|
Post by el woospo on Jan 25, 2014 5:33:45 GMT -5
Mctezington - could you elaborate on your Heneke comments, I rather like him.
As for Godard, pretentious, yes. But he is French and was at the forefront of the last great movement in film so its to be expected. Like Chig says, I always thought h was more taking the piss. Have you seen Weekend or Perrot le Fou? These are both prime examples of him saying fuck you to film conventions and fuck you to the audience if all you want is to watch the same old film conventions again and again and ...
What I do not like is when a director credits themself as anything other than director. A .... film or something like that, arrogant as fuck to claim that it was them who made it, fuck the crew, writers, actors ect ect ect 'it was ALL ME!' - fuckers. I am all for auteur theory but keep the ego in check please.
|
|
|
Post by Mctenzington on Jan 25, 2014 13:59:48 GMT -5
Haneke's Brechtian 'confront the audience' schtick is boring and pompous to me. The guy's a talented craftsman, and builds some really interesting atmosphere (which makes Cache his best film in my mind), but the guy has to remind you again and again that he's the one in control of the story. He's kinda like a phantom in each one of his films. It's very clinical and distancing to me.
But I'm not a fan of the Hamburg school of philosophy anyways---I guess you could say my beef is with them and not necessarily with one of the practitioners they've inspired.
With Godard, I agree that films like Weekend and Pierrot Le Fou are closer to simply taking the piss. They're lighter, more playful than the majority of his work, but I think they express some of the qualities I don't like about the guy. I guess I'd suggest checking out work from him that's more somber from his latter period (pretty much anything from Dziga Vertov group to Film Socialisme). It's clear to see that his views are quite serious, and without the colorful genre fare, his arrogance can't be mistaken for joking around. His open arrogance in some of his latter work is actually kinda surprising at times (like calling out Spielberg for not giving all of Schindler's List's money to Holocaust survivors).
|
|
|
Post by Chucky G on Jan 25, 2014 19:18:30 GMT -5
With Godard, I agree that films like Weekend and Pierrot Le Fou are closer to simply taking the piss. They're lighter, more playful than the majority of his work, but I think they express some of the qualities I don't like about the guy. I guess I'd suggest checking out work from him that's more somber from his latter period (pretty much anything from Dziga Vertov group to Film Socialisme). It's clear to see that his views are quite serious, and without the colorful genre fare, his arrogance can't be mistaken for joking around. His open arrogance in some of his latter work is actually kinda surprising at times (like calling out Spielberg for not giving all of Schindler's List's money to Holocaust survivors). Correction: I believe he was criticizing Spielberg for not giving any of the money to Schindler's surviving ex-wife, Emelie. Spielberg donated all of the profits he was in control of to (I think) the Shoah Foundation (or the one that was founded to gather video testimonials of Holocaust survivors from around the world). I know he personally donated his whole advance pay for the movie away. My beef with Godard is a simple one and it rests in his dismissal of Citizen Kane as a mediocre film full of bullshit theories on cinematic technique that had done nothing but delay the advancement of film technique by at least 19 years (pretentiously enough, when his own Breathless came out). If that isn't pretentious arrogance, then I dunno what is.
|
|
|
Post by Mctenzington on Jan 25, 2014 21:02:01 GMT -5
I believe you're right Chucky, but the arrogance doesn't come from Godard's opinion itself, but rather the fact that he did it in In Praise of Love. Using the running time of your own film in order to criticize another filmmaker is just a shitty thing to do.
|
|
|
Post by el woospo on Jan 25, 2014 22:04:09 GMT -5
I guess I do not have a problem with Godard because I have never taken him seriously, I have always seen him as just fucking with film form, I have enjoyed some films and been bored by others but like I said before, he is French, it's in their nature to come across as arrogant.
I kind of put him as a tamer version of von Trier, if you take him seriously then he 'wins'. I believe they just have their own little jokes and do not care who gets it or who doesn't, they are just having fun making films, I can see how this can be seen as arrogant but I would rather film makers do what they want rather than pander to the audience or money men. There is however a fine line between doing what you want and self indulgence...
|
|
|
Post by slendermaschine on Jan 27, 2014 0:57:16 GMT -5
I'll preface this first choice by saying that he isn't necessarily arrogant and might be a decent person even, but every time I see his name listed I want to avoid the movie like blight: JJ Abrams. What it specifically is that bothers me is how in countless times he has gone on saying one thing and then the complete opposite turns out to be true. It's as though the guy is a compulsive liar and quite frankly I just hate dealing with liars or listening to their bullshit. Plus after so many accounts of this pattern, his statements feel like an M. Night Shyamalan film in terms of predictability; he says something and I expect it to come out later he was full of shit trying to "surprise" us like we're bloody six year olds at Christmas.
I actually forgot about Shyamalanadindong, but yep, except unlike JJ Abrams who really just bothers me because of the lying, M. Night can go to hell. Big fucking deal if people liked the dead people movie; he's made so many bombs that George W. Bush should have put him in his Axis of Evil. The so-called "twists" between Signs and The Village alone should have put him on a no-fly list, and yet it's 2014 and some people still have this delusion that he should be handling movies instead of a McDonald's register.
Continuing the 'degrees to Kevin Bacon' trend I've got going here, from M. Night's last project I have to say that I have lost 99% of my good will and nostalgia for Will Smith after the blatant nepotism involved in getting that squinting cunt son of his into making bad movies worse. Seriously, does the kid stare at the sun in his spare time or just have to take a shit? Anyway, After Earth, a.k.a. the earliest spiritual sequel/rip-off to a movie in recent history - Oblivion 2013 - should stand as good enough evidence to turn the little shite down for future roles and as a bonus to forsake M. Night Shyamalan to at most twisting bottle tops waiting restaurants.
And last while on the subject of movies that sunk, here's one truly arrogant director who'd explore the hell out of those in 4D: James Cameron. Telling other people how they should be using 3D in movies? Really? I'm sorry Mr. Cameron, I didn't realize you were the human Avatar of Universal Studios Theme Park because that's what 3D is; it's a big gimmick to raise ticket prices and package an extra disc in overpriced bundles that nobody can use anyway because nobody is buying those fucking overpriced televisions.
Plus I for one never really got the big deal about the Titanic. Yeah, so a couple of dumbasses fall in like with each other because they're young and horny and then one of them dies. Big. Fucking. Deal. Elementary school children literally spend more time together than those two ever did, so I'd say graduating to middle school is more heart-wrenching than what barely constitutes as a crush going south. Equally problematic to me is that the Titanic is basically just a 20th Century "First World Problems" disaster movie. While many were packed in boats to reach America just for a better life, I really don't care about two twenty-somethings trist aboard the S.S.Askin' For It when it crashes into a block of ice taking a fucking cruise ha ha!
|
|
|
Post by minasa on Feb 4, 2014 14:28:34 GMT -5
Any actor that refuses to watch their own performances is a pretentious fuck. Yeah, your performance must be so fucking god-like that watching it would ruin your future performances entirely. Fuck you.
Examples:
|
|
|
Post by slendermaschine on Feb 5, 2014 7:37:43 GMT -5
Any actor that refuses to watch their own performances is a pretentious fuck. Yeah, your performance must be so fucking god-like that watching it would ruin your future performances entirely. Fuck you. I dunno, maybe go easy on him. Can you imagine if you watched your own films and realized you've been playing the same character every Tim Burton movie in a row? He might have some mental relapse and go into an emo fugue state...or worse: Go blackface. Another one: Whoever (if there ever is someone) who makes a Halo movie. Trying to insert intelligence into that series for a film takes one pretentious cunt because that series is about as smart as repeatedly smashing your head into a mailbox to check your Facebook. James Cameron dedicated years of his life to creating a deep, sci-fi world. He made up a new fucking language for it. And he ended up with Smurfs for Adult Treehuggers. Anyone that thinks they can make a smart Halo movie must have a Cinnabon sign hanging over their toilet. Why are they called Spartans? Because that derivative marketing bullshit just never dies.
