okay, this thread is probably doomed to begin with but I just finished reading Easy Riders, Raging Bulls and watching Personal Journey with Martin Scorsese Through American Movies and thinking about some great movies of the past (and then some of the movies of today), and somehow this question came up. as I posed it to myself I had no idea of the answer, so perhaps its just an opinion, but what is it that would make a film great? or even worthwhile? since film is a storytelling medium, what makes one story better than another?
is a film great because of
1. the STORY IT TELLS. the story is something that is interesting, exciting, different, sheds some light on a subject that had never been illuminated before. makes us laugh, cry, cheer. the way in which the story unfolds, whether through plain ordinary photography and uninventive camerawork and editing have no effect on the subject of the film which is the story that is still getting across.
or is a film great because of
2. the WAY IT TELLS the story. is the story inconsequential, and could be about anything? because more importantly than the subject of the film, the language of film is brought to such life through the sequences of images and techniques utilized/improved/invented that the story could be of a barber or a king and its not the subject but the telling that breaks barriers.
or is a film great because of
3. the SUBTEXT OF THE STORY. does that make a film more important when the story is only masking a deeper message. is a film that deals with aliens, but is really speaking about racism, or macarthyism or violence deemed a great film because of what it is 'saying' about a certain subject?
obviously a mix of these choices might result in a great film, but if one of these was to be valued above the others which ONE is more important?
basically how come the seventies is full of great movies, but there are less today? what are todays movies lacking that was in such abundance then? a great story? a new way to tell that story? or a story with a deeper social/polictical conscience that has something to say?
Just off the top of my head I would say a combination of the three but if you dig down to basic I would say no. 2. How many great films haven't we seen that just re-uses old storylines?
Coens are a great example of this.
who's to say a film is great? who's to say it isn't? wonderful breakdown tho, modernage. i think the nineties and even today are full of just as many great films as the seventies, but then again that's just me. some people think taxi driver is brilliant (most of the people on this board) and hate a film like say, oh...minority report (there seems to be quite an even split with that one), and some (mutinyco i am thinking of) think minority report is a masterpeice and taxi driver needs to be re-edited.
what makes a film geat to me mostly has to do with how it gets me to respond emotionally, and you pin pointed that in number one, tho a mix of all three gets me to that point. it's tough to say what makes a film great to an individual, or even the masses....i dunno....i think ive stated the obvious but hey someone had to do it... :)
I think it's lots of swearing and lots of killing that truly makes a great film.
PG never makes for great art.
Quote from: kottePG never makes for great art.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.amazon.com%2Fimages%2FP%2FB00000J2KR.01.LZZZZZZZ.gif&hash=832640f4fbf64788df3bd5374caf5f558773b87d)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.amazon.com%2Fimages%2FP%2FB00000J2L8.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg&hash=858cc34a1fdce03ab8b407856f2e746f0ca787db)
Quote from: kottePG never makes for great art.
Yeah...I was just kidding. Forgot the smiley-man...
so you would go with the story it tells. obviously, ideally a combination of elements would be best. but which element bears more importance?
Citizen Kane is regarded as a great film because of the barriers it broke down and doors it opened as far as how to shoot a film and the WAY TO TELL A STORY. although the story is interesting, i doubt were it not for the WAY IT WAS TOLD, any one of us would be mentioning this film today.
Bringing Out The Dead has some brilliant camerawork and editing, but fails to be a great film. not because of the WAY ITS TOLD, so there must be other missing elements.
Casablanca, #2 on the AFI List of Greatest Films, is also regarded as a great film. and although the camerawork and editing is competent, as there were so many films made on the assembly line, why has this movie stood out over time? because of the STORY IT TELLS for whatever silly reason has struck a chord with so many people, that regardless of the way its filmed, people still watch it because they feel its a good story and can connect with it.
why are so many films of the seventies regarded so highly? what magic ingredient did they contain that made them superior to the films of the 80's or today? what makes Taxi Driver a more highly regarded film on this message board than Jaws? is it because it tells a story that connects to so many people here about lonliness and isolation? is it because of the way its told was so unique and interesting? or was it because of its social commentary, how it not just speaks about one character, but speaks for a whole group of people?
Quote from: kottePG never makes for great art.
Two words: Annie Hall. Although, that is the exception more than the rule, and I agree with Kael (I think) who said that it's almost a requirement that the film be rated at least R to be a great film. Again, there are a few exceptions. I don't think you can generalize what make a great film, either, because there are so many variables. Which is why it's so laughable that there's now a formula for the blockbuster.
Today, I was watching TV and a commercial came up for "Win a Date With Tad Hamilton!" Liz Phair's "Why Can't I" started whining in the background. Now the movie has a shoddy premise to start with, but sometimes I think certain shoddy premises can work if they aren't Hollywood-ized. Along Came Polly, for example, had a great premise, two good actors, but will probably fail because of how it's handled. This morning I saw a student film made in film school by the creator of Buffy. His father is my dramatic fiction writing teacher, oddly enough. Now, this film was decent for someone still in film school, but it fell into certain cliches and film school don'ts, and it had a soundtrack that grated on my nerves because it tried to tell me how to feel. I'm more and more convinced that less is more, and that Dogme has a lot more legitimacy than first thought. That, and a combination of the three things modage said, if anything, makes a great film at its basic. But nothing is that simple.
It is not the "what," it's the "how." Andrew Sarris hit it perfectly square on the head when he wrote that. Someday, someone's gonna deck me for repeating that over and over, but... it's so true. So I guess, like everyone, I'd hedge and say a combo of the three, but you'd never get a great film without the second option modernage mentioned, without something special/passionate/proficient in the style. Now, a style needn't announce itself or be to be a style- everyone has a style, whether you choose it or it chooses you. You don't have the option of not having one; you have the option of what degree of control and insight you have with it.
I'll admit there are stories I'm less interested in than others, but I feel that's a subjective failing on my part, and don't usually care to admit it when I can help it. My real belief is that any story can be great if told in a way that's great (this, of course, covers an overemphasis on plot, thus requiring more specific attention to "plot holes" and the like, as well).
my genius!
QuoteWhat makes a film great?
...when the words....."A David Lynch Film" appears onscreen....
Quote from: rudieobmy genius!
Quote from: NEON MERCURY...when the words....."A David Lynch Film" appears onscreen....
hilarious. atleast read my initial post first, huh? the last time i attempt to start a 'thoughtful thread'. back to lists... :?
three great scenes; no bad scene.
.......honestly.....it has to be combination of #1..and #2...you see....a film can be great jusyt onthe surface the story it tells....like jaws for example.....that is a gtreat ffilm...and there is nno essence of #3 ......unnless you want to be overly ANALytical about it and say..."oh..oh the umm shark represents oppreseive government...and the boat represents the country ..which serves as a "life boat" to the poeple riding it"......but ......that just stupid there are plenty of ffilms that are unniverally great..but have no "deeper" meaning.....but like i have said earlier anyone can find meaning in something but.....honesly #3 ....can be nnonn--existence in cinnneam...and it would be peachy.....but i still enjoy watching films......that conveys #3's part in this equatioonn......basically.....it comes down to what makes a great film is story and style....but there some films that have hardly a story to it....but he style oif the film is remarkable.....take muhollannd dr. for example......if you unnlock the story its not that "fanntastic/innnovative....etc......but the way lynch approached the film in his always amazing STYLE....made a okay story the masterpece of the new millenniunm which hasnn't been equalled yet.....
Quote from: NEON MERCURYhonesly #3 ....can be nnonn--existence in cinnneam...and it would be peachy.....but i still enjoy watching films......that conveys #3's part in this equatioonn......
there would be no Kubrick or Lynch without #3.
the thing no one thinks about is that the "subjects" are never purely topical, it's never "oh this was made in 1997 so it's about tupac"... subtext and meaning is way underrated, and in fact it's what makes a film stand the test of time. actually this leads to the truth about a great film, there are 2 types which resonate, those which are great entertainment (spielberg), and those which reveal sumthing about the human condition (kubrick). that is like the eternal conflict of cinema, and marrying the two has always been near impossible for critics and the public to digest.
so the question is what does Great mean, in anything, i would say it's the ability to recognize truth. the problem then is, for example, a film like 2001 is undeniably great, but u might not think so.. that's ur problem, because it is a fact, like the sun is a fact, that the film reveals a great truth about us. the difference is u may not hav recognized this truth in urself, so u don't think it's all that. that's what makes anything great. it's not as simple as "oh if u tell a good story" cos that's still using the word GOOD, what's a good story then? it never ends.
even great entertainment contains truth in it, Jaws and ET, are examples of the ability of cinema to stimulate "imagination" in even the dullest robots.. that's why they're so popular. it reminds ppl of that truth that they forgot "i used to dream about things, i wonder why i'm so boring now".
Casablana has alot of #3 actually.
Quote from: PQuote from: NEON MERCURYhonesly #3 ....can be nnonn--existence in cinnneam...and it would be peachy.....but i still enjoy watching films......that conveys #3's part in this equatioonn......
there would be no Kubrick or Lynch without #3.
...that is true....but the subtext of kubricks film are more "grandiose" in scope i think...
both mulholland dr. .....and 2001...rely heavily on their subtext.....but ...i believe that if we were to pull out all of the subtext in both films 2001 is the bigger revelation.....
...and i do believe that films can be great if there was an abscence of number 3.....
I PERSONALLY WOULD NOT LIKE IT TO BE THIS WAY.....but there are plenty of films that have nno presenc eof number 3 that are great universally ...like 2001 is a universally phenomenal film....and i agree w/ your assesment of 2001....
But #3 is only there if you look for it
Quote from: SlorgBut #3 is only there if you look for it
..thats true.....
i think it depends on the film in question....
examples...die hard...thats blantant number 1 and 2..and the film relys on those only...(style and story.)
...but i'm sure someone could find elements of number 3 but.....it would be ludacris...(like my jaws analogy)......
another example is the thin red line....i have read the book and seen the flick..that film encompasses all three....style..story .subtext(mainly in the film)...... now someone watching this film..could just watch it for its "entertainment" value easily......but unlike die hard this film is more "welcomed" .....for its subtext......
..and lastly ....2001 .is purely a subtextual film......
all i'm saying is that some films required or are ingrained with subtext....and some are not.....you are right in that #3 is there if you look for it ...but i feel that
certain films warrant such examination.....and some films are not just...by that.....
Quote from: SlorgBut #3 is only there if you look for it
it's the chicken and the egg.
i guess no one (cept maybe sickfins) agrees with my theories on truth.
This man behind the camera
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mtv.com%2Fshared%2Fmedia%2Fnews%2Fimages%2Fr%2FRatner_Brett%2Fsq-brett-ratner-orange-jacket-dragon-uni.jpg&hash=a876d8522e21673959e53306827739d4e0e2fff3)
you said it baby
more cowbell
Quote from: ewardyou said it baby
one huge modafuckin' ditto.
Quote from: NEON MERCURYboth mulholland dr. .....and 2001...rely heavily on their subtext.....but ...i believe that if we were to pull out all of the subtext in both films 2001 is the bigger revelation.....
...and i do believe that films can be great if there was an abscence of number 3.....I PERSONALLY WOULD NOT LIKE IT TO BE THIS WAY.....but there are plenty of films that have nno presenc eof number 3 that are great universally ...like 2001 is a universally phenomenal film....and i agree w/ your assesment of 2001....
But can't subtext also extend to
implications? I would guess that 2001 has more implications than embedded subtext.
Quote from: BrainSushiThis man behind the camera
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mtv.com%2Fshared%2Fmedia%2Fnews%2Fimages%2Fr%2FRatner_Brett%2Fsq-brett-ratner-orange-jacket-dragon-uni.jpg&hash=a876d8522e21673959e53306827739d4e0e2fff3)
what the fuck is this? i try to start one serious thread, and you cant even read the first fucking page before posting something like this? whatever.
Quote from: themodernage021. the STORY IT TELLS. the story is something that is interesting, exciting, different, sheds some light on a subject that had never been illuminated before. makes us laugh, cry, cheer. the way in which the story unfolds, whether through plain ordinary photography and uninventive camerawork and editing have no effect on the subject of the film which is the story that is still getting across.
If I had to choose one out of the three, this would be it. I mean, the second idea basically refers to style, and I believe that you can have oodles of style and still have a bad movie due to an uninteresting or cliche story. The 3rd idea, with subtext, can really be a part of the actual story, but is not necessarily interpreted that way. Such as someone can take aliens on a shuttle as just being aliens on a shuttle, where someone else can interpret them as outsiders in a confined society or something. The story is important because it gives the movie structure and helps the movie unfold like a good book. All the elements mentioned are vital parts of a movie, but just choosing one, story would have to be it because it identifies with the audience and they become involved.
If I had to choose one, it would probably be 3, which should really be "the idea it conveys."
Quote from: themodernage02
what the fuck is this? i try to start one serious thread, and you cant even read the first fucking page before posting something like this? whatever.
relax. he's just adding much needed comic relief. it's healthy to have a laugh every now and then. besides, it
is possible to learn and have fun at the same time.
Quote from: Cerpin_Schulzemore cowbell
Fellas, I got a feva'......and the only prescription....is more cowbell!
Quote from: themodernage02Quote from: BrainSushiThis man behind the camera
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mtv.com%2Fshared%2Fmedia%2Fnews%2Fimages%2Fr%2FRatner_Brett%2Fsq-brett-ratner-orange-jacket-dragon-uni.jpg&hash=a876d8522e21673959e53306827739d4e0e2fff3)
what the fuck is this? i try to start one serious thread, and you cant even read the first fucking page before posting something like this? whatever.
who says he's joking?
SECOND QUESTION: does a film have to be known to be great? like if a great film is made, but no one sees it, is it still great? (tree falls in forest). like, does part of what makes a film great have to do with it being the first to do something, or its influence over other films/filmmakers? so is it possible one of the greatest films ever made is one that no one has seen because it was made in some kids garage?
Quote from: themodernage02SECOND QUESTION: does a film have to be known to be great? like if a great film is made, but no one sees it, is it still great? (tree falls in forest). like, does part of what makes a film great have to do with it being the first to do something, or its influence over other films/filmmakers? so is it possible one of the greatest films ever made is one that no one has seen because it was made in some kids garage?
Cult filmA cult film is a movie that attracts a small but devoted group of obsessive fans or one that has remained popular over successive years amongst a small group of followers. Often the film failed to achieve mainstream success on its original release, but this is not always the case. Sometimes the audience response to a cult film is somewhat different to what was intended by the film-makers, although usually a film that becomes "cult" started-out with unusual elements or subject matter.
A film reaches cult status due to an audience's relationship to the film. This makes the designation of cult status to a film difficult, however continued success amongst a subset of moviegoers many years after the film's original release is a key defining factor.
Many cult films are from such genres as horror, science fiction and world cinema. The Rocky Horror Picture Show, which combines the elements of science fiction, horror—not to mention transvestitism, incest and homosexuality—and, amazingly, is a musical, is considered by many the first true and seminal cult film.
The construction of meaning within the cult film text, and the nature and epistemology of cult film (and also its audiences), however, are now studied academically.
An instance of how cults differ between societies include the elevation of the British comedy film actor Norman Wisdom into a cult icon in Albania during the years of Communism under Enver Hoxha, at a time when his family-friendly style almost certainly ensured that 'cult' would be the last term on earth to be applied to him in the West. Curiously he and his films are now acquiring nostalgic cult status in Britain.
Selected List of Cult Films2001 - A Space Odyssey
Abba - The Movie
The Adventures Of Buckaroo Banzai Across The 8th Dimension
Apocalypse Now
Army of Darkness
Attack of the Killer Tomatoes
Bad Taste
Beyond the Valley of the Dolls
Blade Runner
The Blues Brothers
Boxing Helena
Braindead
Brazil
The Breakfast Club
The Day The Earth Stood Still
Dark Star
Dazed And Confused
Dr. Strangelove or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Drowning by Numbers
Donnie Darko
Eraserhead
Evil Dead
The Graduate
Grand Illusion
The Gods Must Be Crazy
Harold and Maude
Heathers
Henry--Portrait of a Serial Killer
If...
Incubus
The Italian Job
It's a Wonderful Life
James Bond series
Koyaanisqatsi
Little Shop of Horrors
The Man Who Fell To Earth
Mars Attacks
The Matrix
Monty Python and the Holy Grail
Monty Python's Life of Brian
Monty Python's The Meaning of Life
Meet The Feebles
Paris, Texas
Pink Floyd's The Wall
Priscilla, Queen of the Desert
The Princess Bride
The Producers
Pulp Fiction
Raising Arizona
Reefer Madness aka Tell Your Children
Repo Man
Rocky Horror Picture Show
Silent Running
St. Elmo's Fire
Santa Sangre
Star Wars series
This Is Spinal Tap
Tommy (the Who rock opera)
TRON
The Wicker Man
Withnail and I
The Wizard of Speed and Time
Yellow Submarine
Usually, when I like a film, I think it's pretty great. So I would have to say for a film to be great, I have to like it.
Quote from: LinkUsually, when I like a film, I think it's pretty great. So I would have to say for a film to be great, I have to like it.
are you quoting Oscar Wylde? or someone?
Quote from: chuckhimselfoQuote from: themodernage02SECOND QUESTION: does a film have to be known to be great? like if a great film is made, but no one sees it, is it still great? (tree falls in forest). like, does part of what makes a film great have to do with it being the first to do something, or its influence over other films/filmmakers? so is it possible one of the greatest films ever made is one that no one has seen because it was made in some kids garage?
Cult film
A cult film is a movie that attracts a small but devoted group of obsessive fans or one that has remained popular over successive years amongst a small group of followers.
I guess what modernage was reffering (correct me if i'm wrong) is a film without any status, that is, nor is an obscure film, nor a cult film, etc...it's just some piece of film that no one has seen and is ready to be discovered.
To answer your question I think it could be great, like the hidden gem in some isolated place, is that what you meant?
Now, what about when some guy who shot his film on video and then made his feature based on his amateur film (Boogie Nights), maybe his amateur film wasn't a masterpiece or anything like that, but from that idea he made one great film, does that aply to your question?
Quote from: chuckhimselfoare you quoting Oscar Wylde?
no, Leopold and Loeb.
Quote from: FernandoI guess what modernage was reffering (correct me if i'm wrong) is a film without any status, that is, nor is an obscure film, nor a cult film, etc...it's just some piece of film that no one has seen and is ready to be discovered. To answer your question I think it could be great, like the hidden gem in some isolated place, is that what you meant?
right. now, okay so then if a film's greatness stands seperately from its impact on other films, (or atleast somewhat seperately), than is it possible that a newer film with less impact on 'film history' is better than an older one that broke rules and influenced tons of films/filmmakers? because to assume that a film can be great because of what it IS, and not what it DOES (impact/influence), then that would lead you to believe that a film that doesnt have a place in film history could still be better than an older film that does? or am i wrong?
Quote from: themodernage02Quote from: FernandoI guess what modernage was reffering (correct me if i'm wrong) is a film without any status, that is, nor is an obscure film, nor a cult film, etc...it's just some piece of film that no one has seen and is ready to be discovered. To answer your question I think it could be great, like the hidden gem in some isolated place, is that what you meant?
right. now, okay so then if a film's greatness stands seperately from its impact on other films, (or atleast somewhat seperately), than is it possible that a newer film with less impact on 'film history' is better than an older one that broke rules and influenced tons of films/filmmakers? because to assume that a film can be great because of what it IS, and not what it DOES (impact/influence), then that would lead you to believe that a film that doesnt have a place in film history could still be better than an older film that does? or am i wrong?
this reminds me of a two quotes, none of them properly related to cinema.
one is by a musician whose name i can't recall, "being a good musician implies being a good businessman" and the other comes from the creator of a NES videogame called McKids. it's not actually a quote, but he said something about how by just making a good game your not necesarily making a succesful one. for all i know, you can be the greatest guitar player in the world but if no one listens to you, you have failed.
it may look vain, but leaving all creative terms aside, i'm of the idea that if you really want to make a succesful film (and by saying succesful i'm talking about getting to people, not of making money. people tend to confuse that) , not only does it has to have good monetary backbone, it has to come in the right time and the right place.
it's quite simple..
MARKETING makes a film successful.
TALENT makes a film great.
if u can't tell the difference, then stick with the first.
sadly, without the marketing, no one will see a great film...
Quote from: Pit's quite simple..
MARKETING makes a film successful.
TALENT makes a film great.
if u can't tell the difference, then stick with the first.
i think that's a very american way to divide things.
that's funny cos i'm not american.
Quote from: sntsadly, without the marketing, no one will see a great film...
u mean the asshole public won't.
No, I just mean that if you or your producer doesn't know how to sell the film, it's possible that no one will see it. There's a certain degree of politic that goes into getting into festivals even, much less having people show up to your screening. And that's not even talking about getting any kind of distribution...
You either need a good story or lots and lots of..
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.angelfire.com%2Fin3%2Fsandpanther%2Fmidget.jpg&hash=adeccaf6abff1cd4e44e79ce4f9873b0437a37ae)'s
Quote from: SoNowThensadly, without the marketing, no one will see a great film...
well, that is usually true, but then there is the case of 'cult movies' like the ones listed by chuckhimselfo.
Quote from: SoNowThenNo, I just mean that if you or your producer doesn't know how to sell the film, it's possible that no one will see it.
Is the problem really with the selling, or is the problem with the buying?
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanQuote from: SoNowThenNo, I just mean that if you or your producer doesn't know how to sell the film, it's possible that no one will see it.
Is the problem really with the selling, or is the problem with the buying?
selling.
I know I'm late but, I'd say it's more in how the story is told. Look at Memento, which may or may not be a great film, but the only reason it ever garnered any of the fame it did was because in how the story was told, using that backwards story-telling. See also: 21 Grams.
Quote from: chuckhimselfo.Quote from: themodernage02SECOND QUESTION: does a film have to be known to be great? like if a great film is made, but no one sees it, is it still great? (tree falls in forest). like, does part of what makes a film great have to do with it being the first to do something, or its influence over other films/filmmakers? so is it possible one of the greatest films ever made is one that no one has seen because it was made in some kids garage?
Cult film
A cult film is a movie that attracts a small but devoted group of obsessive fans or one that has remained popular over successive years amongst a small group of followers. Often the film failed to achieve mainstream success on its original release, but this is not always the case. Sometimes the audience response to a cult film is somewhat different to what was intended by the film-makers, although usually a film that becomes "cult" started-out with unusual elements or subject matter.
A film reaches cult status due to an audience's relationship to the film. This makes the designation of cult status to a film difficult, however continued success amongst a subset of moviegoers many years after the film's original release is a key defining factor.
Many cult films are from such genres as horror, science fiction and world cinema. The Rocky Horror Picture Show, which combines the elements of science fiction, horror—not to mention transvestitism, incest and homosexuality—and, amazingly, is a musical, is considered by many the first true and seminal cult film.
The construction of meaning within the cult film text, and the nature and epistemology of cult film (and also its audiences), however, are now studied academically.
An instance of how cults differ between societies include the elevation of the British comedy film actor Norman Wisdom into a cult icon in Albania during the years of Communism under Enver Hoxha, at a time when his family-friendly style almost certainly ensured that 'cult' would be the last term on earth to be applied to him in the West. Curiously he and his films are now acquiring nostalgic cult status in Britain.
Selected List of Cult Films
2001 - A Space Odyssey
Abba - The Movie
The Adventures Of Buckaroo Banzai Across The 8th Dimension
Apocalypse Now
Army of Darkness
Attack of the Killer Tomatoes
Bad Taste
Beyond the Valley of the Dolls
Blade Runner
The Blues Brothers
Boxing Helena
Braindead
Brazil
The Breakfast Club
The Day The Earth Stood Still
Dark Star
Dazed And Confused
Dr. Strangelove or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Drowning by Numbers
Donnie Darko
Eraserhead
Evil Dead
The Graduate
Grand Illusion
The Gods Must Be Crazy
Harold and Maude
Heathers
Henry--Portrait of a Serial Killer
If...
Incubus
The Italian Job
It's a Wonderful Life
James Bond series
Koyaanisqatsi
Little Shop of Horrors
The Man Who Fell To Earth
Mars Attacks
The Matrix
Monty Python and the Holy Grail
Monty Python's Life of Brian
Monty Python's The Meaning of Life
Meet The Feebles
Paris, Texas
Pink Floyd's The Wall
Priscilla, Queen of the Desert
The Princess Bride
The Producers
Pulp Fiction
Raising Arizona
Reefer Madness aka Tell Your Children
Repo Man
Rocky Horror Picture Show
Silent Running
St. Elmo's Fire
Santa Sangre
Star Wars series
This Is Spinal Tap
Tommy (the Who rock opera)
TRON
The Wicker Man
Withnail and I
The Wizard of Speed and Time
Yellow Submarine
IMHO, many of those films you listed hardly qualify as "cult" films in the technical sense of the word because they are a) universally known b) made tons of money for their time and over time and c) did both a and b, like 2001, Pulp Fiction, Star Wars series, Blade Runner, The Graduate, The Matrix, St Elmos Fire, Breakfast Club, Rocky Horror, Apocalypse Now etc., and many others which qulaify as a's.
so what? he didnt write the list. and did you have to quote that whole long thing instead of just the ones you wanted to point out? do you have any thoughts on the topic?
..i guess a film could be great w.outr mass appeal.to audiences....b/c its doesn't matter if the ffilms sells it 's all about the film itself(in terms of its quality).....and thats all up to opinion ...but the only film i can thinnk off that is "great" ...but doesn't have mass maket appeal or earnings would be ......Sean Penn's The Pledge.....its truly a great film and nno one ever really mentoins it.......i seriously doubt that anyone w/ reasonable tates in film who has seen this would say other wise.....
Quote from: themodernage02so what? he didnt write the list. and did you have to quote that whole long thing instead of just the ones you wanted to point out? do you have any thoughts on the topic?
Regarding this pointless, subjective, runaround thread filled with semantics... what makes a film great is how it moves you, personally, be it emotionally or just visually. No one element is more relevant than the other. Many of the films generally acknowledged as "great", whatever the hell that means, combine story with style, and maybe a lil subversion thrown in for good measure.
BTW, what do you care about me quoting the entire list? I was simply making a point on what was said, sorry that it bothered you soo much. Also, The Modern Age is the shittiest song on an otherwise brilliant debut album by The Strokes. Cheers.
Quote from: billybrownAlso, The Modern Age is the shittiest song on an otherwise brilliant debut album by The Strokes. Cheers.
the demo is better. :-D thanks for your two cents though.
Quote from: themodernage02Quote from: billybrownAlso, The Modern Age is the shittiest song on an otherwise brilliant debut album by The Strokes. Cheers.
the demo is better.
I'm sure it is...
Quote from: billybrownRegarding this pointless, subjective, runaround thread filled with semantics... what makes a film great is how it moves you, personally, be it emotionally or just visually. No one element is more relevant than the other.
well, just to keep this going. of course its subjective, but that requires opinions from boardmembers interested in participating in a discussion with their opinions on that subject. so, are films that dont move you automatically out of consideration for a 'great film'. will you read something about the film and then decide to take a second look? or dismiss it because you didn't connect to it? so, what makes a film great
to you?
Quote from: themodernage02Quote from: billybrownRegarding this pointless, subjective, runaround thread filled with semantics... what makes a film great is how it moves you, personally, be it emotionally or just visually. No one element is more relevant than the other.
well, just to keep this going. of course its subjective, but that requires opinions from boardmembers interested in participating in a discussion with their opinions on that subject. so, are films that dont move you automatically out of consideration for a 'great film'. will you read something about the film and then decide to take a second look? or dismiss it because you didn't connect to it? so, what makes a film great to you?
What makes a film great is how it moves me, personally. For example, many film historians, scholars, and critics rave and drool over films like Casablanca or Citizen Kane or Gone With The Wind, etc., and while I can appreciate their cinematic value, I don't really care for them that much. I don't really connect to them and they don't really move me on an emotional level at all. Then, a film like Buffalo 66, which wasn't really critically hailed across the map so to speak, completely engages my visual and emotional senses, and for me,
that is a great film. Sometimes a film connects with you later if you're prompted to give it a second via critical praise, but for me, it's all about how long a film or a particular moment or even music from a certain scene lingers with me, longer after I've stopped watching the film. Because the term "great" can be soo subjective, I think you need to apply personal feelings/emotions into what art, be it, film or music or literature, you deem to be great or worthy of praise.
thank you.
Quote from: themodernage02thank you.
You're welcome and good night to all of you fine Xixaxer's.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fworldpeace.org.au%2Fimages%2Fhug%2520calvin.gif&hash=6b599cee5d418f62289981cb4562e9bfa48a4664)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geocities.com%2Fnoveltyhat%2Fhuggy.txt&hash=765ef7062213f644d48317fc6ad9a5f3ab5062a6)
HAHAHAHA god
whoa, how long did that took?
Quote from: Orteous(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geocities.com%2Fnoveltyhat%2Fhuggy.txt&hash=765ef7062213f644d48317fc6ad9a5f3ab5062a6)
Thanks...all I needed was a hug after all! :-D
and an icepack.
Quote from: ©bradand an icepack.
nah, no ice pack... ice packs are for pussies. :lol:
Quote from: billybrownQuote from: ©bradand an icepack.
nah, no ice pack... ice packs are for pussies. :lol:
Your avatar's gay, right? It looks like a severe case of a gay bashing.
Quote from: kotteQuote from: billybrownQuote from: ©bradand an icepack.
nah, no ice pack... ice packs are for pussies. :lol:
Your avatar's gay, right? It looks like a severe case of a gay bashing.
Yeah, it is... it's a severe case of the happy bashing. How'd you know?
*(grabs chest, heart implodes).
QuoteWhat Makes A Film Great?
Tits.