haldir
Posts: 1
Joined: 29/9/2006
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Quentin Black
quote:
ORIGINAL: oui3d
quote:
ORIGINAL: Quentin Black
Having gotten over my initial feelings of cynicism towards Spielberg and Jackson, who while being good filmmakers are also two of the most overrated ones, I waited for these images with hope and excitement. However these images have not delivered and as per usual I'm left with a bitter taste in my mouth. What is going to happen is Empire and the rest of the media is going to hype this project up, the films are going to make a lot of money and a lot of cinema goers are going to be dissapointed.
Popular isn't overrated. This is cinema, for entertainment. Do you remember entertainment?
Spielberg, Jackson, Lucas and Cameron belong to a group of filmmakers who can seemingly do no wrong in the mass media, even though their recent output is pretty mediocre (admittedly Avatar just about gets away with it by providing amazing visuals, even if the film itself was pretty standard). What's worse is that they're leading the 3D/digital/mo-cap/whatever bandwagon in Hollywood and Empire has jumped right on without thinking. When this technology is used right it can be brilliant, like the way Nolan uses IMAX or Fincher uses mo-cap. However the guilty parties are just churning out projects that are completely style over substance, pushing out their films on the back of the latest technology craze. Just as 3D didn't make my viewing of Avatar any more enjoyable (in fact the out of focus backgrounds got pretty irritating) I don't think throwing a load of CGI at TinTin will improve the film in anyway (in fact it looks really creepy).
Just out of interest...
Indiana Jones and the Alien People - 4 stars
War of the Worlds - 4 stars
The Terminal - 4 stars
AI - 5 stars
King Kong - 5 stars
Revenge of the Sith - 4 stars
Attack of the Clones - 5 stars (changed to 3 since a whole heap of backlash)
Phantom Menace - 4 or 5 stars (again changed to 3 with the benefit of hindsight)
...can anyone honestly say that these very flawed films would get these ratings from Empire if they weren't made by these big names? This is not objective journalism and film fans deserve better, especially since we all know these filmmakers are capable of better. Empire needs to stop being lazy and take a stand against their mediocrity because it's quickly gaining a reputation for being just another celebrity-centric magazine that hypes up whatever Hollywood spoon feeds it.
These people and the 3d/mo-cap craze they brandish like a toy is not the future of film. The future of film lies with Scorsese, Thomas Anderson, Coen brothers, Nolan and the many others who put the film first (even if they aren't to everyone's tastes and don't make billions of dollars) and gimmicks second. The ones you could describe as artists.
No really do you understand cinema? You obviously don't love it. You seem to have a very limited view of the variety of films being made out there. (and the people making them, old white men only, really?)How does having an interest in emerging technologies exclude a filmmaker from the future of cinema? Do you think we should have stopped at stereo sound? After all we do only have the two ears.
I constantly hear the "CGI is shit, practical is best" brigade bleating on about being taken out of the film by effects. and all i can ask is.
a) Sure you were paying attention?
b) Were you really convinced by the original King Kong? Were Harryhausen's skeletons in Jason & the Argonauts flawless? In fact, watching at the Thing did you have trouble separating effects from reality?
Did you knackers....
If you knew the slightest about film you'd argue story first and if Jackson / Spielberg don't know enough about story for you then you need to stop listening to the voices, they're lying to you. Film is allowed to be fun.
Oh god you're one of those people. You're one of those people who leaps to Hollywood's (and by proxy Empire's) defense using the tired argument "films are all about escapism and should be fun" or "Spielberg/Jackson/Lucas made some great films so every mediocre film they've made since is just as great and you just don't understand film and story like they do".
If Spielberg was half the master of narrative people hype him up to be he wouldn't have had shitty looking CGI aliens ruin both Indiana Jones and AI or pander to audiences with cop out, saccharin endings that don't make sense (seriously, how did Tom Cruise's son survive the explosion in War of the Worlds and find his way back to his dad?).
If Jackson really understood story he wouldn't need twelve endings to end Return of the King or have used the first hour of King Kong to introduce subplots and intrigue that never gets explored because he's too busy spending the next two hours playing out repetitive monster fights.
If Lucas knew anything about story telling he wouldn't have written the Star Wars prequels.
Look I'm all for fun films. Tron for example looks like it's going to be awesome and comic book films are a guilty pleasure of mine. However watching Spielberg and Lucas crowbar shitty looking CGI aliens into a great franchise isn't my idea of fun. Neither is watching a senate hearing about intergalactic trade my idea of adventure. The problem with Spielberg and co is that they have the money and power to do what they want and as a result they just prat around with technology, making films that sacrifice creativity and artistic merit for polished mediocrity that people will pay money for. All hype and no delivery. Sadly people like you will always lap it up thinking polishing a turd is the same thing as being creative.
If you'd actually bother to read what I wrote you'd understand I'm not saying that films aren't supposed to be fun or shouldn't use emerging technology. The filmmakers I listed there used all this technology (Nolan uses IMAX, Fincher uses mo-cap, Scorsese is filming his latest in 3D) and Nolan in particular makes movies that appeal to a broad audience. Examples of younger or foreign directors who are pushing the artistic and technological boundries of film include Duncan Jones and Tarsem. Regardless of background (I don't even know why you brought up age or race...oh wait I know...because your argument doesn't really have a point) the one thing they have in common is that they are all adamant about using the technology to enhance the story, themes and characters of the film rather than replacing them with the effects.
The Tin Tin pictures look neither ground breaking or exciting. They just look creepy and distracting.
PS Spielberg himself admitted that if he had the technology at the time, he would have had as much of the shark as possible in Jaws. Instead of being the suspenseful thriller that changed cinema that it was it would have ended up as a dated predecessor to Deep Blue Sea. Cramming as much technology into your film isn't necessarily a good thing.
The quote about lord of the rings needing 12 endings made me laugh, i take it you tried to remove that comment after seeing how stupid the comment was.It does make me laugh when peeps think they know what there talking about but really they have no idea at all.You clearly havent seen LOTR ROTK there fore its advised not to comment on things you havent seen.
|
Printable Version
RE: forgotten Herge' last will - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread