation" and "Mean Streets", you're opinion of Scorsese might really change quickly.

Robert Altman's "Short Cuts" is not a very good film. "Magnolia" did a much better job with balancing and executing stories going back and forth with each other than Altman. The ending also left me very unsatisfied. I guess I just don't think that Altman is a very artistic director, and only an okay storyteller.
"You're too kind."
-Richard Roeper

"You're too cruel."
-Roger Ebert

AlguienEstolamiPantalones

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1715
  • Respect: 0
The new Orson Welles?
« Reply #12 on: August 23, 2003, 02:43:02 PM »
0
<-

Ravi

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 4865
  • Respect: +88
The new Orson Welles?
« Reply #13 on: August 23, 2003, 06:17:47 PM »
0
I don't think of directors who make good films early on in their careers in terms of "the next (insert great director)."  I think of them as "directors whose careers to follow."

BTW, after seeing Boogie Nights, I thought PTA was 40 or 50 years old until I saw him on Late Night with Conan O' Brien and he was in his 20s.  I expected someone like Jack Horner, but in better clothes.

mr_boz

  • The Call to Adventure
  • *
  • Posts: 39
  • Respect: 0
    • http://www.exodus82.com
The new Orson Welles?
« Reply #14 on: August 24, 2003, 01:17:21 PM »
0
it's tough to compare modern day film-makers to the pioneers because the industry and art form in question has changed so much since the early years.  i think the comparisons between PAUL THOMAS ANDERSON and the likes of ALTMAN and SCORCESE are a little less prone to error because of this.

as much as i love PT and his work, i agree with kotte in that we need to wait quite a while before we can really evaluate his contribution to modern cinema.  if he puts out a consistent series of shitty movies from now on, i think our desire to put him up on a pedestal will diminish somewhat.  MAGNOLIA will still be an incredible film, but we won't be thinking of the director as another ORSON WELLES.

that being said, i'm hopeful that PAUL THOMAS ANDERSON will keep on keepin' on.

-ccb

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy