But it looked great on paper...

[balmakboor]

I'd like people to share movies that had them excited like crazy as they waited the many long months for their release only to be disappointed, really disappointed.

Example: I was going nuts with anticipation for Lynch's Dune. I had fan magazines that I wore out flipping through the pages. I re-read the novel imagining all the goodness. I played it over and over in my head how, with this material and this director and this cast, nothing could go wrong. Then I went to opening night and cowered in fear -- and probably shed a tear or two -- over what I saw.

I know my younger daughter had this experience recently with Twilight. She had had the movie poster on her wall for weeks. Returning home from the movie, down it came and out with the trash.

My recent surprising enjoyment of Zardoz made me wonder. How many people did this movie affect in this way? Were they thinking Sean Connery plus the guy who made Deliverance plus futuristic sci-fi similar to Planet of the Apes, this is gonna be soooo awesome? Did they walk out never to be able to watch Dr. No with a straight face ever again?

[D_Davis]

Underworld

On paper, vampires + werewolves X fighting each other = awesome

In reality = terrible and boring

[balmakboor]

Underworld

On paper, vampires + werewolves X fighting each other = awesome

In reality = terrible and boring

One thing that could come out of this thread is ideas for scripts. You know, really great ideas like vampires and werewolves tearing into each other that failed the first time due to shitty execution. Give it another go by writing the movie you wish it had been.

[Grouchy]

One thing that could come out of this thread is ideas for scripts. You know, really great ideas like vampires and werewolves tearing into each other that failed the first time due to shitty execution. Give it another go by writing the movie you wish it had been.
My first short movie is about vampires and werewolves tearing into each other over a pool game.

I should really post it (and my other stuff) on YouTube.

[Sycophant]

Abba musical.

:sad:

[megladon8]

Underworld

On paper, vampires + werewolves X fighting each other = awesome

In reality = terrible and boring


Great pick. I also thought the whole "Romeo & Juliet with vampires and werewolves" aspect could have led to something interesting.

For a very recent pick, I'll say Punisher: War Zone.

"Let's make an uber-stylized, supremely violent Punisher movie based loosely on the works of Garth Ennis. We'll have various thugs playing up gang-stereotypes, all coming together as cannon fodder for a new, super badass Punisher. And let's get that guy from "The Wire" to play Jigsaw!"

[Raiders]

Abba musical.

:sad:

DNQ.

[Sycophant]

DNQ.

No, no, no. Check this out.

1) Abba
2) Musical

Should be at least decent.

[Watashi]

Most Asian films.

Casshern would fit that bill quite nicely.

[megladon8]

Most Asian films.

Casshern would fit that bill quite nicely.


If that movie had been 15 minutes long, and just a compilation of the action sequences, it would probably be in my top 20.

[Fezzik]

Cloverfield

[Spinal]

Man on the Moon springs to mind. How could the same team that made a great movie about Larry Flynt make such a lame one about Andy Kaufman?

Also, For Your Consideration. Still mystified as to what happened there.

[number8]

Crank.

[Robby P]

Artificial Intelligence

[DavidSeven]

Artificial Intelligence

Thread closed.

[megladon8]

I thought A.I. was pretty great.

[Sycophant]

Most Asian films.What the hell.

[Stay Puft]

Most Western films.

Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow would fit that bill quite nicely.

[Sycophant]

Fuck. Most films.

[Stay Puft]

That was a tag team effort.

But I did actually come into the thread to post Sky Captain. I was excited for that one, loved the concept, and found it aggressively mediocre in execution at best. Completely lousy at worst.

[megladon8]

Most modern Western films.


Fixed.

[Sycophant]

I believe by "Western," Mr. Puft meant "not Eastern."

And at any rate, I'm sure most old Westerns sucked, too, and we just don't watch them any more.

[Sycophant]

Oh, and Mr. Puft, let me know if you ever wanna tag team Wats again.

[Winston*]

Sky Captain is one of the most boring films I've ever seen in theatres.

[D_Davis]

Most films Watashi likes.

Hook would fit that bill quite nicely.

[megladon8]

I believe by "Western," Mr. Puft meant "not Eastern."

And at any rate, I'm sure most old Westerns sucked, too, and we just don't watch them any more.


I don't think this just applies to westerns.

A good portion of movies in general, from any decade, suck.

[Sycophant]

We are not in disagreement.

[D_Davis]

Sturgeon's Law: 99% of everything is crap.

Luckily, there are enough good films in that 1% to watch - too many to watch in a single life time.

[soitgoes...]

Oh, and Mr. Puft, let me know if you ever wanna tag team Wats again.
Gayest sentence ever?

[balmakboor]

I thought A.I. was pretty great.

So did I, but I realized long ago that most people thought it sucked elephant balls.

[megladon8]

So did I, but I realized long ago that most people thought it sucked elephant balls.


Yeah I know its rep, I was just throwing in my two cents :)

I thought it was the perfect mix of Kubrick's warped-ness and Spielberg's cuddliness.

[balmakboor]

I would toss Sukiyaki Western Django into the ring. God I thought it would at least be a lot of stupid, stylish fun.

[balmakboor]

Yeah I know its rep, I was just throwing in my two cents :)

I thought it was the perfect mix of Kubrick's warped-ness and Spielberg's cuddliness.

I actually spent an entire year discussing and arguing with people about it on the Dreamworks fansite. Fun year actually.

[M.R.Yogi]

Army of Darkness. I was a huge Evil Dead II fan and had been looking forward to this movie for what felt like years (as I remember its release was delayed a long time). I left that theater very disappointed. I didn't dislike the movie but it seemed like such a letdown compared to what I was expecting (something much darker and gorier).

[D_Davis]

I thought Sukiyaki Western Django would be awesome, and it ended up being really, really awesome.

The original Django I would add to the list.

[D_Davis]

Army of Darkness. I was a huge Evil Dead II fan and had been looking forward to this movie for what felt like years (as I remember its release was delayed a long time). I left that theater very disappointed. I didn't dislike the movie but it seemed like such a letdown compared to what I was expecting (something much darker and gorier).

Word.

AoD is actually quite terrible. This is also the point when the Cult of Campbell grew to out of control proportions.

[number8]

Synecdoche, NY.

[Sycophant]

The Rug Cop and The World Sinks Except Japan. Will Minoru Kawasaki ever do any good outside of Calamari Wrestler? :sad:

[Bosco B Thug]

I've gotten over The Haunting 1999, it's been a decade. The Ring Two still hurts, though.

[megladon8]

I've gotten over The Haunting 1999, it's been a decade.

Yeah, talk about butchering an American classic.



The Ring Two still hurts, though.

I never saw this, but would it be sacrelig. of me to say that the first The Ring was pretty good?

[Spinal]

Fierce Creatures.

[megladon8]

Fierce Creatures.


UGH. Good one.

I bought this for my parents last summer because they'd been on a kick of watching A Fish Called Wanda about 4 times in two weeks.

What a piece of trash. Who knew getting so many great comedic actors together in a semi-sequel to one of the best comedies of the 80s would be such a disaster?

[Ezee E]

Sergio Leone's WWII movie, Stalingrad. So great on paper it never even happened.

[Bosco B Thug]

Yeah, talk about butchering an American classic.




I never saw this, but would it be sacrelig. of me to say that the first The Ring was pretty good?
I had a strange, almost fanboy-ish appreciation of this film back in 2002. The love has faded, but I still think it's quite above average and not without some glimmers of depth from the script and the yet-to-improve-himself Gore Verbinski's handling of it. I prefer it to the Japanese original, too, so nah, not sacrilege for me.

The Ring Two is pretty sucky, though. Particularly disappointing since Hideo Nakata directed it, and it has the elements of evocative thematics and imagery.

[megladon8]

I, too, think I prefer Verbinski's The Ring to the original Japanese film.

This is due in large part to the fact that I saw Verbinski's film first.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Alien 3.

I actually love the idea of removing weapons, sticking Ripley on a dead planet, killing off her surrogate family. I think the prison planet is a smart compromise between the initial wacky (and stupid) wooden planet idea and the series' previous settings. I like them making a drama/tragedy out of Ripley's relationship with the aliens.

But she doesn't act like a protagonist, her cohorts are interchangeable screamers, the alien effects are weak. Why the eff is Dutton making the big speeches at the end instead of Ripley? Why is she so willfully suicidal? How did TWO aliens stow away on the ship? Why is she jumping into the sack with Clemens?

Now I'm pissed off again.

Also: Spielberg's War of the Worlds. Seems like a no-brainer, until you see it and realize it has literally no brain.

[megladon8]

Alien 3.

I actually love the idea of removing weapons, sticking Ripley on a dead planet, killing off her surrogate family. I think the prison planet is a smart compromise between the initial wacky (and stupid) wooden planet idea and the series' previous settings. I like them making a drama/tragedy out of Ripley's relationship with the aliens.

But she doesn't act like a protagonist, her cohorts are interchangeable screamers, the alien effects are weak. Why the eff is Dutton making the big speeches at the end instead of Ripley? Why is she so willfully suicidal? How did TWO aliens stow away on the ship? Why is she jumping into the sack with Clemens?

Now I'm pissed off again.

The only thing that bothered me here was Ripley jumping in the sack with Clemens so quickly.

Other than that, none of what you wrote was "negative" to me :(



Also: Spielberg's War of the Worlds. Seems like a no-brainer, until you see it and realize it has literally no brain.

While it's not a very good movie at all, I did find it effectively horrifying.

It made the idea of an alien invasion kind of scary again.

[Sycophant]

More specifically, those computer-generated birds in War of the Worlds. With all those awesome-looking tripod alien invader things, a couple CG birds probably seemed like a great idea on paper.

[chrisnu]

Bubba Ho-Tep. It's still pretty good.

[Rowland]

I had a strange, almost fanboy-ish appreciation of this film back in 2002. The love has faded, but I still think it's quite above average and not without some glimmers of depth from the script and the yet-to-improve-himself Gore Verbinski's handling of it. I prefer it to the Japanese original, too, so nah, not sacrilege for me.Ditto. I loved it at the time, and I still like it a lot, being one of the more deserving recent mainstream horror successes. I prefer it as well to Nakata's original, which I generally liked but struck me as overrated. In some respects, I actually found his sequel, the much-maligned Ringu 2, a more unsettling experience. While I'm at it, Ringu 0 sucked, barring an utterly bonkers climax, my favorite Nakata picture is easily Dark Water, which also had an underrated remake, and The Ring Two sucked hard, from which only the admittedly neat climax left a lasting impression amidst all the tedious melodrama.

[megladon8]

I liked Dark Water a lot, too. Never saw the remake, despite Jennifer Connelly being super yummy.

I was incredibly disappointed by Takashi Shimizu's Ju-On: The Curse and Ju-On: The Grudge.

Neither were frightening. I found them both kind of boring, actually.

But this is making me want to revisit them.

[Russ]

Spielberg's Hook (and to a lesser degree, 1941, although there's lots in that one to like).

[Pop Trash]

Hmmm a few from last year: Be Kind Rewind, Teeth, and Zack and Miri Make a Porno come to mind. Actually, Be Kind Rewind wasn't bad but that was like my most anticipated movie of last year.

[megladon8]

Hmmm a few from last year: Be Kind Rewind, Teeth, and Zack and Miri Make a Porno come to mind.


Yes.

Huge disappointment.

[Spinal]

Teeth is a film that looked awful on paper and then actually turned out to be pretty good.

[megladon8]

Teeth is a film that looked awful on paper and then actually turned out to be pretty good.


Really?

I thought they took a premise that could have been shocking and provocative and made it as vanilla as can be.

[Pop Trash]

Teeth is a film that looked awful on paper and then actually turned out to be pretty good.
What is it? Opposite day?

[lovejuice]

my favorite Nakata picture is easily Dark Water, which also had an underrated remake.


I liked Dark Water a lot, too. Never saw the remake, despite Jennifer Connelly being super yummy.

agree with these statements. dark water is awesome, perhaps my favorite j-horror. and JC is indeed yummy.

second anyone who says hook. how can a picture about a grown up peter pan turn out to be that?

[Rowland]

I liked Dark Water a lot, too. Never saw the remake, despite Jennifer Connelly being super yummy.You should check it out.


I was incredibly disappointed by Takashi Shimizu's Ju-On: The Curse and Ju-On: The Grudge.

Neither were frightening. I found them both kind of boring, actually.

But this is making me want to revisit them.Both work for me primarily through atmosphere, imbued as they are with a chilly, lo-fi aura that works with the nightmare logic of their fractured narratives to produce an unnerving vibe, and he has an eye for horror imagery that effectively fuses the surreal with the mundane, giving his sometimes-junky fondness for shock scares an added oomph. That said, I have mixed feelings for both, especially Ju-On: The Grudge, which isn't really that much better than its also-mediocre American remake. Speaking of which, I like the remake sequel more than the remake, which doesn't appear to be an awfully common perspective. Same goes for the Japanese sequel Ju-On: The Grudge 2, which is actually really cool.

[Spinal]

What is it? Opposite day?

You tell me. The premise was about a girl with teeth in her vagina. You're telling me that sounds like it would make a great movie?

[Melville]

You tell me. The premise was about a girl with teeth in her vagina. You're telling me that sounds like it would make a great movie?
I'd say that sounds like it could make for a good surrealist movie along the lines of Eraserhead, dealing with horror of the body and sexuality (both from the girl's perspective, horrified by her own body, and from her lovers', horrified by female sexuality). What was the actual movie like?

[Bosco B Thug]

Ditto. I loved it at the time, and I still like it a lot, being one of the more deserving recent mainstream horror successes. I prefer it as well to Nakata's original, which I generally liked but struck me as overrated. In some respects, I actually found his sequel, the much-maligned Ringu 2, a more unsettling experience. While I'm at it, Ringu 0 sucked, barring an utterly bonkers climax, my favorite Nakata picture is easily Dark Water, which also had an underrated remake, and The Ring Two sucked hard, from which only the admittedly neat climax left a lasting impression amidst all the tedious melodrama. Don't remember too much about Ringu 2, but yes, Ring 0 was pretty useless and Dark Water is probably his best. Drags a bit.


I liked Dark Water a lot, too. Never saw the remake, despite Jennifer Connelly being super yummy. Its promises of wet Jennifer Connelly is almost absurdly guaranteed, especially if you've any degree of exposure to any promotional material, but the film is also pretty useless.


I was incredibly disappointed by Takashi Shimizu's Ju-On: The Curse and Ju-On: The Grudge.

Neither were frightening. I found them both kind of boring, actually.

But this is making me want to revisit them. No, no, they were boring. :)

Well, The Curse is short enough and has a shocker ending built up to well enough to overcome some dud scenes like the one in the school, but gah, The Grudge's space-time rift/whatever-the-hell climax, use of flashbacks, and lame attempt to be apocalyptic is just snore-inducing.

