SERENITY great cinema? Compared to what?
POSTED BY: Howard
UPDATED: Friday, November 4, 2005 01:41
VIEWED: 28718
PAGE 12 of 13
I only included RUN LOLA RUN because
it was the precuser to THE PRINCESS AND
THE WARRIOR and it is a fun film.
I wrote a list that is varied by intent.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Dear chronicthehedgehog :
Thank you for your empathetic remarks.
To answer some of your valid points.
People spend so much time these days watching
nothing but fun be it REALITY TV, ACTION
FILMS or VIDEO GAMES that I wanted to provide
an alternative way of living.
There is a different kind of satisfaction
that one gets from these movies and some of
them are very enjoyable in their own way.
I concede that some are demanding and that
a few of them are not fun in that sense.
Elegant pleasure can be even more enjoyable
than plain fun.
When I want a fun flick say something lighter
I like smaller films (in budget) say CLUELESS
small film big success. Or the little seen
and very clever and sharp and fun STARDOM.
But then there is TV. I don't feel the need
to go watch action films I find it ironic that
Joss the guy responsible for BUFFY, ANGEL and
FIREFLY feels now the need to enter a business
that in my opinion is worse!!
What I love about those shows is that they
are better at a fraction of budget than any
theatrical action movie. They have everything
from fun to dramatic depth, action and more
sensitive elements. Plus what most action
films don't have...original, creative
imagination.
Plus look at the value for money 22 episodes
of BUFFY or The TERMINATOR...BUFFY for me
every time!!
PS Oh yeah and Joss's shows thanks to his
writers like the great Jane are so often
funnier than TV sitcoms or romcom movies.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
On RUN LOLA RUN..
While it is a fun movie I disagree with
your evaluation I think it is more than
just fun. The mosaic of elements was very
inventive in its mix even if those elements
are not original in themselves.
The idea of having the events repeated with
a different consequence and the commentary
about people passing by in the street was
very refreshing.
I love the running aspect and the techno
music. And I loved it when Joss paid homage
with a Potential in LOLA fashion being hunted.
As for bouncing breasts...no I'm sorry if that
were the intention she would not have been
wearing that kind of bra and a more obviously
sexy chick would have been cast.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:GLADIATOR! Your use of inappropriate language forces me to say this, and I'll only say it once!
Originally posted by Gladiator:
Oh and by the way, My dad can beat your dad up.
You are one
ing funny dude!!!I'm still wipin' tears from my eyes.
That was good.
Chrisisall, Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahhhhahaaahahhaahahahhaahhaahhhahhaha.....bwahahahaha
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SPACED:
If you read what I have written before
I said the issue is not whether it is
well made (TERMINATOR) but what it projects.
As for millions of people liking something
therefore it must be good...
McDonalds
SUV's
Smoking
Wal-Mart
and for a few years millions of people in
Germany loved Hitler
My opinion of TERMINATOR is that it is part
of a sick type of culture.
Back in the late 60's early 70's Science
Fiction was dramatic and had something to say.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Howard, nuthin' against you, man, Gladiator was just gorram hi-larious, that's all.
I guess I'm just a child underneath the civilized facade Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Yeah, stuff like Lost In Space and Logan's Run: the TV series.....
Originally posted by Howard:
Back in the late 60's early 70's Science
Fiction was dramatic and had something to say.
Chrisisall*snicker* Oh, I am SO a child....
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
ANASAZI:
All the films I listed I listed as DVD's
most of them North American Region 1.
I agree that SERENITY is better than the
junk you listed.
As for a movie such as A VERY LONG ENGAGEMENT
playing in only one screen. Well vote with
your money and take your friends so maybe
when a movie like that plays the powers that
be might get the message.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Dear GLADIATOR
You are the lowest form of inhuman life.
Yes I am superior to you. That is not
even in doubt.
You have to spend the rest of your life
knowing that you are barely even good
enough to clean the dirt off my shoes.
I remain always
superior to filfth like you
Sincerely
Howard
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Originally posted by Unsardonic:
Quote:
Hi there, ya sleepwalker
Wotcha *waves*
Quote:
Well, it took me a bit to get back to you due to the work schedule. Lessee... Sir Henry (Rawlinson) would have said, "I've just spent the last 10 hours buried up the backsides of the filth hounds of Hades!" ...so, trying to get past my nitrogen narcosis & readjust to regular atmospheric pressure...
Ha!!! Nice classical references there... of course it could also have been Persephone who uttered those words :)
Quote:
s'anyway... you make a bunch of excellent points about 'Salo.' And I agree with many of them and, also, I agree with you in that I'm also not that particularly 'shockable.' I think had I taken some Evangelical Christian aquaintance of mine, well...THEY might well have been shocked.
That's true - but it's not hard shocking such people.
Quote:
However, I have to tell you, I can't remember what my shockability was back around, I'm thinking, 1972, when I first saw it. If you can imagine the zeitgeist back then, even I might have been quite appalled in '72... I don't think I was but... I WAS shocked.
You know I must admit, to my shame, I did totally overlook the era in which it was made. "My bad" However I'm not entirely sure that doesn't emphasize my point.
Quote:
Now, I don't believe Pasolini shot it specifically for the point of "shocking" people. I believe he was making a political satire that was aimed at various political figures/events in Italian politics around the late 1960's or so... trying to imply that, if you were a member of such-&-such political party (Pasolini was a Communist, himself) then you were just beginning to dip your toes into the pond wherein, after a couple of good dips, you'd be incapable of avoiding ...raping & killing your own children, for example... I believe he was trying to make allegorical finger-pointing statements at whoever he despised. ....and trying to translate those kinds of ideas (whatever he was trying to say) into our CURrent sensibilities is about as seamless as trying to get the humor in a Python gag from 1969 that is specific to local-town-council-politics in some village in England back THEN... doesn't translate so well to the general populace.
You know that's very true. Very true indeed. I did register it as a pollitical focus, and I understand he was (for the poor fellow was assassinated) very committed to his political beliefs, and you know you're absolutely right about the intricate difficulties of expressing your beliefs seemlessly in such a medium. I guess you're right, sex and violence are universal and maybe the better way of presenting a political subtext to your narrative. I don't think I have a problem with any of this, I think maybe what doesn't work for me, and I say me, because I must admit most of my friends who have seem it regard it also as a very hard hitting and impacting piece of work. However for me the very graphic nature in which he presents it I think limited his audience. As you say it was 1972....folks, well they just weren't used to that kinda imagery on screen. It could possibly have been to much for them.
I suppose my wondering is wether or not his 'political' viewpoint wouldn't have been better served if he'd toned down the graphic visuals in place of more subtle imagery. Thereby allowing greater accessability for 'his' audience. I shouldn't wonder if he didn't turn the stomachs of a fair few people who shared in his beliefs with such extreme and graphics images....? Is that really a success in those terms?
Quote:
So I don't really think Pasolini shot it to be secifically 'shocking' as you've interpreted; I believe he was extremely angry about political points of view that he disagreed with & was saying, "See! See how you bastards are?! THIS... is how you are!" He was being accusatory. ...ummm... my opinion... could be wrong.
I think you're right - but then this message is lost if you reduce your audience by having them walk out on your film. I
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME