|
Adnan Meshuggi -> Re: Re: Re: Re: New war movies.... (9/24/2002 7:33:36 PM)
|
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dave Briggs
[B]
Although I think we "US people" might have a good reason to be thin skinned these days, that has nothing to do with what I was trying to say. I also figured, based on your initial post, that you might reply with such a remark. I'm sorry you didn't choose to explain your original question, as I was asking you to do. Instead you chose to toss in another veiled remark.
I don't very often hear people talk about movies with a national attachment to the conversation. Movies are truely international. No one makes movies for a particular nationality. All movies today are made for international release or at least that's what the producers hope for. When most people talk about a movie they have seen or are reviewing they usually talk about the director or producer or the actors. I very rarely hear someone bring the country the movie was made in into question. But your reply does seem to give me an indication of your initial intent. Let me try to explain my reasons for my comments.
When I first saw "Das Boot" for example, I knew when I bought my ticket that it was a movie made in Germany and was directed by a German and had a German cast and it was in the German language with English subtitles. But after the movie was over, I didn't think, "Gee, what a great job those Germans did with that movie." Instead I thought, "What a great movie." The nationality of the producer, director and cast didn't even enter my mind. It was a fabulous movie, period. The same goes for Kurasawa movies, one of my favorite directors. I don't see his movies and think, "What a great Japanese movie." His movies are wonderful and his nationality is no factor in the appeal of his work. If I see a movie I don't like, I don't say, "What were those Australians thinking?" I think, "What a crummy movie." You might find this hard to believe, but if you would have been talking about a French movie and had said "what's with French movie makers", I would have responded the same way.
I'm not angry with you or think any less of you, and I respect your opionion. I just wanted to clarify what you were asking. I honestly couldn't figure out if you actually wanted to know what's with with American movie makers or what's with the directors of the two movies you mentioned.
Don't take this too seriously, Frank. I'm just someone who is bold and forward enough to ask someone a direct question and take them to task for what they say or appear to say. Isn't that what forums are all about? [/B][/QUOTE]
Well, that is a great but seldom opinion.....
most people see a movie and donīt think at all (this is why many "good" movies arenīt succsessfull, but others, really stupid movies are huge succsesses...)
some peole only look a movie from their "political/national" perspective, they never would respect a movie from the "wrong" side...
I donīt see war movies with stupid actings (like U 571), because i want historical details, realism and the historical truth as much as possible.... because i think, so many interesting things happened in so many wars, that we donīt need to much lying nonsense....
best example is pearl harbor, here we have a hero who shot down more german planes as the germans lost in the whole war, who is the superhero (i name such heroes minibonds), a lovestory, many lies (like fighterpilots who fly bombers in the tokio raid)... that iīm not interested in that movie to see more than once (and even this was to often)...
this is the fact, why the movies tora tora tora and midway were so good, they had nearly no such parts in it, just the try to make a movie about the things happened....
Das Boot, as good as the movie was, is sadly a similar example... for political and moralic aspects the movie was changed (compared to the book and the history), the spain adventure showed the typical nazis (because so they hoped to got more acceptance), the boot had to be destroyed at the end (no happy end for the evil krauts) and many more such aspects... esp. in the mini-6 parter for TV, the movie is much better....
spr is also a movie with good and bad parts... the beginning sequence was great, because it showed the real war feeling, the end was hollywood at itīs best (you know, one men against 100 and the one survive because he is the hero....) and this makes the movie really bad... but the audience wants such parts, esp. the american audience.. could you imagine how much sccsess had the movie, if the heros had been killed in the attemp to kill that mg-nest ???
I would wish, that the realistic effect of the beginning from spr would be in a war movie completly, from the beginning to the end, without herotic or moralistic finger tip, just as hard as it could be, maybe with retroperspectives to learn something about some characters, but mostly a bloodbath, without a chance to survive, just simple luck, this mixed with fear, hate and cruelty and i think we would have a great war movie... but nobody in the usa would want to see such movie, because no heroes to love, no wimen to amaze, no sex.... just simple brutallity, evil scenes with no moral aspects, no feeling, just killing... you would need great actors (because it is difficult to "play" realistic battle blindness) and great special effects, and if someone acts like a hero you have no introduction of his motives, his feelings, how important it is for him to save his camerades, etc., just the doing, and probably (if it is realistic) the dead body of him.... i would be very interested in such a movie, esp. about ww1 (we could learn all about the horror of war)
Another interesting project would be war movies about the bombing raids, like Schweinfurt, Hamburg (with more historical touch), or Dresden....
Also, a movie with the sense of schindlers liste, but for war, not the holocaust, would be great so some war morongers start to think about their belivings.....
|
|
|
|