[Melville]

Oh, and my pick would be Gangs of New York, though I know a lot of people on here love it. Scorsese doing a movie about the symbolic past of America, filled with gangs and riots and Daniel Day-Lewis...it should have been so much better.

[Bosco B Thug]

Speaking of which, I like the remake sequel more than the remake, which doesn't appear to be an awfully common perspective. Really really? The Grudge 2 was the bottom-of-the-barrel for this franchise, I could see the sleaze dripping from the screen as I watched, and I saw it in the theater so teenage pheromones were also stuffing up the atmosphere.

Well, a DTV sequel is coming out soon, so the bottom is yet to be seen, probably.

[Rowland]

Well, The Curse is short enough and has a shocker ending built up to well enough to overcome some dud scenes like the one in the schoolYeah, the school segment is easily its weakest, and the segment with the family that ends with the girl's jaw being missing is almost ruined by the ridiculously cheap special effects. The climax is definitely a heart-stopper though.

[Raiders]

Jurassic Park

Director of Jaws + Michael Crichton + dinosaurs = meeeeeeeeh

[chrisnu]

Stephen King's It. Other than Tim Curry, blech.

[Rowland]

Really really? The Grudge 2 was the bottom-of-the-barrel for this franchise, I could see the sleaze dripping from the screen as I watched, and I saw it in the theater so teenage pheromones were also stuffing up the atmosphere.Indeed, I sorta enjoyed the sleaze, as it was obviously made with a cheekier spirit than the rest of the series. It wasn't really scary at all, but the fragmented storytelling essentially rendering the viral hauntings on a globalized scale is oddly satisfying as pure pulp, contrasted with a hopelessly melancholic, irrevocably apocalyptic vibe of the sort I know you found cheesy in Ju-On: The Grudge. It's one of Shimizu's more polished efforts on a visual level as well. Mind you, I'm not really arguing that it's particularly good, but I liked more than I disliked. *shrug*

[Rowland]

Well, a DTV sequel is coming out soon, so the bottom is yet to be seen, probably.I have moderate hopes for this, given that it's directed by Toby Wilkins, who was behind last year's hotly buzzed Splinter.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Stephen King's It. Other than Tim Curry, blech.

Be honest: a TV movie based on It is as unsatisfying on paper as it is on the screen.

[Bosco B Thug]

Yeah, the school segment is easily its weakest, and the segment with the family that ends with the girl's jaw being missing is almost ruined by the ridiculously cheap special effects. Thinking back on it, it's got three solid moments in addition to the climax. Jaw girl, attic girl, and the first sequence with the cat boy I was pretty enamored by first viewing. That's a pretty good scare-to-length ratio for a Juon film.


Jurassic Park

Director of Jaws + Michael Crichton + dinosaurs = meeeeeeeeh Yeah... Yeah. Yeah!

This film has such a strong, fervent sentimental hold on many the young film fan, it's nice to hear the critical perspective from the general public now and then.


Indeed, I sorta enjoyed the sleaze, as it was obviously made with a cheekier spirit than the rest of the series.

It's one of Shimizu's more polished efforts on a visual level as well. When the Theresa Russell character came out in pink underwear and then went on to wet herself not too much later, I knew I was watching a new breed of Grudge film. But yes, power to ya, though for the record, I can't think of one "attack" in that film I'd call quality. Maybe Kayako creeping out of the black room chemical bin, postured and looking like an overgrown toad. That was pretty creepy.


I have moderate hopes for this, given that it's directed by Toby Wilkins, who was behind last year's hotly buzzed Splinter. Hmm, didn't know that. Despite my critical posture, I probably can't resist seeing some cheap new Ju-on scares.

[Spun Lepton]

Be honest: a TV movie based on It is as unsatisfying on paper as it is on the screen.

I quite liked the book.

The TV movie, not so much.

[D_Davis]

I like both of the Japanese Ju-On films quite a bit, especially the second one.

I much prefer them over the Ring films.

[Mara]

I really thought The Island would be awesome. And it was painfully bad.

V for Vendetta wasn't bad, but I really thought it would be extraordinary.

[chrisnu]

Be honest: a TV movie based on It is as unsatisfying on paper as it is on the screen.
They didn't have the money to do it justice. In the process, they completely changed the nature of It. He comes across as a clown who likes to screw with kids, and nothing more. The Ritual of Chud could not have been executed more poorly.

[Qrazy]

Yeah... Yeah. Yeah!

This film has such a strong, fervent sentimental hold on many the young film fan, it's nice to hear the critical perspective from the general public now and then.

I can assure you Raiders is not the general public nor is his opinion representative of the general public's.

[Amnesiac]

Jurassic Park is great.

[Sycophant]

I can assure you Raiders is not the general public nor is his opinion representative of the general public's.

Yeah, if that was about Jurassic Park 3, I guess I could see it, but that statement baffled me.

[megladon8]

Jurassic Park is great.


Amen.

[[ETM]]

I really thought The Island would be awesome.

How come?

[Raiders]

I have described my overall ambivalence to Spielberg's dino film many times before. Suffice to say besides being technically brilliant, I find little to like. I think it gets its kicks off too quickly and by the end, I am not even awed by the site of a T-Rex but rather thinking how he was just used as a convenient plot device.

[Mara]

;154408']How come?

Because I love science fiction films about dystopian futures, and I think Ewan McGregor and Scarlett Johanssen are both talented and attractive. I was hoping for a fun, cheesy, "Logan's Run" type of film.

Obviously, Michael Bay should have tipped me off to the actual quality involved, but I was young and foolish.

[Spinal]

Logan's Run is a good film for this thread actually.

[Mara]

Logan's Run is a good film for this thread actually.

I defend Logan's Run.

Fun fun fun.

[Bosco B Thug]

I can assure you Raiders is not the general public nor is his opinion representative of the general public's. I just meant "general public" as in someone in the public, as in outside of my physical being, is all. I mean, nah, I've no credence in the opinions of the general general public.

[balmakboor]

Hmmm a few from last year: Be Kind Rewind, Teeth, and Zack and Miri Make a Porno come to mind. Actually, Be Kind Rewind wasn't bad but that was like my most anticipated movie of last year.

Yes, Teeth was an unbelievable waste of a great concept. I actually think about writing my own version -- if I wasn't so damn lazy of course.

[Grouchy]

You tell me. The premise was about a girl with teeth in her vagina. You're telling me that sounds like it would make a great movie?
I've already seen the movie, and it still sounds awesome-on-paper to me.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Jurassic Park is a proficient thrill-ride, but it has no interest in the ideas of Crichton's novel, and its characters vary from the superficial (Malcolm) to the cliche (Grant and his daddy issues) to the forgotten (Sattler).

As cold-blooded spectacle, it works beautifully. As a full embrace of the story it purports to be about, Jurassic Park is disappointingly evasive.

[The Mike]

Something mentioned earlier in this thread made me go "Oh man, that one! THAT ONE!" - but I forgot what it was by the time I made it here. Good discussion.

Oh, I'll add Balls of Fury. I was certain Walken could make that golden. :sad:

EDIT: The one I agreed with was The Haunting '99. I remember being giddy going to the theater for that one, so excited for the return of the haunted house flick. Sat in the front row pumped, was making fun of it so much with a friend that we missed the money shot that was the only good thing in the flick.

(And, to a minimal extent...the original The Haunting fits this too. Forking voiceover. :evil:)

[lovejuice]

They didn't have the money to do it justice. In the process, they completely changed the nature of It. He comes across as a clown who likes to screw with kids, and nothing more. The Ritual of Chud could not have been executed more poorly.
indeed? i find it pretty much resemble the novel. granted, both are pretty vague in my memory.

[transmogrifier]

V for Vendetta wasn't bad, but I really thought it would be extraordinary.

To steal from Winston*, this is one of the most boring films I've ever seen at the theatre. It is so incredibly dull.

[eternity]

The Dark Knight owns this thread for me.

Watchmen and Paycheck (wtf) are up there too.

[Winston*]

Brothers Grimm

[monolith94]

Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings. I walked out of the theater with a grim look on my face, and I returned to the world, if only a shattered man.

[Watashi]

Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings. I walked out of the theater with a grim look on my face, and I returned to the world, if only a shattered man.

:crazy:

[Ivan Drago]

I have one from personal experience:

In my Writing the Short Film class I wrote a fucked-up script about a couple - they love each other so much they believe their doctor at the mental institution they're in is trying to split them apart. They try to escape but are cornered. In the "we live together, we die together" mentality, the male in the couple kills the girl and himself, but it's revealed at the end that he is schizophrenic - there is no girlfriend, it's all himself.

It literally looked great on paper (I thought). Then it was workshopped in class.

[D_Davis]

The Island is awesome.

[transmogrifier]

The Island is awesome.

Awesome is pushing it, but it is easily - easily - Bay's best film.

[Qrazy]

Brothers Grimm

Good call.

---

City of Lost Children

[lovejuice]

Awesome is pushing it, but it is easily - easily - Bay's best film.
i second this, weirdly enough.

[Dead & Messed Up]

(And, to a minimal extent...the original The Haunting fits this too. Forking voiceover. :evil:)

:evil:

I'm going to track you down and murder you, and the spectators will ask what happened, and the detective will pull out his cigar, shake his head, and mutter, "If only we knew...if only..."

[eternity]

The Island is probably his worst film, I would think. Bay is best when he isn't trying to be substantive, and when he does, it just gets all the more painful.

[The Mike]

:evil:

I'm going to track you down and murder you, and the spectators will ask what happened, and the detective will pull out his cigar, shake his head, and mutter, "If only we knew...if only..."

There will be spectators? I'm in! :pritch:

(Or, I could say that the minimal extent I refer to is that, while the voiceover serves a purpose and is well written (y'know, great on paper)....my re-viewings through the years have led me to think I just really hate Julie Harris' voice in the role.)

[lovejuice]

The Island is probably his worst film, I would think. Bay is best when he isn't trying to be substantive, and when he does, it just gets all the more painful.
actually i think he's worst when he is trying to be funny.

[Teh Sausage]

Yeah, I can't stand Jurassic Park. I tried to watch it a few months ago and had to turn it off because it was so nauseatingly schematic. Unlike the characters in Spielberg's better blockbusters, no one feels like true human beings, just pawns with certain skills that serve the narrative in some way (such as the girl's computer hacking skills). To me, it's like an empty exercise in trying to thrill the audience as much as it can, but Spielberg's techniques lack the wit and innovation of say, Psycho (Hitchcock's 'practical joke') that they just don't work - like when they're climbing the electric fence, and the film cuts to Laura Dern playing with the circuit breakers. The part where the camera dramatically zooms in to the switch that'll turn on the electric fence (and it's the very last switch too!) was so cliched and contrived, I faceplamed and turned the film off there.

I'm sure many are tired of hearing people accuse Spielberg of being 'manipulative', and generally this aspect of his films don't bother me, but the manipulations here were far too overt for me.

[B-side]

V for Vendetta owns this thread. I still don't hate it, but it could've been truly great. Also, Masumura's Blind Beast. Sounded brilliantly intriguing on paper, ended up pretty meh.

[Mara]

The Island is probably his worst film, I would think. Bay is best when he isn't trying to be substantive, and when he does, it just gets all the more painful.

By this logic, Pearl Harbor would be his worst film.

And Pearl Harbor belongs in this thread, too.

[balmakboor]

As messy as it is, I actually prefer Lost World Jurassic Park to the first Jurassic Park. It is darker and has more dinosaurs and has more to say.

[DavidSeven]

I remember when Jackie Brown originally came out. Tarantino just a few years off Pulp Fiction. Robert. De. Niro. Sam Jackson reprising his role as Jules Winnfield. Pam Grier. Chris Tucker, when he was just known as the funny guy from Friday. Bridget Fonda looking smoking hot. Batman.

I don't think I've ever been as excited for a film. I like it a lot, but I'm pretty sure I was expecting the end of all cinema at the time.

[NickGlass]

I have one from personal experience:

In my Writing the Short Film class I wrote a fucked-up script about a couple - they love each other so much they believe their doctor at the mental institution they're in is trying to split them apart. They try to escape but are cornered. In the "we live together, we die together" mentality, the male in the couple kills the girl and himself, but it's revealed at the end that he is schizophrenic - there is no girlfriend, it's all himself.

It literally looked great on paper (I thought). Then it was workshopped in class.

That sounds terrible on paper.

"The only idea more overused than serial killers is multiple personality."
"Mom said it was 'psychologically taut.'"

[Ezee E]

That sounds terrible on paper.



Yeah. Sorry Drago.

[Ezee E]

I remember when Jackie Brown originally came out. Tarantino just a few years off Pulp Fiction. Robert. De. Niro. Sam Jackson reprising his role as Jules Winnfield. Pam Grier. Chris Tucker, when he was just known as the funny guy from Friday. Bridget Fonda looking smoking hot. Batman.

I don't think I've ever been as excited for a film. I like it a lot, but I'm pretty sure I was expecting the end of all cinema at the time.
Still love the movie, but I can imagine that some were initially disappointed.

And Bridget Fonda was smoking hot there.

[number8]

I'd say that sounds like it could make for a good surrealist movie along the lines of Eraserhead, dealing with horror of the body and sexuality (both from the girl's perspective, horrified by her own body, and from her lovers', horrified by female sexuality). What was the actual movie like?
Like that.

It's one of the best movies of 2008.

[number8]

In regards to V For Vendetta, what are we referring to when we say on paper here?

Is it the book? Cause if so, then yes, in paper form, it's a great great great brilliant story. :P

[Dead & Messed Up]

By this logic, Pearl Harbor would be his worst film.

And Pearl Harbor belongs in this thread, too.

On paper, Pearl Harbor was unattractive. On film, it was reprehensible.

[Rowland]

Awesome is pushing it, but it is easily - easily - Bay's best film.Thank you. I don't think too much of The Island, but I find it more watchable than anything else Bay has released. The high level of venom spewed over this followed by the surprisingly warm embrace of his outright shitty follow-up with Transformers frankly baffled me. The Island is one of those movies I know I'm not supposed to like, so I think I convinced myself I disliked it more than I actually did.

Same goes for Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle and The Hills Have Eyes, other slick mainstream entertainments I think I may have tried to hate but really didn't.

[Mara]

I never saw Transformers.

I cannot imagine any insane confluence of events that would convince me to do so.

[Rowland]

City of Lost ChildrenYes. For all the artful visuals and inventive touches, I found this nearly sleep-inducing. I'll take Alien Resurrection almost any day.

[number8]

I can't think of a single redeeming thing about The Island. Even Buscemi was terrible in it.

[Raiders]

Yeah, The Island is awful. Not as offensive as Bad Boys II, but still uber-lame. It is the most disappointing of Bay's film because while all the rest I expected to suck, and they did, this one had a premise I liked and it was his "breaking away" from Bruckheimer, which I thought maybe might show he had a more artful side than we had seen before. He did, and does not, and I was literally bummed the entire time I sat through the wretched mess.

[Mara]

Yes. For all the artful visuals and inventive touches, I found this nearly sleep-inducing. I'll take Alien Resurrection almost any day.

Aw, I loved The City of Lost Children.

[Grouchy]

Huh, Transformers is definitively better than The Island.

I can't imagine why you people claim it isn't.

[Rowland]

Huh, Transformers is definitively better than The Island.

I can't imagine why you people claim it isn't.Worse action/writing/pacing/acting, and while The Island is thematically underdeveloped and ideologically icky, the sheer, relentless stupidity of Transformers hurt worse, in addition to being just as ugly, if not more so, in its pandering ideology.

[Ivan Drago]

Yeah. Sorry Drago.

Eh, don't worry about it. It sounded worse when it was read aloud in class, trust me. But it was my first-ever script, so my writing can go nowhere but up.

[MadMan]

Jurassic Park is a proficient thrill-ride, but it has no interest in the ideas of Crichton's novel, and its characters vary from the superficial (Malcolm) to the cliche (Grant and his daddy issues) to the forgotten (Sattler).

As cold-blooded spectacle, it works beautifully. As a full embrace of the story it purports to be about, Jurassic Park is disappointingly evasive.As much as I love JP, I can actually agree with the second half of this post. And yet, I still love the movie and I call it great. Go figure :P

Grant had daddy issues? What? I've seen the movie 20 some times and I don't recall that being in there. Guess I'll have to watch it again (my old VHS copy is going to die sometime, heh). Can't say I found Sattler to be really forgotten or Malcom to be all that superficial. If anything while they toned down/shortened Malcolm's rhetoric most of his main chaos theory ideas were still left in there, anyways.

Nothing really comes to mind in regards to the question at hand. I guess I was really disappointed by Spiderman(2002), but I can't say that I found the whole thing that exciting on paper. Maybe I'll come back with an answer later.

[megladon8]

Michael Bay's best is still The Rock, for me.

[Mara]

Michael Bay's best is still The Rock, for me.

Okay, but, do you consider it a good film overall?

Or is being his "best" like getting slapped in the face instead of burned at the stake?

[megladon8]

Okay, but, do you consider it a good film overall?

Or is being his "best" like getting slapped in the face instead of burned at the stake?


I think The Rock is a pretty great action movie. Wouldn't make any "favorites" lists or anything, though.

Cage and Connery went together pretty well, and Ed Harris was a good villain.

[Mara]

From my point of view, I've only seen three of his films and they'd all rank one star: The Island, Pearl Harbor, and Armageddon.

[Sycophant]

Okay, but, do you consider it a good film overall?

Or is being his "best" like getting slapped in the face instead of burned at the stake?

I've actually only seen one Michael Bay film (need to watch more before I can really opine on the man's work and style), but I would rather be burned at the stake than watch Pearl Harbor again.

[Qrazy]

Michael Bay's best is still The Rock, for me.

Yeah, this is correct.

[transmogrifier]

The raptors with guns idea for JP4. Totally fucked it up by not actually making it.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Grant had daddy issues?

He feared being a father. Father-son tensions are at the heart of almost all of Spielberg's flicks, to the point that it's become a cliche.

[lovejuice]

and Ed Harris was a good villain.
not only does i hate ed harris in that movie, but i also hate bay's concept of what constitutes "a good three-dimensional villain." by not actually having enough gut to kill the innocent doesn't make harris's character any better, only wimpier. (hounsou's in the island is weirdly enough a better version of harris's.)

i agree with connery/cage duo. in fact, the rock might be the last good connery's movie.

[M.R.Yogi]

Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings. I walked out of the theater with a grim look on my face, and I returned to the world, if only a shattered man.I loved Dead Alive and Heavenly Creatures and was quite enamored with LOTR (even though I'd only read it once years ago). So to learn that Peter Jackson was making three epic-length LOTR movies, man, I think that's the most excited I've ever been for any movie. In anticipation of the release of Fellowship of the Rings I re-read all three books. I think that more than anything is what caused me to be so disappointed ... if I'd seen the movies with the books just a fuzzy memory then maybe (possibly) I'd have enjoyed them. But with the books fresh in my mind, with my own mental constructs of those characters and that world, yeah, I didn't like those movies much at all.

[Amnesiac]

The raptors with guns idea for JP4. Totally fucked it up by not actually making it.

This is an interesting opinion.

[Sycophant]

This is an interesting opinion.

It is also a correct opinion.

[bac0n]

Roland Emmerich's steaming turd of a Godzilla.

I win.

[The Mike]

Roland Emmerich's steaming turd of a Godzilla.

I win.

Didn't want to bring it up. :cry:

[Qrazy]

Roland Emmerich's steaming turd of a Godzilla.

I win.

Jamming a knife into an ignition in order to turn the car on... does not look good on paper.

[Amnesiac]

It is also a correct opinion.

Nah. Well, probably not. We'll never know.

[number8]

It is also a correct opinion.

As far as I'm concerned, it is the only opinion.

[[ETM]]

As far as I'm concerned, it is the only opinion.

"Honey, which wallpapers do you think we should get?"

"Raptors with guns."





Works for me.

[bac0n]

;154942']"Honey, which wallpapers do you think we should get?"

"Raptors with guns."





Works for me.

Well, DUH.. I mean, how awesome would it be to have a house with THIS plastered on all the walls?

http://wicked3.files.wordpress.com/2006/11/dinowar-1.jpg

[Mara]

I like to wander around and post this picture in response to the last picture.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v254/maragirl/TRexJet.jpg

[Amnesiac]

Wow. Deja vu. And I feel more outnumbered now than I did in the Tree Of Life thread.

[[ETM]]

http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/4125/1187167184421ro16552657jx2.jpg

[MadMan]

He feared being a father. Father-son tensions are at the heart of almost all of Spielberg's flicks, to the point that it's become a cliche.Oh, that. Of course. And heh yep Spielberg is obessed with daddy issues. Its even spread to shows like Lost on TV.

I heartily approve of the posting of pictures featuring dinosaurs armed with guns :lol:

[balmakboor]

Oh, that. Of course. And heh yep Spielberg is obessed with daddy issues. Its even spread to shows like Lost on TV.

I've always considered the mother/son issues as taking center stage.

[MadMan]

I've always considered the mother/son issues as taking center stage.Really? In Jurassic Park? Explain.

[Qrazy]

Really? In Jurassic Park? Explain.

The raptors are the sons and the T-Rex is the mother and they don't get along very well.

[balmakboor]

Really? In Jurassic Park? Explain.

Actually, I meant in his work in general.

The Puer archetype has certain qualities: strong, all-encompassing mothers; weak, damaged, absent fathers; fear of commitment and being strapped down; they typically prefer to fly high above the ground, a metaphor for fear of commitment; often womanizers; puers (also known as eternal boys) are also very juvenile, even infantile

Duel - strong mother/wife figure forces him to deal with his weak masculine nature by fighting the bully

Sugarland Express - the mother (Hawn) is the strong figure

Jaws - the wife is the strong figure forcing him to face the shark (same structure as Duel really)

Close Encounters - mother/son story; Roy flees from responsibility, chops off his dick and ends up in the womb of the mother ship

1941 - not as focused as other works but it does have the infantile Belushi barely touching ground; a juvenile general watching Dumbo; general juvenile humor; a couple who can only get it on while in flight

Raiders - pretty much the same as 1941

E.T. - strong mother, absent father

Temple of Doom - very much in the 1941 vein

The Color Purple - strong women/weak, damaged, castrated men

Last Crusade - I'll grant this as a father/son story but there is an emphasis on both falling fatally for the same type of woman

Always - strongest character is woman; angel is female

Hook - it is the puer story

Jurassic Park - dinosaurs are all female, the creator guy is weak

Schindler's List - Schindler is a classic puer watching from hilltops and womanizing and fearing commitment until he gets sucked into something bigger

Lost World - mother saves her baby (son?) as the centerpiece

Amistad - I can't remember Amistad

Saving Private Ryan - fly to Neverland to bring back the lost boys so their mothers won't have to collapse in tears; weak fathers are responsible for the boys being there; Ryan doesn't want to return (it's like Peter Pan in different clothes really)

AI - boy, Mother, weak-damaged father, boy ends up in womb at end

Minority Report - strong mother/weak father on multiple levels; "everybody runs" also appeals to the puer archetype

Catch Me If You Can - strong mother, weak father, fear of commitment, constantly on the run, often in flight (I'll point out that every time I can think of, the airline used in a Spielberg movie is Pan Am.)

The Terminal - I always thought of the airport as a womb that he is afraid to leave but, I don't know, I can hardly remember the movie

War of the Worlds - weak, divorced father; can't remember much else

Munich - I need to see this again

Kingdom of the Crystal Skull - I forgot this on purpose

[Dead & Messed Up]

Actually, I meant in his work in general.

The Puer archetype has certain qualities: strong, all-encompassing mothers; weak, damaged, absent fathers; fear of commitment and being strapped down; they typically prefer to fly high above the ground, a metaphor for fear of commitment; often womanizers; puers (also known as eternal boys) are also very juvenile, even infantile

Very cool that you brought this up. I'd never heard of this archetype, and it does seem to fit in to Spielberg's interests. Still, I can't help but think that Spielberg's characters, while "puer" characters, seem more invested in relationships with fathers/sons than mothers, who are often taken for granted.

Jaws: The hero overcomes his fears and becomes a true father to his children.
Close Encounters: The father meets God after leaving his family (practically torn from the New Testament).
E. T.: The young protagonist's absent father is replaced symbolically by the former villain.
Temple of Doom: The hero overcomes his selfishness and becomes a symbolic father to the people he saves.
Last Crusade: The father overcomes his selfishness and becomes a true father to his son.
Hook: The father overcomes his anger and becomes a true father to his children.
Schindler's List: The hero gains compassion (almost subliminally)and becomes a symbolic father to the people he saves.
Jurassic Park: The hero overcomes his awkwardness and becomes a symbolic father to the children he saves.
The Lost World: The hero overcomes his avoidance and becomes a true father to the daughter he saves.
Saving Private Ryan: The hero overcomes his obedience and becomes a symbolic father to a lonely son.
Minority Report: The hero comes to terms with the loss of his son; flips his anger at the fatherly antagonist.
Catch Me if You Can: The hero
The Terminal: The ending reveals a son who traveled to America for the sake of his deceased father.
Munich: The hero sacrifices his moral underpinnings for the sake of his child at home.
War of the Worlds: The hero overcomes his selfishness and becomes a true father to his children.
Crystal Skull: The hero overcomes his selfishness and becomes a true father to the son he saves.

[balmakboor]

Yes, there is a definite weak man becomes a true father angle as you demonstrate.

I don't quite see the "becoming a true father" in every case -- Jaws stops short of that with the father washed up on the beach with his feminine half, his masculine half killed by the shark. He never rejoins his family though to demonstrate what you describe.

I don't really see Close Encounters in quite the same religious terms as you.

E.T.'s mission is to assemble a new family but it is a very posed, unconvincing, and pre-sexual family. A family in Elliot and Gertie's eyes for now, but certainly not in Michael or the mom's eyes.

And so on...

[balmakboor]

Very cool that you brought this up. I'd never heard of this archetype, and it does seem to fit in to Spielberg's interests. Still, I can't help but think that Spielberg's characters, while "puer" characters, seem more invested in relationships with fathers/sons than mothers, who are often taken for granted.

Jaws: The hero overcomes his fears and becomes a true father to his children.
Close Encounters: The father meets God after leaving his family (practically torn from the New Testament).
E. T.: The young protagonist's absent father is replaced symbolically by the former villain.
Temple of Doom: The hero overcomes his selfishness and becomes a symbolic father to the people he saves.
Last Crusade: The father overcomes his selfishness and becomes a true father to his son.
Hook: The father overcomes his anger and becomes a true father to his children.
Schindler's List: The hero gains compassion (almost subliminally)and becomes a symbolic father to the people he saves.
Jurassic Park: The hero overcomes his awkwardness and becomes a symbolic father to the children he saves.
The Lost World: The hero overcomes his avoidance and becomes a true father to the daughter he saves.
Saving Private Ryan: The hero overcomes his obedience and becomes a symbolic father to a lonely son.
Minority Report: The hero comes to terms with the loss of his son; flips his anger at the fatherly antagonist.
Catch Me if You Can: The hero
The Terminal: The ending reveals a son who traveled to America for the sake of his deceased father.
Munich: The hero sacrifices his moral underpinnings for the sake of his child at home.
War of the Worlds: The hero overcomes his selfishness and becomes a true father to his children.
Crystal Skull: The hero overcomes his selfishness and becomes a true father to the son he saves.

Actually, reading through these again, it almost seems as if Spielberg repeatedly tries to turn puers into grown men -- with wildly varying success. Spielberg himself is widely regarded as a puer type and it could all be thought of as a form of self-therapy, like he is ashamed of his puer qualities and wishes to break free from them, but can't. I think his regressions to films you can imagine a boy making and enjoying like 1941, Temple of Doom, and Hook might be his most personal in a way because of this.

Another director who is considered an extreme puer type is Peter Jackson. He made Dead Alive which is a total puer expression. Interesting that the two are working together on Tin Tin.

[baby doll]

Oh, and my pick would be Gangs of New York, though I know a lot of people on here love it. Scorsese doing a movie about the symbolic past of America, filled with gangs and riots and Daniel Day-Lewis...it should have been so much better.I think superficial entertainment that doesn't veer into self-parody (as The Departed does) is the best we can hope from Scorsese these days. The Aviator was flashy and funny, and I wouldn't expect anything more.

My pick for a film that should've been better? Most recently, Bertrand Tavernier's In the Electric Mist pretty much defines biting off more than any one could possibly chew: prostitute murders in the present, a lynching in the 1960s that the hero witnessed as a boy, Hurricane Katrina, a film crew invading small town America, and the ghosts of Confederate soldiers that talk to the hero. All potentially interesting, but the film goes nowhere with any of them. By the end, I wasn't even sure what the murderer's motive was.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I don't quite see the "becoming a true father" in every case -- Jaws stops short of that with the father washed up on the beach with his feminine half, his masculine half killed by the shark. He never rejoins his family though to demonstrate what you describe.

How is his masculine half killed by the shark? If anything, the finale is about Brody achieving a symbolic manhood previously reached by Hooper (via the shark cage) and over-reached by Quint.


I don't really see Close Encounters in quite the same religious terms as you.

Maybe this is just my Catholic upbringing, but after the first viewing (which floored me in nearly every capacity), I realized that the film was incredibly religious, despite its sci-fi overtones. It really does feel like when Jesus told James, "Come, and I will make you a fisher of men," and James cast aside his life and left his family.


E.T.'s mission is to assemble a new family but it is a very posed, unconvincing, and pre-sexual family. A family in Elliot and Gertie's eyes for now, but certainly not in Michael or the mom's eyes.

The entire film is about Elliott's perspective; Spielberg goes so far as to frame only the midsections of adult men (the teacher, Keys, the man with the gun). So the ending with the characters in an approximation of the nuclear family is pre-sexual, but also entirely appropriate. It's a brief visual suggestion of resolution during a sequence that's more about the friendship between the two mains.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Actually, reading through these again, it almost seems as if Spielberg repeatedly tries to turn puers into grown men -- with wildly varying success. Spielberg himself is widely regarded as a puer type and it could all be thought of as a form of self-therapy, like he is ashamed of his puer qualities and wishes to break free from them, but can't. I think his regressions to films you can imagine a boy making and enjoying like 1941, Temple of Doom, and Hook might be his most personal in a way because of this.

Hook may be among his most personal, but it's terribly unclear in its effort to link maturation and childlike regression. To become a man, he has to become a kid, because he was too much of a man, but now he's a man-kid, and he's ready to grow up, even though he already did, so what the hell was the point of all this?

It also has those insufferable Lost Boys that I want to murder on sight.

[balmakboor]

How is his masculine half killed by the shark? If anything, the finale is about Brody achieving a symbolic manhood previously reached by Hooper (via the shark cage) and over-reached by Quint.

I always saw Brody's time on the boat as a struggle between his Shadow and Anima. His Shadow (Quint) dies. He is washed up on shore with his Anima (Hooper). That's all I was saying I guess.

[balmakboor]

Hook may be among his most personal, but it's terribly unclear in its effort to link maturation and childlike regression. To become a man, he has to become a kid, because he was too much of a man, but now he's a man-kid, and he's ready to grow up, even though he already did, so what the hell was the point of all this?

It also has those insufferable Lost Boys that I want to murder on sight.

To be honest, I always thought the idea of having Peter Pan grow up, struggle with being a parent, and then go back to Never Never Land to learn how to be a man was silly. I guess we're in agreement on that one.

Perhaps a better way for Spielberg to have gotten his literal Pan ideas out of his system would've been his once rumored remake of Peter Pan starring Michael Jackson.

[balmakboor]

You know, the latest Cannes line-up is so strong that it's too good to be true. I predict half of the films will end up being mentioned in this thread during the year to come. Hopefully not Inglourious Basterds though.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I always saw Brody's time on the boat as a struggle between his Shadow and Anima. His Shadow (Quint) dies. He is washed up on shore with his Anima (Hooper). That's all I was saying I guess.

That's an interesting way of looking at it.

Good thoughts, by the way. I'd always though of the Berg in a very specific way. This has opened that up a little more.

[baby doll]

You know, the latest Cannes line-up is so strong that it's too good to be true. I predict half of the films will end up being mentioned in this thread during the year to come. Hopefully not Inglourious Basterds though.Weird that you mention that, because I'm not sure that I want to see it. If anything, on paper, it sounds terrible: a regressive, immature bit of torture porn by a perpetual Peter Pan steadfastly refusing to grow up and do something serious.

[MacGuffin]

If anything, on paper, it sounds terrible: a regressive, immature bit of torture porn

Oh, come on, not you too.

[baby doll]

Oh, come on, not you too.What? Not me objecting to torture as a form of entertainment, so long as the characters are Nazis, and therefore unambiguously evil, thereby sparing Tarantino the burden of having to have a mature point of view on inflicting cruelty on people?

[MacGuffin]

What? Not me objecting to torture as a form of entertainment, so long as the characters are Nazis, and therefore unambiguously evil, thereby sparing Tarantino the burden of having to have a mature point of view on inflicting cruelty on people?

First of all, you're dismissing a movie you haven't seen. Have you at least seen the original? (Which from what I've heard is merely a basis for this remake, but nonetheless a movie about the masculinity that takes over war soldiers, which I assume Tarantino will touch on.)

Secondly, the term "torture porn" has become all too tired. Namely, you're labeling how other people are supposed to feel in reaction to the movie, rather than yourself. Is this fair? Not all movies featuring torture use it as a form of "entertainment", but in most cases, use it to drive across a point.

Furthermore, "torture porn" seems like a phrase you tack on when you have no other reaction to the violence shown onscreen. You're assuming it is made to turn audiences on. Sure, Tarantino has said in the past "onscreen violence is fun" or something to that extent, but I'm not going into this assuming he's going to transfer his Kill Bill philosophies to a World War II movie; I'm going into it with only knowledge of Castellari's movie, which didn't have torture if I recall correctly, but violence towards Nazis.

We automatically assume the movie will glamorize Nazi annihilation, but don't you think the American soldiers wanted this and acted like this (I have no reason not to believe they wanted to collect scalps, or make games to see who could kill the most Nazis; it's no new idea in cinema to show war as a game for the soldiers). I don't think it's fair to label a movie as torture porn when the torture is central to the story.

[baby doll]

First of all, you're dismissing a movie you haven't seen. Have you at least seen the original? (Which from what I've heard is merely a basis for this remake, but nonetheless a movie about the masculinity that takes over war soldiers, which I assume Tarantino will touch on.)

Secondly, the term "torture porn" has become all too tired. Namely, you're labeling how other people are supposed to feel in reaction to the movie, rather than yourself. Is this fair? Not all movies featuring torture use it as a form of "entertainment", but in most cases, use it to drive across a point.

Furthermore, "torture porn" seems like a phrase you tack on when you have no other reaction to the violence shown onscreen. You're assuming it is made to turn audiences on. Sure, Tarantino has said in the past "onscreen violence is fun" or something to that extent, but I'm not going into this assuming he's going to transfer his Kill Bill philosophies to a World War II movie; I'm going into it with only knowledge of Castellari's movie, which didn't have torture if I recall correctly, but violence towards Nazis.

We automatically assume the movie will glamorize Nazi annihilation, but don't you think the American soldiers wanted this and acted like this (I have no reason not to believe they wanted to collect scalps, or make games to see who could kill the most Nazis; it's no new idea in cinema to show war as a game for the soldiers). I don't think it's fair to label a movie as torture porn when the torture is central to the story.It's not that I'm dismissing it so much as I don't want to see it. And I didn't even know there was an original.

As for torture porn, from Tarantino's previous films, his statements in interviews, and his enthusiasm for the films of Takeshi Miike and Mel Gibson, his attitude towards torture (or at least its representation) seems to be that it's way fucking cool--something to be lingered on and savored for its aesthetic qualities. And I don't know what "point" was being driven across in, say, Miike's Audition, but whatever it was, it could hardly redeem the sheer unpleasantness of the film itself.

And why wouldn't you assume that Tarantino's underlying philosophy would be the same here as in Kill Bill? Why would you expect him to suddenly become a thoughtful, socially responsible filmmaker?

Whether or not Allied Soldiers tortured people during World War II isn't really the point. Judging by the trailers, the film's main attraction is human suffering. Because the people suffering are Nazis, that creates a context in which it's morally acceptable for the characters to collect scalps, etc.

I realize I've gotten into pickles around here for slamming movies I haven't seen, but really, I can't think of a single compelling reason to want to see the film. I'll wait for the reviews, but at the moment, it doesn't look like my cup of tea.

[balmakboor]

As for torture porn, from Tarantino's previous films, his statements in interviews, and his enthusiasm for the films of Takeshi Miike and Mel Gibson, his attitude towards torture (or at least its representation) seems to be that it's way fucking cool--something to be lingered on and savored for its aesthetic qualities. And I don't know what "point" was being driven across in, say, Miike's Audition, but whatever it was, it could hardly redeem the sheer unpleasantness of the film itself.

And why wouldn't you assume that Tarantino's underlying philosophy would be the same here as in Kill Bill? Why would you expect him to suddenly become a thoughtful, socially responsible filmmaker?

