Timewaster's Guide Archive
Departments => Movies and TV => Topic started by: 42 on May 26, 2002, 02:42:28 AM
-
I'm creating this thread in response to something that Fuzzyoctupus noticed. At least some of the lyrics for Fatboy Slim's "Weapon of Choice" come from the 1984 film version of Dune.
Quote: "Walk without rhythm and it won't attract the worm"
This is just after the second chorus of the song and is exactly what Paul tells Jessica when they are escaping from the crashed Ornithopter.
So this thread is for wierd things like that. Another example could be The Dark Side of the Moon and The Wizard of Oz connection. You get the idea.
-
Lol. I'd listened to that lyric a hundred times wondering where the heck it came from.
-
It's too bad Christopher Walken wasn't in Dune. That would be another cool connection.
-
Ha!
By the way, 42, this was a cool idea for a thread.
-
for Wedge fans:
Although an uncommon man, Wedge has a common name. A number of characters in Star Wars stories have had the last name "Antilles," but very few of them are related. Interestingly enough, in the early draft scripts of Star Wars, Wedge was a young human pilot named "Chewie."
Actor Denis Lawson -- who is Ewan McGregor's real-life uncle -- played Wedge Antilles in the classic trilogy.
-
it's cruel to confuse me :'(
-
i have never understanded that quote ??? .... supose just because it does not make sense to me can someone please explain :)
-
??? haven't ??? the ??? foggiest ???
and it's understood
-
uh... do u 2 mean the "walk witrhout a rhythm and it wont attract a worm" quote? if so, its from the film dune. it was all about big ummm worms that ate nething that had a regular rhythm. look just watch the damn film and find out ok? hey its got sting in it! thats gotta be a reason to watch it, right?
-
Sting AND Patrick Stewart.
-
And that guy with the cigar from Quantum Leap.
-
well i'm definetley watching it now! ::)
-
Just thought I'd add some recent movie-related rumors and/or news.
Item 1: News is starting to leak about the structure of LOTR: Two Towers. For example, the Battle of Helm's Deep, arguably the dramatic focus of the story's middle section, will be a single 45-minute battle scene with no cut-aways. This idea just floors me - the 30-minute beachhead scene from Private Ryan was one of the more intense cinematic experiences I've had, and this will likely match that (or surpass it). There have been other interesting tidbits about that scene which I will leave out for those of you that hate SPOILERS.
Item 2: As some of you may know, Orson Scott Card held a convention of sorts this weekend called Endercon, celebrating the (20th? 25th?) anniversary of his novel, Ender's Game. The big movie news revealed here was that Card is working on his third draft of the script which will be directed by Wolfgang Peterson for Warner Brothers. Card has been working on this one for a long time - to give you an idea, his first idea for an actor to play Ender was a 11-year-old Brad Pitt. The studio is apparently giving him a lot of crap because he wants the cast to represent the world's population, but the studio wants a predominantly white cast. Grrr.
Item 3: Wolfgang Peterson is also planning on making a superhero movie for Warner Brothers: Batman vs. Superman! I'm not sure about this one - it will depend largely on the casting of the leads. The script looks promising, though, contrasting the light of Metropolis and its hero with the darkness of Gotham City and its antihero. There are other movies in the works for both Superman and Batman, and Aranovsky's Batman: Year One movie looks very promising, detailing Batman's first forays into the world of vigilanteism.
-
That's interesting, the largest complaint I've heard about LotR and other movies like Spider-Man is that the action sequences are too long. Hopefully, the Helm's Deep sequence isn't so intense that it bores the audience. People can only take so much before they just give-up waiting for the situation to resolve itself.
In other news, the League of Extraordinary Gentleman movie has started filming in Prague. It's starring Sean Connery. Also a script for a Submariner movie has been started. The scriptwriter has promised that the movie will have little to no tie ins to the comic books. Still, it looks like there will be no shortage of comic-book tie-in movies coming out soon.
-
That's weird, because I haven't heard a single person (until you) complain that the action sequences in either movie were too long. Most criticism of FOTR focused on the linear travel-and-fight plot and the similarity between the action sequences, not that they lasted too long. Critics who didn't like the movie (Philadelphia Weekly, Hollywood Report Card, Richard Roeper, Juicy Cerebellum, etc.) complained about the overall length of the movie, but most of them pointed to the action sequences as highlights. Other major complaints I've heard were the over-repetition of musical themes in the score and the insertion of unnecessary sequences (e.g. the sappy romantic scene). Critics who liked the movie also pointed to the action sequences as a highlight - their minor quibbles lay in other aspects of the movie. The same goes for the people I've talked to about the movie - no single action sequence lasts over 10 minutes (including the multi-part "escape from Moria" sequence), so I don't think there's much to complain about.
This is also true of Spiderman. Few critics panned the movie, but those who did (Spliced Wire, Roger Ebert, Amazing Colossal, San Fran Chronicle, NY Observer, Apollo Movie Guide, etc.) never mentioned the length of the action sequences. They complained primarily about the script, either the plot structure or the schticky dialogue. Ebert, in fact, complained that the action sequences went by TOO fast. Critics who liked the movie had no complaints about the fight scene lengths, and I haven't heard this complaint from friends and acquaintances who have seen the movie. The action scenes in this movie don't last that long either (10-12 minutes at most) so there doesn't seem to be much to gripe about here either. There may be people who think the action scenes in these movies go on too long, but it was FAR from the largest complaint levied against either movie.
You're right about the proliferation of comic-book movies, but I think it's unfair to list League of Extraordinary Gentlemen in this category, because few people have even heard of the comic. I would list it with From Hell and Road To Perdition as a movie that came from a comic but almost no one who saw the movie knew it. For the record, though, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is an amazing work and could be a great movie if it gets done the right way.
-
The length of the action sequences was the number one complaint about Spider-man in one of my film classes (about 60 students) when we took a class poll. And a simular poll was taken about FotR in an English class I took. I've also heard the complaint from several family members and friends. We were talking about the willingness of the audience to accept manipulation. If something is too intense, people's psychological defenses kick in and give them the opposite reaction as what the filmmaker or writer want. This why a lot of horror films also include a lot of humor to balance out the intesity so people can make it through the film. The problem is that critics and movie buffs can take a lot more than the average film-goer. They simply have become less sensative to emotional manipulation and have higher tolerance levels. That's why people like Roger Eboert never mention things like that as being problems. The average film-going may hae to watch the film a couple of times to prevent their psychological defenses from kicking in and be able to enjoy the whole thing.
-
I would argue that it is not movie critics and movie buffs who are out of touch and desensitized. Rather, it is the members of conservative, Christian-dominated, definitely non-cosmopolitan communities who are out of touch with what is appropriate in film (e.g. the length of action sequences). I can imagine that people in your classes and other local friends and acquaintances were astounded by a 10-minute fight scene. It's probably been several years since any of them has seen a decent action movie because the industry simply hasn't been making good action movies outside the R-rated category in the last five years or so (until this past year).
An action sequence is not necessarily about emotional manipulation on the part of the film-maker. If it is being perceived as such, this is probably the reaction of an overly-sensitive mind who wants to believe that any portrayal of violence is an attempt by a film-maker to get a rise out of the audience. It is not. Violence is a part of life, and it is the natural flip-side to heroic action. Heroic action without an accurate portrayal of the accompanying violence is manipulation of the viewer, giving the impression of action without consequence.
If the fight scenes in FoTR were too much for local audiences, they'd have the same gripes about Raiders of the Lost Ark and its extended fight- and chase-sequences if it were released in theaters today. FoTR portrayed its action sequences with optimal timing, and Spiderman came pretty close to doing the same. Movies are not made for a community like the one that many of us live in (i.e. Utah) where the movie-viewing is highly self-regulated and selective, and complaints about the length of the fight scenes in these two movies would likely be wholly absent outside this specific context.
It's nice to be able to say that an intelligent, insightful expert on a genre like Roger Ebert is out of touch and easily manipulated, but I doubt you'd be able to convince many people of that, while he could probably easily convince people that you have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to movies.
-
Dude, I told you not to throw a rock at the beehive...
-
Kid I think you misunderstood. It's not that Roger Ebert is easily manipulated, it's that he's not and therefor it takes more to interest him, but this is too much for people who are easily manipulated. And its not just horror and violence. The same thing happens with humor, sentimentality, cuteness, joy or just about any emotion. People simply get get emotionally tired after awhile.
-
I think 42 has a point here, though I'm not sure if it's the point he just reinforced. Above, he said:
"The problem is that critics and movie buffs can take a lot more than the average film-goer. They simply have become less sensitive to emotional manipulation and have higher tolerance levels. "--42
To which Kid said:
"It's nice to be able to say that an intelligent, insightful expert on a genre like Roger Ebert is out of touch and easily manipulated, but I doubt you'd be able to convince many people of that."--Kid
42 said that Ebert would be LESS sensitive to manipulation. I think 42 grazed something larger, however. I think that by seeing so many movies, and becoming so much of an expert on them, you start to enjoy them for different reasons. This is perhaps the biggest conundrum in criticism. By becoming a critic, you begin to lose touch with the interests of people not as fluent in the genre as yourself.
In example, I put forward writing books. Not to tout my abilities--it's rather unaligned with abilities, it simply has to do with time spent--but I have written so much, and looked into the philosophy of fiction writing so much, that I can no longer read and enjoy a fiction novel. As I read one, I dissect, trying to discover what the author is doing, why he/she is doing it, and how I can learn from it. I can't just read a book anymore, and I've started liking books for different reasons.
I think the same thing happens with movie experts. They begin to look for different items than the average, inexperienced person, and so their reviews lose potency.
-
Could it also be said, then, that the same thing that happens to critics also happens to directors and producers? That making so many movies has caused them to view them in a different way than the audience does? In that case, then a critic is not out of touch with the movie--he is in fact one of the few people capable of seeing what the director intended him to. It's the audience that gets left out.
-
Let me clarify what I was saying. 42 said that people who are not movie experts rebel against a moviemaker's desire for them to react a certain way - after 45 minutes of continuous suspenseful action, the audience member begins to lose the tension and vent it through laughing at the action or in other ways. Meanwhile, a movie expert (e.g. big fat Roger Ebert) has seen more movies and can maintain the emotion the moviemaker wants him to have for a longer period of time. It takes greater intensity of action to interest a hardcore movie fan, according to 42, but he can endure the moviemaker's bombardment of emotional directives for a longer period of time. So while he is less easily manipulated in one way (doesn't cry at the drop of a hat) he is more easily manipulated in another way (he will sit on the edge of his seat for the entirety of the Private Ryan beachhead scene, as the moviemaker would like). But enough about big fat Roger Ebert...
I think that the lack of connectivity between good critics and their intended audience is largely a fallacy. A person's reasons for liking a movie are always highly personal - it's not like there is one set of "everyman" reasons to like a movie and then a "fancy-pants" set for experts. Plenty of people who don't watch many movies have an artistic sense and enjoy good shot-framing and cinematography. They just have trouble articulating these feelings because they lack familiarity with the study of the medium. Conversely, plenty of critics enjoy a good fight scene or a witty one-liner or even jokes about flatulance. It varies from person to person, and learning more about the medium simply allows for the articulation of opinions. Any change of taste resulting from exposure to a medium is fairly minimal, in my opinion. The myth of the austere, disconnected critic is ... well, a myth. When it comes to movies, at least.
I think it's also true of criticism outside of movies to a certain degress, but to a lesser degree depending on the age of the form of criticism. Criticism of a medium builds a culture of its own over time with its own values and preferences - this is easy to see in the criticism of poetry or sculpture, for instance. The personal preference of the critic is still there, but it is marginalized more by the pressure to fit the mold. The weight of history, as it were. Schools of criticism for mediums like movies or comic books are in their nascent stages and, thus, allow more freedom for personal expression.
p.s.: Roger Ebert is FAT.
-
Kid, I so regret that my file on aesthetic experiences is still with one of my professors. Anyways, during the early twentieth century, several people did experiments to see how people react to different art works. And by art I mean all of the arts (dance, drama, visual art, literature, poetry, music, film ect...). They found that there are basicly six reactions that people have. They were trying to discover just what is the best way to enjoy art. Critics actually are one category, which incidentally is not the best way to enjoy a work of art. Anyways, we repeated the experiment in one of my classes and found that it holds true.
Also, in post-modern/contemporary criticism it really unpopular to fit a mold, at least in the visual arts.
-
The critic's way of enjoying something is not the best way? That's got to be the cockamamiest idea I've heard in all my goll-durn days! I'm usually all for objectifying things as far as possible, but a person's way of enjoying something cannot be ranked as better or worse than someone else's. How could it be measured - levels of endorphin-release in the brain during enjoyment of art? You may be able to point to aspects of enjoyment that a traditional critic misses out on, but you cannot say that their intensity of enjoyment is greater or less than someone else's - that is far beyond the limits of objectively measurable criteria.
And as for po-mo/contemporary criticism, it is an arena where the pressure is placed on non-conformity. Critics feel a pressure not to agree with others and to use an entirely new approach, and this is a conformity not to conform that is as just as virulent and repellent as any other kind of forced conformity.
PS: I enjoy this forum in a better way than any of the rest of you, and I dare you to prove otherwise! So there.
-
Not only do I enjoy this forum in a better way than you do, but I enjoy this whole site in a better way. So don't be talkin' smack, enjoy-boy.
-
be afraid, be very afraid....
Nemesis
Star Trek X
http://nemesis.startrek.com
don't you think the bad guy looks like picard?
-
Well I was on the palladium website looking up info on the new HTH rules, and discovered a post from Kevin Simbieda's wife (Maryinn) that they "are very close" to closeing the deal on the Rifts movie. and that's all she'd say, of course they've been negotiating for 4 years and how close 'close' is who knows. But If they do make it, I hope Simbieda watches them very closely so that it dosen't turn into the D&D stinker (which I finaly saw the last 30-40 min).
-
Well, that's where you get into some complicated territory. Siembieda is usually very vehement about licensing out his products to other developers and then completely ignoring them--they sink or swim without him ever paying attention. On the other hand, if he does decide to get involved he will likely get way too involved, as is his tendency. And with something as high-profile as a movie, I can't see him not getting involved. I don't know which situation would be better, actually.
-
Well, it was announced today that Alfonso Cuaron will direct the third Harry Potter movie. I find it interesting that they chose a Mexican to direct a British film, especially since they were so determined to keep it a British film when they made the first one. ::)
-
Um 42 Harry Potter is an american film. The actors may be brittish but the producers and several of the prospective directors have been american, it's also fully funded by american backers. if you go buy the fact that they film in brittan and use a lot of brittish actors and crews then you'd also have to say the first 4 star wars and all the Indiana jones were brittish as well.
-
Yes, but during the production of the first film, JK insisted that every actor in the film be British, including the extras. She even is rumored to have not wanted Chris Colombus as the director because he was American. Sure the money backing it is American but the intellectual rights belong to a Brit. With Columbus stepping down it was thought that JK would have a chance to get a Brittish director, which is what she wanted in the first place.
Also, half of the producers are British and most of the production crew is British. If the distributor (WB) wasn't American the entire film would of been British made.
-
its a well known fact that one of the first ppl involved on the project was a certain chap called steven spielberg. however, he was essentially booted off (he "left") because he wanted it to be set in america. generally its felt that that would have destroyed the atmosphere of the film (its a very british book)
-
Well, it *would* have destroyed the feel of the film.
Would have been like the stupid Doctor Who tv-movie they freaking shot in America.
-
I wish spielburg had been involved, it was a very boreing moive. i lost my intrest after the first 30 min. I still haven't read any of the books, and i doubt i ever will. while I understand wanting the movie to 'feel' Brittish, I think Rawling went a little overboard. I'm sure she's rather upset that the second move will have a few americans in it (a promotion over here that has Contest winners in the movie).
-
So, the rumor is that someone has licensed Scott Card's The Lost Boys for a motion picture. I believe hearing rumors that a movie of Ender's Game was in the works. Does anyone know if a movie based on a Card novel will actually get made?
-
The Ender's Game movie has been in the works for over a decade. As I understand it, Card has sold himself the movie rights in some odd little deal to give himself complete creative control, and is having trouble finding someone to actually do the movie his way.
Of course, it doesn't help that the first draft of the script absolutly stunk. I've got a copy of it, if you ever want to have a look.
-
Wolfgange Peterson (a perfect storm) is currently on board to direct (has been for a few months).
-
As some of you may know, Orson Scott Card held a convention of sorts this weekend called Endercon, celebrating the (20th? 25th?) anniversary of his novel, Ender's Game. The big movie news revealed here was that Card is working on his third draft of the script which will be directed by Wolfgang Peterson for Warner Brothers. Card has been working on this one for a long time - to give you an idea, his first idea for an actor to play Ender was a 11-year-old Brad Pitt. The studio is apparently giving him a lot of crap because he wants the cast to represent the world's population, but the studio wants a predominantly white cast. Grrr.
Life would be so much easier for us all if people paid attention to things that I say. EUOL was right about the first script draft being terrible, but it's been through several iterations since then, and it is supposedly in a far superior state at present.
-
Forgive me if I don't hold my breath for a Card movie anytime soon (as in the next couple of years).
-
As I understand things, Scott has a bit of...trouble getting along with most of the SF community. I have a suspicion he has similar hindrances when working with Hollywood.
-
As a matter of fact, he demands complete and total control of what does and doesn't get put in the movie. That means if the film's producer, director, and editor all want to take something out, and Card doesn't want it taken out, then Card has to have his way. That's been the major delay on movie deals for his books.
And yes, I did hear that little piece of trivia straight from Card.
-
lol. Well, I guess that solves it, then.
Still, I guess I can see his point. It'd be tough to let a movie come out with pieces you don't approve of in it.
-
An interesting fact I found out this weekend (that kind of goes along with some of the discussion in Books): Terry Pratchett co-wrote the screenplay for Muppets Take Manhattan.
-
well it's officaial, New Line cinima wants to make a MacGuyver movie. The only problem No Richerd Dean Anderson, well he won't be playing Mac. He might be a producer and get a cameo.
-
News on Ender's Game from a Card nerd convention appearance:
"Orson Scott Card began his reading session by giving an update on the status of adapting Ender?s Game for the big screen. Nothing too new, or out of the ordinary, but he did confirm that they are still trying to come up with a script that blends Enders Game and Enders Shadow. Blending the two novels solves the problem that much of Ender?s Game is Ender?s internal monologue/struggle with the tasks placed before him. He also re-emphasized that no one has been cast yet, and any child will probably be unknown and approximately 7 years old right now in order to be in the 9 year old range when it comes time to film in approximately 1-2 years."
Maybe you guys are right. This massive reworking of the script doesn't bode well, even if it is a good idea (and I'm not saying it is). They may be as close as they've ever been to getting it made, but it may never get any closer. Without a finished script, how long can they keep Wolfgang Peterson attached to the project?
In other news from the same convention, New Line has announced that they've optioned Greg Bear's Forge Of God with tentative plans to make the whole trilogy. I've only read Forge Of God (and maybe the sequel although I remember nothing about it), but I was very impressed with it. Could make a good movie. Any other opinions?
-
I personally worry that any movie adaptation of Ender's Game would end up being too much of a kid's movie. All the major characters are kids, and it would be hard for a movie company to sell the movie to a public unfamilar with the story. Adults might not want to see it because it's all about kids. Kids would probably want to see it, but, if kids are the target audience, it would have to be dumbed down quite a bit and the tone would be considerably lighter.
-
Jerry Seinfeld is making a movie/documentary about his development of a new stand-up act. It will have to be pretty dang funny if it wants to be funnier than the trailer.
http://www.apple.com/trailers/miramax/comedian.html
-
So Disney is planning on making a martial-arts version of Snow White. It'll have Shoa Lin monks instead of dwarves. Could this be a reaction to the pacifying of fairy tales?
-
I don't really see Disney reacting to the pacifying of fairy tales since they are the worst offender in the first place. More likely, this is another entry into the current trend of remodeling classic stories and repackage them by incorporating this season's fads. The Ocean's Eleven remake injected modern crime-drama sarcasm and attitude into a limp Rat-Pack project. The new Solaris (also by Soderbergh) livens up a cerebral Russian sci-fi art film with big name stars and CGI. Guy Ritchie is about to release a remake of the classic Italian romance Swept Away with Madonna (does she count as a fad?) Mr. Deeds Goes to Town was repackaged as a lowbrow Adam Sandler comedy. The Ring is being remade as a slick and moody supernatural thriller with much of the disturbing creepiness of the original diluted down to "for the masses" levels. Insomnia was remade from the Swedish original with almost no change whatsoever except for casting Robin Williams as the killer (with Al Pacino playing the Skarsgard protagonist note for note).
Remakes are popular now like never before. Disney has simply decided to capitalize by making a martial arts fairy tale that everyone is familiar with and that can capitalize on the high-energy martial arts popularized by Jackie Chan and the mythic atmosphere of Crouching Tiger. Does that answer your question?
-
Kid, the question was a joke, perhaps too subtle, but an intended joke none the less. ;D
-
See - this is why we have emoticons. So people can tell if you are joking and they're allowed to laugh. Especially when you're making a joke that could be argued as a serious statement. Disney is not a monolith with a single brain (believe it or not) and I wouldn't be surprised at all if there are elements within the company that would like to distance themselves from what Disney's done with fairy tales in the past. The retelling of Snow White could very well represent this sentiment from people working for Disney. The company as a whole may also by trying to rework its image to stay competitive now that new kiddie-movie companies are stealing their business. By retelling Snow White in a different way, they may be consciously trying to distance themselves with their "old-timey" reinterpretation of 1937. I believe that this could very well be part of the reason they are green-lighting the Snow White and the 7 Shaolin Monks movie, but I think it is motivated in a more general sense by the popularity of repackaged hits.
-
If they want to do a cool martial arts fairy tale movie, why not Momotaro the Peach Boy? I've been waiting for them to do that for years.
-
It was announced today that Will Smith will be starring in the film adaptation of Isaac Asimov's "I, Robot." The movie is being directed by Alex Proyas ("Dark City," "The Crow") and the script has been passed through the hands of several writers, including Hillary Seitz ("Insomnia") "A Beautiful Mind" writer Akiva Goldsman. Personally, it sounds like a terrible mess and a travesty to me.
-
Just when I thought that there couldn't be any worse Hollywood rumor than Arnold Schwarzenegger talking about doing a live-action version of Captain Planet.....
-
Please tell me you are joking, Slant.
The cartoon was terrible, WHY would they make a movie out of it? Let alone a movie starring Arnold.
-
does anyone care that Star TRek 10 is coming out in a little over a week?
-
I desperately want to care about it, but I'm finding it hard. The commercials sort of look cool, but the 2nd Edition CCG looks cooler--and when you're upstaged by your own merchandise, you know you're in trouble.
Besides, with The Two Towers nearly upon us, I find very little room in my brain or time in my schedule to think about other movies.
-
*WARNING - POSSIBLE SPOILER AHEAD*
the bad guy looks like picard
-
That just ruined the movie for me...
They show that much in the commercials.
-
I keep trying to be excited too, but I'm more worried. The sources I've read say that this is probably the last Star Trek movie in a long while. I suppose that's probably a good thing, since we--it's target audience--are so unexcited. However, the movies have kind of been a staple. They just aren't earning cash, though. Let's hear it for the market system....
-
it's the last "the next generation" one, and no wonder they're not earning money - i haven't seen a single trailer, the only reasons i know about it are the website(which i found by accident) and a poster which i only saw last night after going to the cinema
-
well it's being advertised a lot over here.
-
It's being advertised too much. I was a lot more excited before I saw the trailer.
-
One trailer now, two datas? or was it data and lore?
-
Presumably Data and Lore. Strange that they'd bring him back in a movie about Romulans, but since the rumor is...well, I guess i should avoid spoilers.
-
Whoa, whoa, whoa, Fell. You can't just say something like that and then back off. Please, spoil us (or me at least :) )
I've got to say that I'm not terribly excited about this Trek film. I can't put my finger on why, though.
-
perhaps because the last one was utter sh***?
-
Actuallly, I never saw the last one. I'm a big fan of First Contact though. It wasn't at typical Trek movie...but that's what I think I liked about it.
Did they lose another Enterprise in Insurrection?
-
almost, it's always nearly destroyed when riker's in charge
-
SPOILER ALERT
The rumor is that Data dies once and for all in this one.
-
cool, where are you hearing these rumours?
-
I actually wouldn't be surprised to see several crew members meet their demise, this being the last of the movies.
In fact, I'll predict right now that Picard dies in battle or while sacrificing himself for the crew (or both). I think this will happen despite the final episode of the series. Just a guess, though.
-
i'm willing to bet that the ship will be destroyed ;D
-
If you watch the previews closely, I think you can already see it being destroyed.
-
and data floating in space
-
Or Lore.
Anyway, the movie's out now and getting abysmal reviews. Has anyone seen it?