|
Post by el woospo on Jan 22, 2014 9:44:05 GMT -5
A thread where you post your views on film makers or film stars (or any celeb for that matter) that fuck you off with their arrogance.
My example would be recent readings from a certain much beloved by many Quentin Tarintino.
After he announced his next film would be another western I read he said (to paraphrase) 'since I TOUGHT MYSELF HOW TO MAKE A WESTERN I SHOULD MAKE ANOTHER' - what an arrogant cocksucker. By ripping off many other superior westerns you tought yourself how to make one? An over long one does not even meet the worst of Sergio Leone?!? What a prick.
Happy news is the script was leaked and he has shelved it. Now he can try to rip off Russ Mayer or Mario Bava or Jesus Franco or Akira Kurasawa (again I spose...) and on and on. . .. .
I also have seen Kevin Smith on the receiving end of much hate on ti interwebs... just an example, I have no feelings on him, I enjoyed Red State...
Any way, any acceptance speech, set walkout, interview, general film aesthetic that makes you say - 'fuck off yi cunt!' - !??!?
|
|
|
Post by Mctenzington on Jan 22, 2014 13:48:25 GMT -5
Godard rubs me the wrong way sometimes. Crediting yourself with the middle name 'Cinema' is pretty fucking arrogant.
|
|
|
Post by Dominick on Jan 22, 2014 15:25:46 GMT -5
Damon Lindelof gets way too much hate. We get it, you hated the Lost finale because you didn't understand it and the finale wasn't what you wanted when in reality it was a good finale, but that doesn't make him a bad writer. I mean he's written shit like Prometheus and Cowboys and Aliens, but what about all those great Lost episodes and Star Trek Into Darkness? Hell even though World War Z was goofy it wasn't half bad. It's what these Lindelof haters forget, he's written 40 or so excellent episodes of Lost and yet they all act like the finale turned him into a bad writer.
|
|
|
Post by Chucky G on Jan 22, 2014 17:05:22 GMT -5
Damon Lindelof gets way too much hate. We get it, you hated the Lost finale because you didn't understand it and the finale wasn't what you wanted when in reality it was a good finale, but that doesn't make him a bad writer. I mean he's written shit like Prometheus and Cowboys and Aliens, but what about all those great Lost episodes and Star Trek Into Darkness? Hell even though World War Z was goofy it wasn't half bad. It's what these Lindelof haters forget, he's written 40 or so excellent episodes of Lost and yet they all act like the finale turned him into a bad writer. Oh yeah. A TV Series playing and leading its audience with Science Fiction suddenly makes a 180 and becomes about religion with abundances of internal inconsistency (both plot and character wise). Essentially, he breaks the deal he made with the audience at the beginning of the show, but because he fucked expectations by going in a completely fuck-all direction, he should be praised. Oh yeah. Prometheus. Where to start? The movie is rife with bullshit that wasn't there before he came along, maybe? Oh yeah. Star Trek Into Reference. Not like it was ripped off from better Star Trek sources and was clusterfucked by thematic inconsistencies. Oh yeah. He's the guy who justifies not explaining motives, happenings, plot points, and justifies ambiguity for the sake of ambiguity all because he believes that the questions posed by such things are more interesting than the actual reasons (as he explains in the Prometheus commentary), never mind how this philosophy on storytelling fucks shit up. No, how about fuck Damon Lindelof.
|
|
|
Post by Dominick on Jan 22, 2014 17:46:45 GMT -5
Damon Lindelof gets way too much hate. We get it, you hated the Lost finale because you didn't understand it and the finale wasn't what you wanted when in reality it was a good finale, but that doesn't make him a bad writer. I mean he's written shit like Prometheus and Cowboys and Aliens, but what about all those great Lost episodes and Star Trek Into Darkness? Hell even though World War Z was goofy it wasn't half bad. It's what these Lindelof haters forget, he's written 40 or so excellent episodes of Lost and yet they all act like the finale turned him into a bad writer. Oh yeah. A TV Series playing and leading its audience with Science Fiction suddenly makes a 180 and becomes about religion with abundances of internal inconsistency (both plot and character wise). Essentially, he breaks the deal he made with the audience at the beginning of the show, but because he fucked expectations by going in a completely fuck-all direction, he should be praised. What "deal" did he make?
|
|
|
Post by Chucky G on Jan 23, 2014 18:50:45 GMT -5
Oh yeah. A TV Series playing and leading its audience with Science Fiction suddenly makes a 180 and becomes about religion with abundances of internal inconsistency (both plot and character wise). Essentially, he breaks the deal he made with the audience at the beginning of the show, but because he fucked expectations by going in a completely fuck-all direction, he should be praised. What "deal" did he make? You obviously aren't as familiar with the things that go into storytelling as some of the rest of us, so let me explain. This deal? Whenever a writer/author starts a story, they set a tone, a pace, a list of rules, characters, foreshadowing, a set of conflicts that they promise to resolve, and a reason for the audience to invest and stay invested, among other things. In essence, he outlines a problem and promises to solve it. The problem with this is, as opposed to giving the audience the answer to, "Who ate Timmy's lunch?" in the form of say, the dog or his sister, he gave it in the form of, "God did it." You can stick the answer of "God" into anything and it will answer the question, but the problem with such an answer is it completely negates the purpose of a question like this. There was no point of having a mystery being a central focus of the show if the answer to such a mystery is so fucking cheap. Hell, in 2005 ( link), Lindelof said, "Every mystery that we present on the show... all of those are questions that we know the answers to." He also said that " nothing in the show is flat-out impossible" and that everything so far could be explained by science (in other words, God shouldn't have been the answer). So, how about fuck Damon Lindelof?
|
|
|
Post by el woospo on Jan 23, 2014 20:29:07 GMT -5
Whaat Chucky said... the reason I quit watching Lost was that it became abundantly clear that the 'deal' could never be resolved. I became convinced, as did many others. that the pay off could not be anything other than horse shit.
I am all for ambiguity and in many instances it can be the best part of a film but it seems that Lindelof uses it as his motif, his get out of jail free card, his last resort when he writes himself into a corner that he is not smart enough to write himself out of. I have nothing against him but agree with the above points.
@mctezinbloke - I have read and seen many htings by Godard but heave never heard him be refered to, or refer to himself with the middle name 'Cinema'. Source?
|
|
|
Post by PoopaPapaPalpatine on Jan 23, 2014 20:36:35 GMT -5
I don't know if this counts but I can't fucking stand Jon Favreau through Dinner for Five. He goes on and on about Swingers and Elf like they are cinema classics; the trials and tribulations he went through making them.
Fuck outta with that shit and stop interrupting Peter Falk.
|
|
|
Post by el woospo on Jan 23, 2014 20:48:19 GMT -5
@palps - it counts... I would like to add, although an easy target his recent behaviour has cemented him as a cunt and not just a shit head. Shiat LeBeef has recently made a short film based on one of his friends comics (maybe graphic novel, forget the details) and did not credit him claiming it his own personal work, almost shot for shot with lots of the same dialogue. He gets busted and then makes a public apology that is almost word for word the same as another public apology made by another film bloke in recent years. He cannot even say sorry without ripping someone off. What a cunt. Now I hear he is claiming it was all performance art and he was basically ripping off Jaquin Pheonix style 'fool the public' nonsense. Double cunt. www.avclub.com/article/shia-labeouf-plagiarizes-every-article-about-his-p-107228?utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=feeds
|
|
|
Post by Mctenzington on Jan 24, 2014 0:08:25 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure he credits himself as Jean-Luc Cinema Godard in Band of Outsiders. still: I mean, beyond that, the guy has some of the most hyperbolic quotes about film around. Cinema is dead, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Chig Champa on Jan 24, 2014 6:47:15 GMT -5
I hate to defend someone as pretentious as Goddard, but it's always been my understanding that the "Cinema" part of his billing in Band of Outsiders was a tongue-in-cheek reference to his involvement "within" the film as its narrator/commentator. It comes off to me less as a "I'm so good at making movies that I've taken Cinema as part of my name," and more along the lines of "I'm in control of the very fabric of the story being told, to the point of intruding upon it."
|
|
|
Post by Chig Champa on Jan 24, 2014 6:52:15 GMT -5
@palps - it counts... I would like to add, although an easy target his recent behaviour has cemented him as a cunt and not just a shit head. Shiat LeBeef has recently made a short film based on one of his friends comics (maybe graphic novel, forget the details) and did not credit him claiming it his own personal work, almost shot for shot with lots of the same dialogue. He gets busted and then makes a public apology that is almost word for word the same as another public apology made by another film bloke in recent years. He cannot even say sorry without ripping someone off. What a cunt. Now I hear he is claiming it was all performance art and he was basically ripping off Jaquin Pheonix style 'fool the public' nonsense. Double cunt. www.avclub.com/article/shia-labeouf-plagiarizes-every-article-about-his-p-107228?utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=feedsOne correction to this statement on LaDouche's Douchery. The guy who got ripped off, Dan Clowes, is not only not friends with Shithead, he's never even met or spoken to him.
|
|
|
Post by el woospo on Jan 24, 2014 7:45:26 GMT -5
@palps - it counts... I would like to add, although an easy target his recent behaviour has cemented him as a cunt and not just a shit head. Shiat LeBeef has recently made a short film based on one of his friends comics (maybe graphic novel, forget the details) and did not credit him claiming it his own personal work, almost shot for shot with lots of the same dialogue. He gets busted and then makes a public apology that is almost word for word the same as another public apology made by another film bloke in recent years. He cannot even say sorry without ripping someone off. What a cunt. Now I hear he is claiming it was all performance art and he was basically ripping off Jaquin Pheonix style 'fool the public' nonsense. Double cunt. www.avclub.com/article/shia-labeouf-plagiarizes-every-article-about-his-p-107228?utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=feedsOne correction to this statement on LaDouche's Douchery. The guy who got ripped off, Dan Clowes, is not only not friends with Shithead, he's never even met or spoken to him. Really? The first source I read about it hinted that they were 'once' chums... either way LaDouch is clearly that, a fuckin LeDouche.
|
|
|
Post by Mctenzington on Jan 24, 2014 14:29:05 GMT -5
@chig: I agree, but I still think it's really arrogant. I think a director's credit (given it's the last opening credit) kinda implies the same thing anyways. This whole directors projecting themselves into their movies (like say, Haneke) or directors referring to themselves as story gods (like Tarantino) just rubs me the wrong way.
|
|
|
Post by Dominick on Jan 24, 2014 21:56:32 GMT -5
You obviously aren't as familiar with the things that go into storytelling as some of the rest of us, so let me explain. This deal? Whenever a writer/author starts a story, they set a tone, a pace, a list of rules, characters, foreshadowing, a set of conflicts that they promise to resolve, and a reason for the audience to invest and stay invested, among other things. In essence, he outlines a problem and promises to solve it. The problem with this is, as opposed to giving the audience the answer to, "Who ate Timmy's lunch?" in the form of say, the dog or his sister, he gave it in the form of, "God did it." You can stick the answer of "God" into anything and it will answer the question, but the problem with such an answer is it completely negates the purpose of a question like this. There was no point of having a mystery being a central focus of the show if the answer to such a mystery is so fucking cheap. Hell, in 2005 ( link), Lindelof said, "Every mystery that we present on the show... all of those are questions that we know the answers to." He also said that " nothing in the show is flat-out impossible" and that everything so far could be explained by science (in other words, God shouldn't have been the answer). So, how about fuck Damon Lindelof? Now while I think having a light at the center of the island is a bit cheap, I'd rather there be some than none.
|
|