I'm surprised you singled out Miike and Gibson when Eli Roth would've best supported your argument.

I don't see anything particularly thoughtless or socially irresponsible about Kill Bill.

[MacGuffin]

It's not that I'm dismissing it so much as I don't want to see it. And I didn't even know there was an original.

There is. And it's excellent.


As for torture porn, from Tarantino's previous films, his statements in interviews, and his enthusiasm for the films of Takeshi Miike and Mel Gibson, his attitude towards torture (or at least its representation) seems to be that it's way fucking cool--something to be lingered on and savored for its aesthetic qualities. And I don't know what "point" was being driven across in, say, Miike's Audition, but whatever it was, it could hardly redeem the sheer unpleasantness of the film itself.

Well, I don't know about Audition. I saw it years ago and wasn't exactly sure if I liked it or not. But I know many saw some depth in the relationship presented, or lack there of. As for Tarantino's "attitude", I don't think he wants to glamorize the acts of violence (or as you put them, "torture"), but rather, the sheer spectacle of these acts.

The violence in the Kill Bill series is inspired by the spectacle of sword fighting in old Shaw Brothers movies, but it is violence stylized for modern day, which is to say, more gore and astral spray. (Disclaimer: if you are interested in Shaw Brothers, I am not the one to ask; that would be Daniel Davis. But, while I haven't seen anything from that studio I don't believe, I am certainly interested).

The violence that will more than likely appear in Inglorious Basterds is probably going to be about the spectacle of warfare itself: as I said, the "games" soldiers come up with to entertain themselves and make war seem, to them, like not such of a bad thing while they are on the battlefield.


And why wouldn't you assume that Tarantino's underlying philosophy would be the same here as in Kill Bill? Why would you expect him to suddenly become a thoughtful, socially responsible filmmaker?

In discussing the five-year transition between Kill Bill and Inglorious Basterds (I'm not including Grindhouse because I think you can solve which kind of spectacle that is for yourself), I'm not exactly saying Tarantino is automatically going to be a "mature" director in the Godard, Haneke, Denis, Tsai sense, but he's going to tackle new content, which may very well allow him to explore for himself the spectacle of violence he is so fascinated with, and perhaps he'll learn something about himself, such as why he is fascinated with this theme.


Whether or not Allied Soldiers tortured people during World War II isn't really the point. Judging by the trailers, the film's main attraction is human suffering. Because the people suffering are Nazis, that creates a context in which it's morally acceptable for the characters to collect scalps, etc.

You can look at so many well-loved war movies and say that they are about human suffering, and than say that because the Axis Powers are those being killed, it is morally acceptable for the violence to continue. I don't think this is really acceptable logic in defining a movies' moral ground.

I fully expect Inglorious Basterds to tell us why the Allied soldiers feel the need to collect scalps, and hopefully offer some character psychoanalysis which could provide some intellectual subtext.


I realize I've gotten into pickles around here for slamming movies I haven't seen, but really, I can't think of a single compelling reason to want to see the film. I'll wait for the reviews, but at the moment, it doesn't look like my cup of tea.

I can think of five reasons right now:

1. Quentin Tarantino directs it: I've decided I'm through with dismissing him because of his listless number of homages. He's got a style that is prevalent throughout his entire oeuvre that, in my honest opinion, makes him a worthwhile director.

2. Brad Pitt continues a possible "streak" of interesting roles: First, a man who ages backwards. Then a bizzare, hilarious gym trainer. Now, an Allied general. I'm curious to see what's next for him, as, regardless of my opinion towards each of these movies, he is proven his talents, I believe.

3. Remake of a worthwhile war movie: I'm curious to see how this matches up. I know it will be different than the original. I just wonder how different. Will it contain the same tone as the original, or perhaps portray soldiers in the same, hilariously macho way?

4. Cannes competition: I really need to make an effort to see more movies in competition for the Cannes Film Festival. Even the bad ones are significantly better than typical mainstream fare. With new movies from Tsai, von Trier, Haneke and Noé, it will be interesting to see how this one stacks up.

5. Interesting approach to war movies: I'm always up for a movie that subverts from the typical textbook approach to historical non-fiction. Something as stylized as this should at least be interesting.

You should see the original. It's honestly pretty excellent.

[trotchky]

How is Kill Bill socially irresponsible? Lighten up Limbaugh, it's only a movie.

[MacGuffin]

How is Kill Bill socially irresponsible? Lighten up Limbaugh, it's only a movie.

Haha.

[SirNewt]

I'm gonna go ahead and condemn the upcoming version The Divine Comedy. A visually supreme special effect spectacular that surely will suck. Yet rereading Dante only drives my anticipation upward.

[transmogrifier]

I'm surprised you singled out Miike and Gibson when Eli Roth would've best supported your argument.

I don't see anything particularly thoughtless or socially irresponsible about Kill Bill.

I don't know, Gibson fits quite well if you ask me.

[baby doll]

How is Kill Bill socially irresponsible? Lighten up Limbaugh, it's only a movie.That's Tarantino's position, that it's only a movie, which strikes me as a way of denying responsibility for the images he's putting out into the world. To be fair, I don't know of anyone attempting to emulate anything in the film, but I don't get the impression that he's even thought about the issue.

[number8]

That's Tarantino's position, that it's only a movie, which strikes me as a way of denying responsibility for the images he's putting out into the world. To be fair, I don't know of anyone attempting to emulate anything in the film, but I don't get the impression that he's even thought about the issue.
I hope not. That would make his films pretty lame.

[baby doll]

I hope not. That would make his films pretty lame.They already are, so what's the harm?

[number8]

They already are, so what's the harm?
They have those great violence to make them better.

[balmakboor]

I just feel like inserting something to read about Pulp Fiction here:

http://www.libarts.wsu.edu/philo/faculty-staff/campbell/Conard.PulpFiction.pdf

Just because I feel like it.

[Amnesiac]

That's Tarantino's position, that it's only a movie, which strikes me as a way of denying responsibility for the images he's putting out into the world. To be fair, I don't know of anyone attempting to emulate anything in the film, but I don't get the impression that he's even thought about the issue.

Are you partially basing this off of this interview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7L2ukSJFgCM&feature=PlayList&p=94BA48C2FA4063AC&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=28)?

[number8]

Are you partially basing this off of this interview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7L2ukSJFgCM&feature=PlayList&p=94BA48C2FA4063AC&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=28)?

Ah, that interview always cracks me up whenever I see it.

[megladon8]

Trying to claim moral superiority by being against on-screen violence is ridiculous.

[baby doll]

Trying to claim moral superiority by being against on-screen violence is ridiculous.Who's what now? I have no problem with onscreen violence (I'm a big Gaspar Noé fan), but with Tarantino, there's nothing else there.

[megladon8]

Who's what now? I have no problem with onscreen violence (I'm a big Gaspar Noé fan), but with Tarantino, there's nothing else there.


Sorry, I misinterpreted what you wrote.

I thought you were condemning all on-screen violence as "torture porn", which I think is ludicrous.

[balmakboor]

Sorry, I misinterpreted what you wrote.

I thought you were condemning all on-screen violence as "torture porn", which I think is ludicrous.

I think it is more the "there's nothing else there" that I find laughable. It's so 1994.

[trotchky]

I think it is more the "there's nothing else there" that I find laughable. It's so 1994.

True statement. I also find the implication that Gasper Noe has more respect for his audience or society at large (or takes more "responsibility" for them, whatever the fuck that means) than Quentin Tarantino more than a little laughable.