Author Topic: voting for the Xixax Dekapenticon  (Read 19027 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

SoNowThen

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 4536
  • Respect: +9
    • 24/30 Cinema
voting for the Xixax Dekapenticon
« Reply #30 on: November 05, 2003, 02:52:57 PM »
0
well, I disagree about LOTR. as with Kill Bill, I consider it one movie.


anyway, the three admins involved (and GT too, since it was his thing) should make some rules regarding these mentionables...
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10863
  • Respect: +1270
voting for the Xixax Dekapenticon
« Reply #31 on: November 05, 2003, 03:01:00 PM »
0
Quote from: xerxes
will godfather 1 & 2 be counted together like they did in sight & sound???


I'm tempted, but no. In many ways they're very different movies. They were released at different times.

I think the LOTR movies should absolutely be separate, especially because none of us has seen the third.

Redux is the same movie. Director's cuts are the same movie.

Kill Bill is one movie, though. Some books have two volumes, but it's still one book.
"Hunger is the purest sin"

ono

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 4209
  • ...
  • Respect: +180
voting for the Xixax Dekapenticon
« Reply #32 on: November 05, 2003, 03:05:45 PM »
0
Admittedly, you bring up a good point.  Kill Bill is supposed to be one movie.  Sadly, it isn't.  I'm coping.  Really.

Godfather is three separate movies, because the original was envisioned as just that: one movie.  But your good point is that LOTR is based on one source material (correct?).  I mean, I don't give a fuck; I'm rather indifferent to that whole series.  But that would make it a nine-plus hour movie.  And while I don't want to give credence to that, there have been longer films considered one whole such as The Sorrow and the Pity, Shoah, Berlin Alexanderplatz (although a miniseries), and the Dekalogue (also more a miniseries) and that whole hundred-hour-long film I forget the name of.  But I digress.

SoNowThen

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 4536
  • Respect: +9
    • 24/30 Cinema
voting for the Xixax Dekapenticon
« Reply #33 on: November 05, 2003, 03:20:00 PM »
0
I will happily go along with what JB posted.

BUT, my reasons for treating LOTR as one is that it was conceived as one story, and published in 3 volumes. Now, Dickens published Great Expectations in many parts, but we still consider it one book. So, 'tis all I was trying to say...

but like I said, if the people want to treat it as three, I will acquiesce.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Gold Trumpet

  • The Master of Three Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5767
  • Respect: +151
voting for the Xixax Dekapenticon
« Reply #34 on: November 05, 2003, 08:12:50 PM »
0
If Kill Bill (Vol 1 and 2) is considered one movie, then is it automatically exlcuded from voting this time around? See, I have it as two different movies and also think in lines with voting expectations this year, a lot of people will prolly be voting for Kill Bill. This may be a problem.

Reasons why I see it as two movies (taken from "Kill Bill: Volume 1" thread):

I do see Kill Bill (Vol. 1 and 2) as two separate movies. And I think the general public will too when they have gone dvd and everything is said and done. Why? Distance of release is close enough to follow the Matrix movies in that it is a quick sequel right after the film. Also, the dvd plan is to release both movies generally separately first. The general public will buy these versions. The box set of both volumes will likely be for fans like us more so.

This is also why I have been so critical of Volume 1 is because it does stand on its own. It is complete enough to be worthy of any other movie and so good it even surpasses most movies. It is also complete enough to have the general 3 acts and use them efficently. The ending to Volume 1 doesn't really suggest one movie cut in half, but two movies linked by a similiar storyline and a revelation. A revelation worthy of a serial in making you watch the following one. From everything QT has said, the movies will also be different in form, with Volume 1 utilizing all the action and Volume 2 more classic to Tarantino's earlier films. So I really don't see one film broken in half and really incomplete without its other half. A better example of that would Full Metal Jacket. The first part is only forty five minutes and so focused on one situation that with it ending, you feel you must be payed off with the actual war. The boot camp part is entertaining, but not fulfilling. The first part of Kill Bill is surely both. With that, I see Volume 2 more as a sequel. Or Just "Volume 2". Each film its own volume.

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10863
  • Respect: +1270
voting for the Xixax Dekapenticon
« Reply #35 on: November 05, 2003, 09:01:34 PM »
0
It doesn't matter right now if we split up Kill Bill. No one has seen Volume II.

Vote for "Kill Bill" or vote for "Kill Bill Volume I"... it will be counted.
"Hunger is the purest sin"

Gold Trumpet

  • The Master of Three Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5767
  • Respect: +151
voting for the Xixax Dekapenticon
« Reply #36 on: November 05, 2003, 09:09:19 PM »
0
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman
Kill Bill is one movie, though.


You're accepting both volumes of Kill Bill as one movie, but also are accepting Volume 1 as one movie too when saying Kill Bill would count this year, how so?

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10863
  • Respect: +1270
voting for the Xixax Dekapenticon
« Reply #37 on: November 05, 2003, 09:21:57 PM »
0
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
You're accepting both volumes of Kill Bill as one movie, but also are accepting Volume 1 as one movie too when saying Kill Bill would count this year, how so?


They will be one movie. Right now Volume 1 has to represent the whole thing. It may be awkward, but it's our only choice.
"Hunger is the purest sin"

Gold Trumpet

  • The Master of Three Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5767
  • Respect: +151
voting for the Xixax Dekapenticon
« Reply #38 on: November 05, 2003, 09:26:09 PM »
0
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman
I think the LOTR movies should absolutely be separate, especially because none of us has seen the third.


Quote from: Jeremy Blackman
They will be one movie. Right now Volume 1 has to represent the whole thing. It may be awkward, but it's our only choice.


ok.

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10863
  • Respect: +1270
voting for the Xixax Dekapenticon
« Reply #39 on: November 05, 2003, 09:33:06 PM »
0
That's different, because as it stands... there's only one Kill Bill, but there are two LOTRs.
"Hunger is the purest sin"

Gold Trumpet

  • The Master of Three Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 5767
  • Respect: +151
voting for the Xixax Dekapenticon
« Reply #40 on: November 05, 2003, 09:38:33 PM »
0
Alright. I'll accept. I still think it may need to be disqualified this year, though.

Jeremy Blackman

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10863
  • Respect: +1270
voting for the Xixax Dekapenticon
« Reply #41 on: November 05, 2003, 09:44:26 PM »
0
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
I still think it may need to be disqualified this year, though.


Well, it's not. So there.

We can revisit this at the next Dekapenticon.
"Hunger is the purest sin"

cine

  • Pretttttyyy, Pretttyyyyy Pretty Good
  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 5553
  • Respect: +281
voting for the Xixax Dekapenticon
« Reply #42 on: November 06, 2003, 12:08:25 AM »
0
I just want to throw in my two cents here even if its passed now and completely unneeded.
If the films were given separate theatrical release dates, they should count as separate films. Godfather films - clearly they're different films with separate release dates. Nobody should think that 1 & 2 can just go together because they look like they belong together. It's irrelevent here. Shoah was released as one movie, the Decalogue was released as one movie, etc. If these were split up, they should still be counted as separate films, but in those films' cases, they were not.

Find Your Magali

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1042
  • Respect: +14
voting for the Xixax Dekapenticon
« Reply #43 on: November 06, 2003, 02:22:25 PM »
0
Quote from: Cinephile
I just want to throw in my two cents here even if its passed now and completely unneeded.
If the films were given separate theatrical release dates, they should count as separate films. Godfather films - clearly they're different films with separate release dates. Nobody should think that 1 & 2 can just go together because they look like they belong together. It's irrelevent here. Shoah was released as one movie, the Decalogue was released as one movie, etc. If these were split up, they should still be counted as separate films, but in those films' cases, they were not.


Precisely. I'm with Cinephile. ... I would vote for The Fellowship of the Ring as a magnificent standalone film. ... But I wouldn't put it on the list if I have to lump it with The Two Towers and I'm certainly not putting it on the list if I have to lump it with The Two Towers and a film that hasn't been released yet.

rustinglass

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
  • Respect: +1
voting for the Xixax Dekapenticon
« Reply #44 on: November 07, 2003, 11:06:23 AM »
0
foreign film titles: original language or english?
ex: Le Fabulous (?) destin d'Amelie Poulain or Amelie?
hana-bi or fireworks?

and (has nothing to do with it):
Mulholland drive or mulholland Dr (imdb)
"In Serbia a lot of people hate me because they want to westernise, not understanding that the western world is bipolar, with very good things and very bad things. Since they don't have experience of the west, they even believe that western shit is pie."
-Emir Kusturica

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy