RE: Goofy Out of Place Things in Movies (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message


marcusm -> RE: Goofy Out of Place Things in Movies (1/21/2008 11:24:09 PM)

But look how many other warmovies are filmed. Endless shooting and running. Unless
you are some sort of ballistic examiner it gets boring fast for normal viewers. The Thin Red Line
adds a dimension to warmovies seldom seen before or after for that matter. Sure it is a tad too long
but anyone who has ever been in the army knows it can be like that. Without the poetry part.





Arctic Blast -> RE: Goofy Out of Place Things in Movies (1/21/2008 11:29:09 PM)

Again, I don't totally disagree with you on this one, marcus. I just found that a little too often, the director seemed to be suffering from a need to prove how 'artistic' he could be, for no reason at all other than showing off. It's the same sort of syndrome that affects a lot of Oliver Stone movies, where he feels the need to add all sorts of bizarre quick cuts and things for no discernible reason at all.




marcusm -> RE: Goofy Out of Place Things in Movies (1/21/2008 11:36:56 PM)

Well I think Platoon had similar aspects. It tried to do something more than just
show endless firefights. Who wants to see that anyway? Stone has made some crap movies
but The Platoon is a masterpiece, no question about it.




Arctic Blast -> RE: Goofy Out of Place Things in Movies (1/21/2008 11:49:47 PM)

I like Platoon and Wall Street. Any Given Sunday had some good PARTS to it, but overall was just a mess. The less said about Alexander, the better, Natural born Killers was just stupid. didn't he do U-Turn, as well? that one could have been much better. The only thing I liked about that one was that NOBODY won.






marcusm -> RE: Goofy Out of Place Things in Movies (1/21/2008 11:57:41 PM)

Any Given Sunday succeeded with one thing at least, it made me appreciate aspects of American Football, something I never thought I would. Maybe it took an over playing Al Pacino to see the light :). It made me see the finer points of the sport. This is what movies should do in my book, make you think, or at least have some kind of reaction.




anarchyintheuk -> RE: Goofy Out of Place Things in Movies (1/22/2008 12:08:53 AM)

Loved Thin Red Line, just thought it had several questionable casting decisions.




JMHawkins -> RE: Goofy Out of Place Things in Movies (1/22/2008 7:05:44 AM)

quote:

Enemy at the Gates...


I thought it was intentional (and brilliant) that Enemy at the Gates had the Germans use American accents and the Russians use British accents. A nice twist on the 50's and 60's Hollywood WWII movies with Germans all using British accents.





JudgeDredd -> RE: Goofy Out of Place Things in Movies (1/22/2008 10:40:22 AM)

I see we're going back to the usual "stereotyping" that goes with so many threads nowadays...way to go...you know who you are.

marcusm
Ursa Major said "The Spruances in The Thin Red Line"....it was what he was describing in a thread titled "Goofy Out of Place Things in Movies"...if you think about it, what he said fits the category of the thread, so why retorte
quote:


Personally I think people who get hung up on stuff like "modern ships" should stick to watching documentaries

And as for this
quote:


That explains the brain part(and why some might not like it).

If that is to suggest that those who didn't like don't like films that make you think??? Then [:-] - that's a fairly broad statement, and one which often manifests itself on these boatrds and turns threads into mdu slinging, slagging matches.

I didn't like the Thin Red Line because it bored me. Not because I don't like movies that make you think...it just bored me.

And CanoeRebel...
quote:


The folks out there who liked it are probably the same ones that enjoyed Dancing with Wolves and Cold Mountain.  Drivel.

Aint necessarily so. I liked Dances with Wolves, but I couldn't watch Thin Red Line more than once.




Ursa MAior -> RE: Goofy Out of Place Things in Movies (1/22/2008 11:42:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

I see we're going back to the usual "stereotyping" that goes with so many threads nowadays...way to go...you know who you are.

marcusm
Ursa Major said "The Spruances in The Thin Red Line"....it was what he was describing in a thread titled "Goofy Out of Place Things in Movies"...if you think about it, what he said fits the category of the thread, so why retorte
quote:


Personally I think people who get hung up on stuff like "modern ships" should stick to watching documentaries

And as for this
quote:


That explains the brain part(and why some might not like it).

If that is to suggest that those who didn't like don't like films that make you think??? Then [:-] - that's a fairly broad statement, and one which often manifests itself on these boatrds and turns threads into mdu slinging, slagging matches.

I didn't like the Thin Red Line because it bored me. Not because I don't like movies that make you think...it just bored me.

And CanoeRebel...
quote:


The folks out there who liked it are probably the same ones that enjoyed Dancing with Wolves and Cold Mountain.  Drivel.

Aint necessarily so. I liked Dances with Wolves, but I couldn't watch Thin Red Line more than once.



If I said Spruances out of place in TRL then I was wrong. I wanted to say they were out of place in Pearl harbor.




JudgeDredd -> RE: Goofy Out of Place Things in Movies (1/22/2008 11:50:29 AM)

LOL - you didn't say it was out of place in The Thin Red Line...you did say Pearl Harbour - my bad.

But the point of the film was not the issue. I was poiting out that just because you spot a film has Spruances in it and they were not from that era, it doesn't mean you didn't enjoy the film, neither should one think that just because you did notice such a thing, it doesn't mean you should go and watch documentaries and give up on films. Further, that such a post is not uncommon in a thread titled "Goofy Out of Place Things in Movies"

My bad for saying you said The Thin Red Line, though.




Ursa MAior -> RE: Goofy Out of Place Things in Movies (1/22/2008 6:33:32 PM)

Nevermind JD. There are a lot of people on the net who take themselves way too seriously. And I might even say they even do it from sheer goodwill.




mjk428 -> RE: Goofy Out of Place Things in Movies (1/22/2008 8:30:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

I see we're going back to the usual "stereotyping" that goes with so many threads nowadays...way to go...you know who you are.



Stereotyping is fine as long as we don't insult eachother for our tastes.

More stereotyping:

Speilberg is to film what The Beatles are to music. Scorcese is The Stones. Kubrick is Frank Zappa. George Lucas is The Bee Gees. All very successful even if different levels of talent. And they've all hit some bad notes.

Terrence Malick thinks he's Miles Davis but his films are so dull and pretentious that AT BEST he comes off as the finale of a G3 tour. Where 4 or 5 great guitarists try to impress and outdo each other and only manage to produce a pile of crap. He completely lost me after Days of Heaven. New World was TRL at half speed.


My pet peaves for things out of place in movies:

American Indian tribes in the wrong geographical location. Nothing like having the Sioux attacking Old Tucson to make me start questioning the film makers. At least have somebody say "WTH are they doing here?"

Another one is songs in movies that had yet to be recorded.

I realize these are both petty things but they do break my immersion. They are also so easily researched that it's pretty unforgiveable to get them wrong IMO. I can understand the difficulty of procuring the right WW2 tank, or knowing the proper call of an unladen African Swallow ;), but how hard is it to change the names in the script or use a Buffalo Springfield song instead of Led Zepellin?




morvwilson -> RE: Goofy Out of Place Things in Movies (1/22/2008 9:02:42 PM)

When I enjoy a movie, I tend to watch them more than once because I like to  analyze them. That is when I tend to see the small mistakes. Like in The Longest Day, one of the American Paratroopers carring a Thompson Submachine gun but is wearing an ammo belt with pouches for M-1 Garrand stripper clips.
In Saving Private Ryan, toward the end of the movie there is the sniper in the bell tower. He fires his bolt action Springfeild seven times with out reloading. (that particular rifle had a 5 round internal magazine)
In Enemy at The Gates, the german sniper fires at the russian when he lowers his rifle to observe the effect of his shot, the bolt of his rifle is half way open. (bolt action rifles are not cocked until the bolt is completely closed)
Granted minor points all and I would not pan any of the above mentioned movies for these points.
Then, of course, with the older WW2 films it is always American half tracks being used for German vehicles.

As to The Thin Red Line, I think that film made the critical mistake of being boring (at least it was to me). The problem with artists is that sometimes they get so carried away with being artsy you sometimes have to take art classes to understand what they are doing. That is when I think the artist looses touch with the audience. And for The Thin Red Line, that was proven at the box office here in the US. If I remember rightly, the DVD came out about 6 mo's after it was released in theaters and shortly thereafter it was released one in those two dvd sets attatched to a better movie. I don't mind watching something that makes you think, but how many times do you have to see the same shirtless actor, drenched in sweat stand up in front of some hut?




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.640625