|
|
|
Post by el woospo on Feb 5, 2014 10:53:10 GMT -5
Any actor that refuses to watch their own performances is a pretentious fuck. Yeah, your performance must be so fucking god-like that watching it would ruin your future performances entirely. Fuck you. I dunno, maybe go easy on him. Can you imagine if you watched your own films and realized you've been playing the same character every Tim Burton movie in a row? He might have some mental relapse and go into an emo fugue state...or worse: Go blackface. Another one: Whoever (if there ever is someone) who makes a Halo movie. Trying to insert intelligence into that series for a film takes one pretentious cunt because that series is about as smart as repeatedly smashing your head into a mailbox to check your Facebook. James Cameron dedicated years of his life to creating a deep, sci-fi world. He made up a new fucking language for it. And he ended up with Smurfs for Adult Treehuggers. Anyone that thinks they can make a smart Halo movie must have a Cinnabon sign hanging over their toilet. Why are they called Spartans? Because that derivative marketing bullshit just never dies. I think that watching yourself in a film in which you spent ages working on that you know the story inside and out and still know the dialogue would be a bore not to mention cringe worthy. I think it more of an egomaniac thing to want to watch your self on screen than to shy away from doing so.
|
|
|
Post by slendermaschine on Feb 8, 2014 1:48:18 GMT -5
I dunno, maybe go easy on him. Can you imagine if you watched your own films and realized you've been playing the same character every Tim Burton movie in a row? He might have some mental relapse and go into an emo fugue state...or worse: Go blackface. Another one: Whoever (if there ever is someone) who makes a Halo movie. Trying to insert intelligence into that series for a film takes one pretentious cunt because that series is about as smart as repeatedly smashing your head into a mailbox to check your Facebook. James Cameron dedicated years of his life to creating a deep, sci-fi world. He made up a new fucking language for it. And he ended up with Smurfs for Adult Treehuggers. Anyone that thinks they can make a smart Halo movie must have a Cinnabon sign hanging over their toilet. Why are they called Spartans? Because that derivative marketing bullshit just never dies. I think that watching yourself in a film in which you spent ages working on that you know the story inside and out and still know the dialogue would be a bore not to mention cringe worthy. I think it more of an egomaniac thing to want to watch your self on screen than to shy away from doing so. You're both right depending on context of why said individual is personally motivated (or not) to see themselves acting. For example, if it's to really analyze oneself on a critical level to try and improve, it's hard to fault that person for what is admittedly a very difficult endeavor to do not only from the standpoint of trying to remain as objective as possible, but the willingness to concede to one's own shortcomings as an actor. However, if you're someone presumably like Shia Lebeouff, then seeing oneself onscreen is just another masturbatory opportunity to indulge in the rose-smelling shit that said individual has convinced themself is reality. Spoiler to them: Their shit is not, in fact, rose-smelling in the slightest. Personally, I can honestly identify with the former mindset in terms of how difficult it would be to be self-critical because I have a tendency to be pretty unrelenting towards myself and my expectations. As for Mr. Depp, couldn't say because I don't know the bloke myself, but from what I've heard about him in one story I can only vaguely remember about him really going out of his way for fans, I'd at least like to think he isn't in real life a Hollywood shitbag.
|
|
|
Post by minasa on Feb 16, 2014 19:08:20 GMT -5
I think that watching yourself in a film in which you spent ages working on that you know the story inside and out and still know the dialogue would be a bore not to mention cringe worthy. I think it more of an egomaniac thing to want to watch your self on screen than to shy away from doing so. Cringe worthy? Hardly. I meant more towards the context of watching a single clip. Look at Jared, would it really bother him to watch a less than 20 seconds clip? It screams pretentiousness.
|
|
|
Post by el woospo on Feb 16, 2014 23:45:23 GMT -5
I think that watching yourself in a film in which you spent ages working on that you know the story inside and out and still know the dialogue would be a bore not to mention cringe worthy. I think it more of an egomaniac thing to want to watch your self on screen than to shy away from doing so. Cringe worthy? Hardly. I meant more towards the context of watching a single clip. Look at Jared, would it really bother him to watch a less than 20 seconds clip? It screams pretentiousness. I see what you're saying, the only answer I can give to not wanting to watch a short clip would be that due to the nature of publicity and promotion you would have already seen the same clip numerous times while on the 'campaign trail'. The cringe worthy part comes from my own point of view where I do not like even hearing the sound of my own voice in a recording never mind seeing me try to fool the masses into thinking I am someone else.
|
|