David Mamet's Spartan

Started by MacGuffin, January 08, 2004, 10:56:38 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 4
User actions

SoNowThen

#15
January 08, 2004, 01:22:24 PM
Just because his words alone aren't poetic, doesn't make his dialogue any less beautiful. I think it's harder to write so-called "regular joe" dialogue and make it great. Glengarry Glen Ross is the peak of dialogue. And every actor in that film does it complete justice. To me, it's golden and beautiful.

Also, I find that Mamet is the exact opposite of Bresson. Mamet could never work with non-actors. He's all about the theatrical performance.
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.

godardian

#16
January 08, 2004, 01:29:32 PM
Quote from: SoNowThenJust because his words alone aren't poetic, doesn't make his dialogue any less beautiful. I think it's harder to write so-called "regular joe" dialogue and make it great. Glengarry Glen Ross is the peak of dialogue. And every actor in that film does it complete justice. To me, it's golden and beautiful.

Also, I find that Mamet is the exact opposite of Bresson. Mamet could never work with non-actors. He's all about the theatrical performance.

Yes, but he's clearly trying to get the same thing out of actors - not a "performance" at all, but more of a reading, forcing the artificial tendencies in an actor out (the only way to get verisimilitude, "realistic" behavior out of an actor is to allow them to "peform") which contradictorily produces that very heightened artificiality in the characterizations we see on-screen (not exactly a Bressonian result, but a Bressonian method). It must have been easier for Bresson than for Mamet, as it's more difficult to get actors to not "act" than non-actors.

Mamet didn't direct Glengarry- the more severe Mametian tendencies have been removed, particularly in the performances. You have to look at his own work to see how he really means it to be. I bet Glengarry wouldn't be as highly regarded had it been directed by Mamet, but it would be more as he meant the piece to be.
""Money doesn't come into it. It never has. I do what I do because it's all that I am." - Morrissey

"Lacan stressed more and more in his work the power and organizing principle of the symbolic, understood as the networks, social, cultural, and linguistic, into which a child is born. These precede the birth of a child, which is why Lacan can say that language is there from before the actual moment of birth. It is there in the social structures which are at play in the family and, of course, in the ideals, goals, and histories of the parents. This world of language can hardly be grasped by the newborn and yet it will act on the whole of the child's existence."

Stay informed on protecting your freedom of speech and civil rights.

SoNowThen

#17
January 08, 2004, 02:00:09 PM
Meaning it would have been boring.

James Foley is (to me anyway) like Curtis Hanson. A hack who managed to dig deep and create one masterpiece. He took Glengarry to Valhalla.
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.

godardian

#18
January 08, 2004, 02:29:53 PM
Quote from: SoNowThenMeaning it would have been boring.

James Foley is (to me anyway) like Curtis Hanson. A hack who managed to dig deep and create one masterpiece. He took Glengarry to Valhalla.

Well, that's a valid criticism of Mamet's style. Whatever it is, it's singular. And you even managed to avoid pointing out Mamet's ugliness!  :)
""Money doesn't come into it. It never has. I do what I do because it's all that I am." - Morrissey

"Lacan stressed more and more in his work the power and organizing principle of the symbolic, understood as the networks, social, cultural, and linguistic, into which a child is born. These precede the birth of a child, which is why Lacan can say that language is there from before the actual moment of birth. It is there in the social structures which are at play in the family and, of course, in the ideals, goals, and histories of the parents. This world of language can hardly be grasped by the newborn and yet it will act on the whole of the child's existence."

Stay informed on protecting your freedom of speech and civil rights.

Gamblour.

#19
January 08, 2004, 02:35:10 PM
I fell in love with Pidgeon in State and Main, I fucking love that movie. SoNowThen, you so crazy. She was adorable in State and Main, and so was PSH.
WWPTAD?

SoNowThen

#20
January 08, 2004, 02:40:03 PM
Quote from: Gambloren das ManhörenSoNowThen, you so crazy.

:)



I think what we really need is Alec Baldwin performing a one-man show of a Mamet play. Now there's your classic Mamet actor!
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.

Alethia

#21
January 08, 2004, 02:46:14 PM
anyone else think its kinda funny that mamet wrote glengarry glenn ross, hoffa, house of games and.......the edge...?

SoNowThen

#22
January 08, 2004, 02:50:20 PM
I caught the first 15 minutes of The Edge, and was surprised how much I enjoyed it...


Oh, also, Mamet did a rewrite on Ronin, which is why it's so fucking great!!
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.

MacGuffin

#23
January 08, 2004, 03:19:12 PM
Quote from: SoNowThenI caught the first 15 minutes of The Edge, and was surprised how much I enjoyed it..

Watch the rest of it. It gets better.

He also wrote "The Untouchables".
"Don't think about making art, just get it done. Let everyone else decide if it's good or bad, whether they love it or hate it. While they are deciding, make even more art." - Andy Warhol


Skeleton FilmWorks

SoNowThen

#24
January 08, 2004, 03:25:23 PM
Yeah, I'm really excited to revisit this when it gets rereleased on dvd this year. Untouchables was my favorite movie for a good 5 years when I was younger. There's another great match: brilliant Mamet writing (minus shit directing) + amazing DePalma directing (minus any amount of his usual script thinness).


Okay, Mac, if you can vouch for it, I'll borrow Edge from my friend and finally finish it all....
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.

godardian

#25
January 08, 2004, 03:48:02 PM
I find that The Untouchables sits low in the de Palma filmography for me... I think any "period" thing would. His style doesn't work for me with that.

Looking over the cast of Spartan again, it'll be really interesting to see how Val Kilmer comes off. I don't like him, usually. There's no guarantee he'll be any more bearable in a Mamet film. I still like House of Games best, though I haven't yet seen Oleanna (I see the DVD every time I'm in Tower and think about it), and I still haven't seen Hoffa, which of course has the famous PTA film-school-prank story behind it, but I'm not huge on Danny DeVito as a director, so it's not a high priority.
""Money doesn't come into it. It never has. I do what I do because it's all that I am." - Morrissey

"Lacan stressed more and more in his work the power and organizing principle of the symbolic, understood as the networks, social, cultural, and linguistic, into which a child is born. These precede the birth of a child, which is why Lacan can say that language is there from before the actual moment of birth. It is there in the social structures which are at play in the family and, of course, in the ideals, goals, and histories of the parents. This world of language can hardly be grasped by the newborn and yet it will act on the whole of the child's existence."

Stay informed on protecting your freedom of speech and civil rights.

MacGuffin

#26
January 08, 2004, 03:55:11 PM
Quote from: godardianI still haven't seen Hoffa, which of course has the famous PTA film-school-prank story behind it, but I'm not huge on Danny DeVito as a director, so it's not a high priority.

Actually, this was just announced:



The Hoffa DVD from Fox is a special edition streeting on 1/27 (SRP $19.98 ). Extras will include commentary by director Danny DeVito, deleted Scenes (with intro by Devito), several featurettes (including Historical News Coverage of Hoffa, Personal Anecdotes from Members of the Teamster's Union, Special Shots, DeVito's 11 1/4 and Discussion After First Script Read-Thru), hundreds of storyboard images, the original script, location and production stills, costume drawings, film reviews, Siskel & Ebert's review, poster artwork, a Hoffa reading list, and the theatrical trailer.
"Don't think about making art, just get it done. Let everyone else decide if it's good or bad, whether they love it or hate it. While they are deciding, make even more art." - Andy Warhol


Skeleton FilmWorks

SoNowThen

#27
January 08, 2004, 03:58:12 PM
Any other opinions on that movie? I'd like to check it out...
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.

godardian

#28
January 08, 2004, 04:00:44 PM
Definitely a rental... I remember it being kind of medium-received. It's nice, though, to have no real way of knowing how good a movie is before seeing it, with the opinions being so mixed on it.
""Money doesn't come into it. It never has. I do what I do because it's all that I am." - Morrissey

"Lacan stressed more and more in his work the power and organizing principle of the symbolic, understood as the networks, social, cultural, and linguistic, into which a child is born. These precede the birth of a child, which is why Lacan can say that language is there from before the actual moment of birth. It is there in the social structures which are at play in the family and, of course, in the ideals, goals, and histories of the parents. This world of language can hardly be grasped by the newborn and yet it will act on the whole of the child's existence."

Stay informed on protecting your freedom of speech and civil rights.

nix

#29
January 09, 2004, 12:21:18 AM
"you had to put on your thinking cap!"

I dunno. Sometimes Mamet's dialogue is brilliant, and sometimes... it's just stupid.

Heist has some real zingers.

There's only one actor in State and Main that rubs me the wrong way:

Clark Greg. What a cocksmoker.
"Sex relieves stress, love causes it."
-Woddy Allen
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 4
User actions