Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 15 of 25
-
June 25th, 2010 12:06 PMPokémon Ranger ✩ MoriartyHmm, that's very true. I think I just prefer my films/theatre to either a) be placed entirely in a fictional universe, or b) make the audience aware of the fictional universe without breaking the Fourth Wall too badly. Arthur Miller's The Crucible and All My Sons was a mix up of the two philosophies, I think.
Yeah, I separate the Scientology from the acting because Tom Cruise can actually act, and imo a lot of Hollywood ~stars~ are perfectly normal but severely lacking in that department these days. It seems like anybody can be an actor so long as they're beautiful/handsome...another reason why I watch foreign films and Indie stuff. At least it's got "real" people in it. As a chubby person, I'm fed up of HW telling me that all fat people are either comic-relief morons or psychopaths. Hence why Hurley from ABC's LOST is one of my favourite television characters; he swerves into the comic relief category sometimes, but only as a deeper extension of his role in the show. Despite his size, he is a very well-rounded and realistic character. -
June 25th, 2010 11:52 AMRichard LynchAh, but sometimes that awareness of a different reality works in the films benefits, usually in comedies. Kevin Smith's films come to mind, and even a few Woody Allen films (Whatever Works comes to mind, with Larry David ranting to the audience). In those cases, it works very well... but in most others, it doesn't, I agree.
And Tom Cruise is a great actor. He was amazing in Collateral. He's one of the few who I can separate acting work from social life (his personal life is none of our business, really, but you gotta admit, he is a Scientologist whackaloon, I just wish he wouldn't make it so obvious in public). Another one John Travolta, also a Scientologist nut job, but I love him as an actor. -
June 25th, 2010 11:18 AMPokémon Ranger ✩ MoriartyThis is why I could never get on with the theatre of Bertolt Brecht: he was very much against the idea of entertaining and immersing the audience, and had more of the idea that the audience ought to be aware that they are watching a fictional representation of reality. Brechtian theatre just goes over my head...to my mind, if something immerses an audience then they remember it better and dissect it in their own minds, like Waiting for Godot, or Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. The latter makes the audience aware that they are in a fictional reality, but immerses them in the 'story' of Hamlet all the same. I can think about that play for hours. :3
Oh don't get me wrong, I LOVED Cloverfield, but it just made me feel a bit sick! I was like you, expecting it to be a bit disappointing (I found Blair Witch disappointing after all of the hype about the clever camera work) but aside from the motion sickness I thought it was an amazing film. I was in tears at the end when the camera man was eaten...but also squicked out because you got to see it. A very effective film. =]
And it's nice to meet someone who respects Tom Cruise's acting skills rather than out and out dismissing him. I liked him in War of the Worlds, and I really enjoyed it as a movie (again thinking it was going to be a let down because I love the original, the musical and the novel). -
June 25th, 2010 10:52 AMRichard LynchLynch has said that his movies are more meant to be an immersion experience as opposed to a theatrical one. He wants to put you in a different world; his world, and nothing else. I think he succeeds with aplomb! Kubrick, with his later works, is the same way, IMO.
And actually, Cloverfield didn't bother me. I very much enjoyed it. I remember thinking it was going to be a terrible indie-film, and then the first explosion came, and I was dumbfounded. It had some of the greatest special effects I've ever seen, almost rivaling Speilberg's War of the Worlds, which I often cite as having the greatest special effects ever (damn you Tom Cruise for ruining that movie's reputation! You're a good actor, but a social nut job!). Plus the fact that you don't really see the monster (except in quick snippets) was brilliant for a modern mass-chaos monster movie. -
June 25th, 2010 10:10 AMPokémon Ranger ✩ Moriarty...I have seen Doctor Strangelove! Duuh. "Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the War Room!" is one of my favourite movie quotes of all time. I can't believe I forgot about it. ;_; Eraserhead...I saw it quite a few years ago now so I can't recall specifics, but I remember being very...I dunno what the word is. Immersive, I guess? Like, normally I'm very much aware that I am sat in a room watching a screen that has images on it, but with films like Eraserhead, Amelie, and strangely some Marx Brothers stuff like Duck Soup I'm right in there with the action. I love films like that. :]
Eugh, I don't like shaky-camera things. I had a real problem watching Cloverfield because of the camera work, and several old 1970's episodes of Thriller nearly made me feel sick. :x I think I might skip it on that basis; with my ~medication~ weird camera angles can really screw my head up. D: -
June 25th, 2010 7:59 AMRichard LynchYou've seen Eraserhead? Good for you. What'd you think? I believe you have to be a fan of surrealist art (like, paintings) in order to truly appreciate it. And The Shining is one of my favorites by Kubrick! If you only ever see one more, you simply must see Dr. Strangelove, or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb. It's arguably his best film.
Also, I watched Tetsuo last night, and it was decent. It had some aspects of your usual experimental film, but there were too many shaky-camera and fast moving shots (I felt like I was going to be motion sick at some scenes). Still worth a gander if you're a fan of surrealist (or Japanese) cinema. However, it wasn't on par with Lynch, even though many people claim it's better. In my opinion at least! -
June 25th, 2010 2:08 AMPokémon Ranger ✩ MoriartyI haven't heard of it, even though I have seen Eraserhead and The Elephant Man! Thanks for the info, I'll have to check it out :D The only Kubrick thing I've seen is The Shining, admittedly. ;~;
D'aww. Yay! I get to be friend with a smart person. *nods* -
June 24th, 2010 7:59 PMRichard LynchSo, I just got this surrealist movie I've been wanting to see for years called Tetsuo: The Iron Man, which I heard was akin to both David Lynch (like Eraserhead) and David Cronenberg (who did the remake of The Fly), and those are two of my favorite directors (David Lynch actually is my favorite director, second only to Kubrick). Have you ever heard about it?
You're my obscure artsy stuff pal, so I thought if anyone heard about it, you would. :P -
June 18th, 2010 1:19 AMPokémon Ranger ✩ MoriartyI haven't seen the remake, no! I only discovered the original when we watched it in Social Psychology class to study peer pressure. It was such a powerful film! Yet others seemed to be bored by it...one girl complained that it didn't have any ~fit~ guys so she wasn't interested. :| There is more to good films than good-looking actors godsdamnit. ;_;
I will check that out! I haven't seen the Nolan remake although I keep meaning to, so I will make sure I see the original first :D I like doing that with films. Especially films that have their endings changed to avoid upsetting movie-goers, sigh. It's like when the Germans changed the ending of King Lear so that Lear and Cordelia lived. What was the point of the entire play, then? Nothing! Bah! Leave source material as it is! D: Sorry, I get very grumpy about this. >:
Amelie is an incredible film. I watched it on Film4 at 1am, and the next morning rushed out to buy the DVD so I could make my parents watch it. I love and adore Audrey Tautou.
Thanks for the link! I'll look into them. :D -
June 17th, 2010 3:20 PMRichard LynchI adore 12 Angry Men. I think its one of the greatest movies ever made, in fact. Have you seen Friedkin's remake? Not half bad... plus, no movie with Jack Lemmon could not be good. And I agree with the movie Interview with the Vampire, however, I actually liked Tom Cruise in that movie. I think he pulled it off great.
If you want to see an incredibly intense foreign film, look into the original Insomnia. Not the remake by Chris Nolan, the original. I caught it once on TV, and it had me glued to the screen. The Vanishing (original by Sluizer - he directed the remake too, but they forced him to "Americanize" the ending, and it lost its impact). Of course, I can;t mention foreign films without bringing up the French director Jean-Pierre Jeunet. Amelie and Delicatessen are masterpieces.
As for the Criterion Collection, it's a collection of movie releases that are rather pricey, but most of them you can't find anywhere else. They also have some of the best special features of all DVDs. I'm a firm advocate of them (I collect them... I have about 100/500+); I've never been disappointed with a movie they've released yet:
http://www.criterion.com/ -
June 16th, 2010 1:56 PMPokémon Ranger ✩ MoriartyNosferatu (1922), Metropolis (1925), The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951), Forbidden Planet (1956) and 12 Angry Men (1957) are all my favourite movies. I hate it when people say that older films suck because they're in black and white, or the special effects aren't up to scratch. THEY HAD STORYLINES AND GOOD ACTING GODDAMNIT.
/rant
I've not seen Vampyr or heard of the Criterion Collection - I'll have to check 'em both out. Anything that promotes vampires as the creepy supernatural creatures they're meant to be. :|
I think it was more the movie version of Anne Rice's Interview With a Vampire that turned vampires into pu- er, pretty-boys. - 80's Tom Cruise + Brad Bitt = instant fan appeal. -.- Although I did try to read IWAV and...yeah. Didn't get on too well with it. XD -
June 16th, 2010 1:44 PMRichard LynchAhhh, Nosferatu. You know, for a 1922 film, it still scared me when I first saw it. Incredibly atmospheric (and, not to mention that the director, Mernau, invented the idea that vampires could be killed by sunlight, which isn't in traditional folklore or Stoker's Dracula). Twilight is crap. 'Nuff said. If you like Nosferatu, check out Vampyr, by Carl Th. Dreyer, 1932. Just as, if not more, creepy compared to Nosferatu. Still can't beat Max Schreck (and, you know, "schreck" is German for "terror" ;)) Oh, and Vampyr features the first female vampire in cinema history. The fact that she's also the "master vampire" makes it incredibly pertinent, IMO. Have you ever heard of the Criterion Collection?
I blame Ann Rice for romanticizing vampires. She still made them scary (Lestat is downright frightening), but it was after that that vampyrism became romantic. Blah. I prefer my vampires scary, thank you very much. -
June 16th, 2010 8:50 AMPokémon Ranger ✩ MoriartyAnd equally, sorry for my delay...my MacBook's wireless card has gone up the spout, so I believe he'll be going in for repairs tomorrow. :|
That is a fascinating theory! I may well have to look up more on it; I like the idea of the Earth being one big recording machine. Although according to Deep Thought and the mice, it's a big computer. :-)
No, not yet unfortunately -.- I've been job-hunting and playing Pokémon too much, I swear. But I plan on finishing it tonight, now that my 'net is basically broken. XD
I hate the romance genre as well, even moreso since fanfiction novels *shudder* like Meyer's Twilight have started up the 'dark romance' sub-genre. The only romance I read is the Sookie Stackhouse books, and that's because a) Sookie is a pro-active female character who doesn't rely on men to get her out of anything, and is thus a rarity; and b) vampires actually kill people, as opposed to sparkling and being generally LAME. Edward Cullen vs. Nosferatu = no contest. -
June 15th, 2010 10:14 AMRichard LynchSorry for that delay in response... I thought I had responded. Selective memory. haha
Anyway, I once heard an interesting theory about ghosts, involving the fact that much of what makes up the earth is iron. Now, iron is also the main ingredient in old fashioned recording film (such as a cassette). I have to bring up the fact that it's actually some kind of iron oxide, but that's a different story. Anyway, what this is implying is that ghosts may very well be visuals and sounds recorded by the earth in some way (and also, obviously, played back in some way). It's a theory that's always interested me.
And have you finished the Yellow Wallpaper yet? The ending is one of the creepiest ever, and it's solely because of the way it's written. That's how you can tell a good author: when they can scare you with their style.
I just finished reading a romance last night, Somewhere in Time (originally published as Big Time Return). It was... surprisingly good. I hate romance, but I read it because it's Matheson. And I'm glad I did; it was highly enjoyable! Still wouldn't touch Nicholas Sparks to save my life, but eh. haha (although, a younger girl who was flirting with me at work tried to convince me to read The Guardian by him... she said is was borderline horror, but considering the circumstances, and that I told her I read mostly horror, I don't know how much credence I can place on that :P) -
June 11th, 2010 9:44 AMPokémon Ranger ✩ MoriartyI believe in ghosts as after-echoes of emotion. I didn't used to, but then we visited the Allied and German graveyards in Belgium and I understood what people meant when they say 'this is a good/bad place'. But I don't believe in ghosts as actual beings who stick around and yell BOO at people. But yes, I thought that Turn of the Screw was simply amazing, so I will definitely check out Hill House :'D I love things like that.
I am actually reading The Yellow Wallpaper right now! HOW DID YOU KNOW. I got an anthology of American short stories for my birthday, and I'm currently flicking through it.

