Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

F23, blah!

See debating is something of an enjoyable activity for me... so, perhaps it might be why I'm enjoying this one so much (Bill, I hope you know that this is all in good fun, and not to take any of it personally) But it is very hard to debate someone when they do not give examples or support to their claim... so if you say that all michael mann's work is amateur hour and that he is for the most part a wasted investment. Would you mind putting that into context with films like the last of the mohicans, man hunter, heat, and the insider? (you are also free to use any others like miami vice) maybe i'll be able to understand your post a bit more with a few examples.
-Tanner

oh and unless I'm mistaking Stephen Soundheim turned sweeny todd into a musical... not tim burton. He simply took the play and adapted it to film... so I think you are misgiving that genius credit to burton. And just a side note... I loved sweeny todd... thought it was one of the best films of that year, but yeah wasn't burtons idea...
 
It cuts both ways. I have given (rough) examples, lack of verisimilitude in genres that demand just that, but to be more precise, we're never taken beyond the effects of a lumbering machine called the studio. Everything, at least to me, feels/looks like it lacks a single cohesive voice. I know I'm being a bit harsh, regrettably so at times, but I feel at other times it's what it takes to counter the much ado about nothing. Nothing rings true in the Public Enemies trailer- even taking expressionist perspective into account- I don't see anything that's genre expanding. Costume, staging, lighting, human mannerisms, walking styles, lipstick color, hair lights, vehicle trim, machine gun play and sound, all seem affected.

I'm glad you enjoyed Sweeny Todd but I'd give Burton a wee bit more credit than 'simply took the play..'- but your point about Soundheim is well taken.

To be honest, Mann's past films -I haven't seen Man Hunter- are lost in a fog of suppressed memories. The Insider I remember as melodramatic handling of a dramatic scenario- the other end of the stick would be the understated, and yet infinitely more effective execution of Good Night and Good Luck. The Insider isn't a disaster mind you, but I have to ask, is Mann too on the nose, is he thinking for us? Mohicans is an odd movie, fragmented, like it was pasted together from scenes originating in different time zones- and it looks too staged. The Crucible, on the other hand, was brilliant in its staged qualities.
Still, the Mohican's novel is fairly lame- Mark Twain's assessment of Cooper's writing ability is very funny reading.
Honestly, I can barely recall a single moment of these movies.

I don't know what it is about some of these period pieces that want to luxuriate in a contemporary obsession with a perfection that never existed. A wrong sort of perfection.

You know, Tanner, Mann is a very prominent figure in film, that makes him more of a target, but we can all forgive or find merit in failed honest attempts by pros like Mann, or indies or filmschool students- local film festival entries, and everything I do, when needs be.

And Talking of pot shots: Appaloosa; What was it with Jeremy Irons' unabashed aping of Daniel Day Lewis's character, Plainview, in There will Be Blood? Is it because Day Lewis fashioned Plainview on Huston's character, Noah Cross, in Chinatown? Irons seemed to be firing a shot over Day- Lewis' bow. Odd.
 
Of course a film lacks a single cohesive voice. It's the composition of dozens or hundreds of people's efforts.

A director can only direct so much. At some point you aren't directing anymore, you're doing. Cohesiveness is nice, but I've seen a lot of shoddy work produced by overly powerful directors who had nobody saying "Hey, you sure you want to do that?" or if it was said nobody was listening.

It's a razor fine line between cohesive voice and repressive incestuous egotism.
 
Bill, sometimes pushing the limit helps tell the story in a way that is more accessible to people regardless of the subject, and you can still say something about it. You opened up a conversation. I have no clue why he does things, but I am not going to pass judgment based on a trailer.
 
Bill Anderson said:
It cuts both ways. I have given (rough) examples, lack of verisimilitude in genres that demand just that, but to be more precise, we're never taken beyond the effects of a lumbering machine called the studio. Everything, at least to me, feels/looks like it lacks a single cohesive voice. I know I'm being a bit harsh, regrettably so at times, but I feel at other times it's what it takes to counter the much ado about nothing. Nothing rings true in the Public Enemies trailer- even taking expressionist perspective into account- I don't see anything that's genre expanding. Costume, staging, lighting, human mannerisms, walking styles, lipstick color, hair lights, vehicle trim, machine gun play and sound, all seem affected.

I'm glad you enjoyed Sweeny Todd but I'd give Burton a wee bit more credit than 'simply took the play..'- but your point about Soundheim is well taken.

To be honest, Mann's past films -I haven't seen Man Hunter- are lost in a fog of suppressed memories. The Insider I remember as melodramatic handling of a dramatic scenario- the other end of the stick would be the understated, and yet infinitely more effective execution of Good Night and Good Luck. The Insider isn't a disaster mind you, but I have to ask, is Mann too on the nose, is he thinking for us? Mohicans is an odd movie, fragmented, like it was pasted together from scenes originating in different time zones- and it looks too staged. The Crucible, on the other hand, was brilliant in its staged qualities.
Still, the Mohican's novel is fairly lame- Mark Twain's assessment of Cooper's writing ability is very funny reading.
Honestly, I can barely recall a single moment of these movies.

I don't know what it is about some of these period pieces that want to luxuriate in a contemporary obsession with a perfection that never existed. A wrong sort of perfection.

You know, Tanner, Mann is a very prominent figure in film, that makes him more of a target, but we can all forgive or find merit in failed honest attempts by pros like Mann, or indies or filmschool students- local film festival entries, and everything I do, when needs be.

And Talking of pot shots: Appaloosa; What was it with Jeremy Irons' unabashed aping of Daniel Day Lewis's character, Plainview, in There will Be Blood? Is it because Day Lewis fashioned Plainview on Huston's character, Noah Cross, in Chinatown? Irons seemed to be firing a shot over Day- Lewis' bow. Odd.
Click to expand...
Bill-
With regards to examples... you have given me things that you have felt from the films, but not where/why you've felt them in any of the films.
I'm happy to continue this debate at some point, but at the moment I find it a little pointless to debate a subject that you don't remember very well. So, if you ever decide to go on a Mann bender and want to continue then I'll be around.. I suspect after you watch the films (again) you might not feel this way.
As to Appaloosa I never did get around to watching it, but maybe i'll pick it up this week and give it a watch. I'll keep your thoughts in mind.
One last thing... Mohicans felt staged to you!? wow... you defiantly need to give it another viewing...
 
In the end, Mann chose a medium that suited his story.
 
At the risk of never ending debate, I think all parties are free to voice there opinion. You think the movie is mindless drivel, fine. You think it is great fine. but a couple points should be made

1. mindless drivel that makes millions, gives high minded art the ability to pay the bills.
2. There is an art to producing escapist movies. just as there is an art to comedy( which sadly seems to have been temporarily lost) Entertainment is just as valid a movie purpose as Enlightenment. and vice versa.

3. if i want to make high minded art, you can drop dead if you disagree.
4. if i want to make commerce driven mega movies, you can drop dead if you disagree.

5. Arts people, from Entertainers, to Enlighteners are highly opinionated. it is ingrained in our logic. its taught in our schooling. And no one outside the arts community gives a crap. so let it go. stop critiquing other peoples work, and focus on making better what you do.

6. I get ornery when i am tired and tend to write things on message boards that normally i would just ignore.

7. There is far more to motion pictures than any one aspect. I, for instance, love the cinematography in The Fountain. The story on the other hand is the single greatest sleeping drug ever created. again only my opinion, other people may like it and good for them, just don't think you can argue away my feeling of boredom at the story.

8. which brings me to my final point, what the world needs now, is love sweet love... and corporate bailouts... no that wasn't it... oh yeah now i remember, let the films stand for what they stand for and quit judging the makers
 
your welcome. I kinda had flash backs to my childhood when we argued about who was the leader of the ninja turtles, in the cartoon it was leonardo, but of course there was always the kid that said " so what, in the movies it was Raph!" . Man I sure showed him, may he rest in piece.
 
Ian Laurie said:
At the risk of never ending debate, I think all parties are free to voice there opinion. You think the movie is mindless drivel, fine. You think it is great fine. but a couple points should be made

1. mindless drivel that makes millions, gives high minded art the ability to pay the bills.
2. There is an art to producing escapist movies. just as there is an art to comedy( which sadly seems to have been temporarily lost) Entertainment is just as valid a movie purpose as Enlightenment. and vice versa.

3. if i want to make high minded art, you can drop dead if you disagree.
4. if i want to make commerce driven mega movies, you can drop dead if you disagree.

5. Arts people, from Entertainers, to Enlighteners are highly opinionated. it is ingrained in our logic. its taught in our schooling. And no one outside the arts community gives a crap. so let it go. stop critiquing other peoples work, and focus on making better what you do.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top