 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
76.99.186.92
How many more are we going to be fed?
I tried to watch the latest opus: The Pacific, and only managed a small portion of it. The previous one - The Band of Brothers I gave up after two episodes.
SPR I watched in its ugly, pukey entirety.
Does that means the negative slope has been established?
Follow Ups:
I wasn't crazy about Pacific's first episode either. Band Of Brothers was OK but I didn't like it as much as many did. SPR's opening is incredible but the rest of the film doesn't match it. How could it?
-Wendell
I've only seen one episode so far but it is quite good. At least it has a lot of footage I' ve never seen.
Not that it was as bad as you make out.
J.B.
I'll reserve judgement on Pacific until more of it plays out-let's say its beginning was inauspicious. Yes, Private Ryan was particularly cloying after the Omaha Beach opening, which had a visceral effect on everyone I know who saw that in the theater.Band of Brothers may have started slowly and had a few made for tv moments, but it got better and more realistic as the episodes unraveled and had my father (a WW2 vet) and I fully involved by episode 4. The opening narrations by the vets whose stories were depicted coupled with some great acting by relative unknowns made most of the series very compelling.
There were also some great sets and realistic battle scenes--especially Bastogne. I would term it the best modern day dramatic depiction of that portion of the War. My father concurred. Kudos to the actors who played the two officer leads and to the way the concentration camp discovery episode was done.
I think watching just an episode or two of B.O.B would not be representative of the arc of what they accomplished by the final episode. That is why I am willing to hang in there and see what becomes of the Pacific. Had I judged Schindler's List after the first twenty minutes I'd have panned that film but felt differently at the end.
Just like judging equipment, it pays to wait for some break in... :o)
Regards,
Grant
Edits: 03/17/10 03/17/10
The second I switched to Pacific it was immediately recognizable, unmistakable Spielberg, it was SPR all over again. It really IS a cookie cutter, as the only difference seems to be the enemy uniforms and some scenery. Spielberg has very recognizable style, which I hate, but someone might like, and he is not trying, or is unable to change it, or even to cover it.
As far as the SPR - I was totally unimpressed with the Omaha Beach scene. To me it was at the level of the Jaws or Friday the 13th. Essentially Spielberg paints like a six-year-old... OK, maybe a fifteen year old... he's got some basic skills, but he doesn't yet have anything to say. And at his age one does not expect anything new from him, he is not that kind of a director. Peter's principle is working, after all, and Spielberg has reached his level of incompetence.
You obviously have more discerning taste and an evolved palette for cinema and realism in war and drama than I. Maybe I consumed too much tabloid tv as a child, making me unable to judge a quality war drama from Gilligan's Island when I see them.
Please give me a table of comparison. What are the superior war dramas that make B.O.B look so cookie-cutter like? Best Years Of Our Lives? Tora Tora? At least, let's say compared to the "two episodes" of B.O.B you actually sat through.
I won't pursue the fools errand of defending Spielberg as a great director, but I am not so biased that I can ignore some of his craft and deft touches in Schindler's List and B.O.B. Sure, I prefer other filmaker's body of work and I can agree with most of your criticisms, but I thought most of B.O.B was well directed, well acted and had some very realistic moments.
The fact that my father and other WW 2 vets were impressed including those who contributed the detail for the series tells me they did some things well. I know it was not perfect and yes, there may have been a SPR moment or two that I was able to put up with for some of the more compelling moments and solid acting performances.
Spielberg may have many or all of the flaws you list, but there is more to him and his films than just his foibles. Some of what I liked about Schindler's List was in B.O.B and I hope it shows up in some of the Pacific. If not, I'll rank it accordingly.
BTW, I liked Jaws because of Dreyfuss, Schieder and Shaw yet acknowledge it was gratuitous and full of ham-handed schlock-- so maybe I am easily entertained after all. At 16, I was just glad to have a seat in the theater for that! :o)
You will find many fine choices there.
Spielberg I put in the category of very skillful artisans, I am not denying his technical skills, but he is not, in my mind, a great director. And BOB I thought was below even his limited directing skill. The man lost all his taste with that film, moving to the Dark Side of CGI at the expense of everything else. Today we have film after film staking its success on CGI, and having not much else to show for it... perhaps the worst one being the Spartacus... of which I made an effort of seeing a couple of episodes.
dd
WWII really happened. The events this dramatization embodies actually happened. I agree with you about SPR although I thought the opening sequence on Omaha beach was done pretty well.Maybe you don't like any dramatization. If that is so, stick to the Time Life books or the Ken Burns' documentaries. However, I have read the books these mini-series are based upon and there is a heck of a lot of factual basis for the events.
I thought Band of Brothers was very good and did a great job dramatizing actual events and depicting actual people. It wasn't Hollywood schlock at all as main characters got killed and did horrible things. It did not sensationalize the military and showed how FUBAR a lot of it was. The last section on "Points" showed all sorts of bad behavior from the military not to mention the looting and raiding the soldiers did.
So what exactly is your problem with BOB and why can't you sit still long enough to watch the Pacific? They are both actually difficult things to get into because of the multitude of characters and they don't make it easy on you. I didn't see any SPR schlock in BOB or the Pacific as of yet (1 episode).
Or is this just pre-emptive hate?
Edits: 03/17/10
.
Now, if you also do not like the LoTR - that will make Patrick's day, and spoil AuPh's appetite...
LoTR--endless CG battles.
What was it about, anyway?
Making choices? The changing of eras? The futility of despair?
I hate SPR, but I quite like LOTR:FOTR, the first of the three LOTR films. Jackson's version would not have been the movie I'd have made but it was quite good in many ways, and the type of movie I would have preferred would never have been produced much less made any money.
In fact, I think FOTR is one of the few blockbuster movies that uses CGI in support of story and character. The are tons of examples where it's the other way 'round, but IMO FOTR isn't one of them.
If that makes me shallow, so be it.
Soiled diapers, warm milk out of mama's breasts... pulling the cat's tail...
The heroic quest, the most common theme in literature; some would argue
the only theme in literature; some would argue the only theme in
everything. At the very least, it's a recurring theme. Try reading
Joseph Campbell's "The Hero with a Thousand Faces." Precocious ignorance
is a ludicrous combination; it makes one look like a dumb fuck. Regards,
J.R.
-
If I'd insulted you, kid, you'd be in intensive care somewhere. Look
above you; Victor's insulting Auph without provocation. It's what he
does. By the way, did you know that J.R.R. Tolkien held the Rawlinsonian
Chair of Anglo-Saxon at Oxford for twenty years? He was a world famous
philologist and a close friend of C.S. Lewis, but I bet you don't like
or understand the Narnia films either. Go bite some tires or suck some
trailer hitches. Yours,
J.R.
I've even re-traced many of the rooms and buildings that Tolkien inhabited at Oxford.
I just don't think the films (especially the mind-numbing computer-effects) did justice to his books.
But then, most film adaptations of great literature fall short, don't they?
I wrote my Master's thesis on Tolkien many years ago; it was entitled
"An Annotated Glossary of the Proper Names in the Mythopoeic Fiction of
J.R. Tolkien." I thought Jackson did a pretty fair job with an
extremely difficult task and I thought most of the CG stuff was adequate
especially in the opening battle scenes where the One Ring is taken from
Sauron. With the advances in CG, as evidenced in "Avatar", I would think
that a remaking of LotR would be astonishing. Anyway, I thought Jackson
did rather well the primitive technology at hand. But, hey, I'm hardly
an objective observer. I really wanted to like the films, and I did, but
I've been told I'm a cheap date. Regards,
J.R.
Be happy, health care reform is on the way. That means you can afford stronger meds and shock therapy!
NT
fs
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
