 
|
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 |
In Reply to: Re: Best Director Award: obsolete? posted by Victor Khomenko on January 22, 2002 at 15:39:34:
I'll readily admit that Scott has lost his way in recent years (how the cartoon-epic Gladiator ever scored Best Picture is beyond me -- next thing WWF will be in the Olympics). Nevertheless, he has redeemed himself to a degree with Black Hawk Down. Why? Although visually he completely knocked of Spielberg's SPR he does manage to tell a plausible story almost completely using visuals -- in many director's hands it would have become complete chaos. And finally, he thankfully resisted including *most* flag-waving, rah-rah-shish-boom-bah-type speeches that take over films like this.Doug Schneider
Follow Ups:
I know the story (I read the chapters from the book) and would like to see a good rendition. However, I am completely insecure about trying it. American war movies generally disgust me. They tend to range from idiotic and silly to revolting, with the latest gems like SPR, U-571 and Pearl Harbor being prime example of just how low that genre has become here. So I am extremely reluctant to try another one.Since you are recommending it I might give it a try - when my wife is out of town - on a large screen with all channels going. I am not against giving credit when it is due. And I would not mind to be positively surprised.
It's graphic though not quite as graphic as SPR with out the preachiness and hollywood gumdrop wrapping that sandwiched SPR. It lacks the structural sense of stupidity of U571 wherin preposterousness is heaped upon ridiculousness. It lacks the specious subplots, brainless romantic storyline and downright silly rewriting of history to serve its purposes of Pearl Harbor.It is very much the story of the battle - with little personal character development pretext or poitical subtext. If you can get into the soldier's preparations and a fairly literal playing out of a battle against hopeless odds its quite interesting. But be warned - lots of people getting shot and blow up - but not in the pure shock value SPR manner or Schwarznegger good guys never get hit sort of way either. But it is bloody so in that regard it is quite Hollywood. In other words it is graphic rather than suggestive...
joejoe
***It is very much the story of the battle - with little personal character development pretext or poitical subtext. If you can get into the soldier's preparations and a fairly literal playing out of a battle against hopeless odds its quite interesting.I like this paragraph - this is the type of action that should allow a good director to REALLY open up, or bad one to fall onto his face. So I am now even more curious.
***But be warned - lots of people getting shot and blow up - but not in the pure shock value SPR manner or Schwarznegger good guys never get hit sort of way either. But it is bloody so in that regard it is quite Hollywood. In other words it is graphic rather than suggestive...That is another interesting point. A short time ago I had the discussion with someone regarding the shocking schenes in good films. Violence and gore can be done many different ways. In that particular example the question was whether my wife found a brutal scene intollerable.
The reality thought is that for an adult the violence, if it is closely integrated into the plot is not in itself too objectionable, within limits. It becomes objectionable if it is simply gratuitous - for instance like that in the Hannibal, which I thought was a complete trash so the violence there just made it ever trashier, and that was not easy.
It seems like there is big difference between for instance how the battle scenes are presented in Full Metal Jacket, and the SPR. It is horrifying in its almost static power in the FMJ, and idiotic in the Ryan. Why? The first one uses shades, the second - primitive colors and crude brushwork.
The true horror of war and battle is never in the endless barrels of red paint. The true horror is always in the faces of the participants. In their eyes. In the trembling of their bodies. If that spells "subtlety" then it is because that IS the key.
I love FMJ. This is certainly not its match, but it is far better than any recent Hollywood war pic.joe
What I liked about it is that Scott *seems* to have just documented the battle. There is a little bit of that melodramatic speechmaking, but only a wee bit. From what I read Scott was not interested in making a pro-American war movie, but producer Bruckheimer was. Seems Scott got it mainly his way.Doug Schneider
...do you find out the DVD release date?
Vic,I agree with DAS 100% on BHD. Yeah, the combat scenes are a knock-off of SPR (whose opening 30 minutes are still among the best), but the film could have been much more "rah rah, aren't we the best" than it was.
I read that the Somali people have been fighting to get tickets to watch a pirated version of the film in Mogadishu and that they cheer when the Americans get killed. They apparently don't like how they were portrayed.
Truth hurts I guess.
Tosh
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 ]
