quote:

Originally posted by Harris:
I once felt much the same way about Natural Born Killers as it seems Evan feels about Miami Vice. In reality, they both suck.

what are you? NBK? You can't be serious.

i liek to think of Natural Born Killers as the movie that should have ended violent movies. unfortunately many people didnt understand it and thus many spin offs of 'violent people' movies were made for example our good friend who made Romance Road Killers or whatever the hell

As long as violence is something that film portrays better than any other medium I find it hard to believe that we will see an end to violent films.

I liked Miami Vice quite a bit, but it is the definition of an acquired taste. It is very arch and stylized. Kind of a Noir Wes Anderson.

I'd say while the Viper is not a great camera, the positives outweighed the negatives BARELY on MV.

I don't see much point to trying to figure out what will be viewed as a classic thirty years from now because so many terrible films are still held in reverence because of nostalgia and many excellent films fall into anonymity because of the specificness of their time.

The Departed was a fantastic piece of entertainment, not particularly deep. There was some nice technical metaphor in the editing and shots that showed the parallel futility of the two men's actions, but mostly it seemed to be for fun.

Pollack would often go into bars and start verbal and physical attacks on people, then go home and paint.

Ive gotten more out of his "violence" than watching the legions of puppets die in hollywood. Few films have shown violence in a way that should make you think, Spielburg recreating wwII is not an exception. why would you make a war film when there's already a war going on? why would you want to recreate such a horror? what is being gained by watching people's eyes pop out or their legs cut off with a chainsaw? like i said not a lot of films have shown violence in a way as to make you think "why is there violence in movies?" we know why there's violence in reality, but then a movie like NBK comes around and exploits it to death and people call it bad when really its saying something. It should be the last! I think its a cop out. we can use a gun in a movie and immediately go to those same emotions that come along with such acts, confusion, fear, anger. Guns and violence are very dead in films nowadays, if you think there's a time and place necessary, well id like to see you try. In my eye you're just coping out, and since when do you go around on bloody rampages? Unless its american psycho, cause then its OK. lets all PRETEND we arnt insane violent lunatics, lets try to explore something else, shall we?

the reason why violence is so effectively portrayed in cinema is that it is a kinetic, visceral, emotional medium.

I'm not defending the moral compass of Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Hostel, or Saw. But film is the only medium that can capture something like the hallway assault in Matrix 1. I had a professor who defined a word called "frisson" which is that unquantifiable feeling you get when watching something "cool" or "sad" or "scary." Side-effects include goosebumps, ejaculations of noise, etc..., cold sweats, stomach churning tension. That's what film does better than most mediums and it's no coincidence that violence elicits the same reaction from us.

Pollock certainly gives me an intellectual reaction to violence but not a gutteral one.

Again the point I'm making is that violence in cinema is not going away so a better goal would be to make it meam something than to try to eliminate it all together. A History of Violence is a great film about the implications and ramifications of violence. So are Straw Dogs, Falling Down, The Edge (kind of), Raging Bull.

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel McLellan:

I thought you were quitting the site Daniel. Something about hating Evan and HDK. Now I hate you.

Out of line, Fascist. Behave yourself.

I agree about film being the only medium that elicits these responses from us. A well-made film is like experiencing life, first and foremost. It may also be many other things, such as thought-provoking, beautiful, moving, etc, but first and foremost, it speaks to us on the same level as reality.

Image removed. - Josh

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Josh,

i feel the wrath of the metal morning snack coming on

Try that trick again and you'll be banned, Fascist.

Discussion back on topic everyone! Nothing to see here. Jedi business.

quote:

The Departed was a fantastic piece of entertainment, not particularly deep.

Oh, look again, my friend. I'd say it rivals Taxi Driver for depth, and it covers so much more ground. This is an astonishing film.

it's my number 2 pick of the year right now. I certainly didn't have anything against it but there was nothing thematically that stuck with me. I liked the message about the vicious circle of futility that the two rats were stuck in though.

Everything I saw in the trailer (especially the horrific revision/massacre of "Comfortably Numb") escreamed out to me "STAY AWAY!"
I really cant see how such a terrible and cliche trailer can be attached to the masterpiece/classic of a movie that you are describing. What does the trailer fail to show from the movie?
And what sets The Departed apart from all the other lame police and secret identity films?

Great Acting
Direction
Script (for the most part)
Cinematography
Editing (REALLY GOOD)
Soundtrack

Everything sets it apart.

quote:

Originally posted by braininabox:
(especially the horrific revision/massacre of "Comfortably Numb")

Just so you know, that was a live version by Roger Waters and Van Morrison. It wasn't a "revision," nor was it a "massacre" in my humble opinion.

quote:

Just so you know, that was a live version by Roger Waters and Van Morrison.

hm... I never would have guessed. That sounded like nothing Roger Waters would make. Oh well.

(I feel honored posting underneath Fuc*in Fascist's last post... ever.)

It's one of my favorite renditions of Comfortably Numb.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ocwzxXz77I

Yeah, I really liked that version of Comfortably Numb. What a great song to have anguished sex to.

I only saw the trailer online after I saw the film, and it did suck.

On a side note, TD, has anyone ever remarked to you, "I eat moderators like you for breakfast"?

quote:

hm... I never would have guessed. That sounded like nothing Roger Waters would make. Oh well.

Agreed, but this is what, thirty years after the original was recorded?

It just sounds ... bad. If anyone thinks that this new version is 'really good,' I think you need to listen to the original again

My stance on way-past-their-prime members of classic bands issuing new performance/recordings of their songs is as follows:

if it is awful (almost always), just ignore it. I see no reason to consider it in the same light as their 'real' output.

quote:

Originally posted by Evan Kubota:
My stance on way-past-their-prime members of classic bands issuing new performance/recordings of their songs is as follows:

if it is awful (almost always), just ignore it. I see no reason to consider it in the same light as their 'real' output.

I agree. Have you heard John Fogerty recently? He's still singing old CCR songs and he sounds absolutely horrible. He just needs to retire.