official MovieNavigator thread

Started by mutinyco, July 30, 2003, 10:21:09 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
User actions

Mesh

#15
July 30, 2003, 11:26:10 AM
Quote from: themodernage02....mainly everyone in this board came through their love of PTA.  it is an assumption, although i could be wrong.

I didn't find this board through any particular love for PTA.  I love one of his movies and like three of them.  That's all.

modage

#16
July 30, 2003, 11:28:43 AM
than you are probably a minority.  and i dont mean a minority on this board, like more people love him than not. i mean, you are most likely some sort of dirty mexican or filthy african or some such person. because no rich white person would think that way.

apologies in advance to any irrate dirty mexicans, filthy africans, or any other stinky minorities who fail to see the humor.
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

SoNowThen

#17
July 30, 2003, 11:37:27 AM
apologies in advance to any irrate dirty mexicans, filthy africans, or any other stinky minorities who fail to see the humor.[/quote]

Classic.


Autofocus is great. PTA is brilliant. Comparing Autofocus with Boogie Nights is useless, because they are two totally different movies.
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.

mutinyco

#18
July 30, 2003, 12:23:13 PM
That whole Modernage quote was out of context. Auto Focus never glamourized its characters' actions. I thought Boogie Nights was sentimental about that era. I also felt that Auto Focus followed through to its natural conclusion: disaster. Boogie Nights chose to have (for all intents and purposes) a happier ending where it's a happy family again. The real John Holmes was a scumbag who died of AIDS. I think the 3rd act of BN was incoherent and lacked follow-through..
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe

SoNowThen

#19
July 30, 2003, 12:25:49 PM
the end suggested that everything had come full circle for them and was okay for the time being, but given the patterns we were shown earlier, we can assume that everything will go to shit again, because they are still a bunch of dumb-ass co-dependent porn stars. Not that I don't love the characters, but PTA's said it before, he writes the saddest happy endings (or maybe in this case it's the happiest sad ending).
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.

mutinyco

#20
July 30, 2003, 01:10:55 PM
I still never understood why Dirk wasn't arrested for what happened at the coke deal. It certainly wouldn't have been difficult to trace him to it.
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe

SoNowThen

#21
July 30, 2003, 01:13:02 PM
Maybe he does get arrested right after the film ends...


but I don't wanna get into that, 'cause I hate when people try to carry on a plot after the last scene. So I'm just saying...
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.

mutinyco

#22
July 30, 2003, 01:16:10 PM
Think it would've happened before the last scene.
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe

mutinyco

#23
July 30, 2003, 01:16:59 PM
But even upon its original release, even critics who gave it 4 stars complained that it lost its way in the second half.
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe

Gold Trumpet

#24
July 30, 2003, 06:50:30 PM
To get back to something mutinyco said earlier, you haven't like a lot of PTA's work because he does not go into social commentary with his examination of human emotions? So a movie that is only about human emotions and relations is meritless to you? Thats a pretty generic comment if I ever heard one. And since you went off into a stream of naming films from the 70s of social observance, I disagree that The Godfather has anything of social observance in it and Altman's best work, McCabe and Mrs. Miller, could also be seen as without any direct social observance. As Altman told PTA once, "keep the focus on the characters."

~rougerum

mutinyco

#25
July 30, 2003, 09:31:05 PM
If you're suggesting either of those films were without social observations, then you've never seen either of those films. Am I talking Oliver Stone messages? No. I'm talking about putting your story within a social setting.

I'm talking about The Godfather spanning multiple decades. Tracing how this country was founded by immigrants. The way organized crime built the country and how it mirrored mainstream politics. How crime was involved in everything from Cuba to Hollywood. Think of the rub out in Part I with the Statue of Liberty standing tall in the background.

McCabe & Mrs. Miller was inherently social. It was a massive revisionist slap in the face of Westerns to the point that many don't even consider it one. Take Altman's DVD commentary where he argued with the costume designer who wanted a more "traditional" look. The film is about individuality and myth. It's about how corporations demolish small entrepreneurs and how this fed into the American dream.

Neither film has a happy ending. As for Boogie Nights, yeah, Dirk should've gotten arrested. He could've gone back to Jack's hoping for a reconciliation, only to have the cops bust him there. Then he gets strip searched in prison and THAT's how we see his johnson (not the Raging Bull rip off). The cops could joke like: "Wow, you're gonna be popular in here!"

I'm tired. Going to sleep.
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe

modage

#26
July 30, 2003, 09:39:52 PM
no offense to you, or gt or anyone else who likes to do this, but a lot of times, people are reading into the movies more than was intentionally put there by the filmmakers.  so, if these films have some grand message behind the layers of entertainment, it may be in part, your imagination.
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

Alethia

#27
July 30, 2003, 09:39:53 PM
oh but that raging bull "rip-off" was one great scene, doncha think?

mutinyco

#28
July 30, 2003, 10:33:20 PM
I haven't done that at all. Everything I've said is plainly observable from the films. Have you ever listened to commentary tracks of various great directors? Have you ever listened to their reasoning? Listen to Coppola's commentary on The Conversation. Even the building being torn down outside a window in one shot was intentional -- done to symbolize the various layers being torn away or something to that effect...
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe

Gold Trumpet

#29
July 30, 2003, 10:39:57 PM
See, mutinyco, your interpretation is what brought out social observance from those films. Doesn't matter if I agree with you, but many people have found social observance with a movie like Punch-Drunk Love. Ideas and points that are as valuable as yours. It doesn't matter if you didn't, but you should at least see things can be found by someone doing an interpretation. I asked you whether a film was with any merit if just about human emotions anyways. You never answered. The idea that you think a film needs to have social observance 1.) is wrong because it is in all the eyes of the viewer and 2.) is stupid because some films are very much about inner emotions and should not be judged on that level.

~rougerum
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
User actions