Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General' started by Paff, Oct 23, 2003.
the godfather trilogy puts me to sleep.............(runs and hides in the closet)
Dawn of the Dead '04 is a worthless piece of shit and anyone who doesn't think so is a complete idiot (that's my Unpopular Opinion, it's inside my head at all moments, I'm just admitting it- I don't wanna discuss it). John Landis was KIND to it when he said "they got to the mall and it went in the toilet." The movie was in the toilet from minute-1. Same with The Hills Have Eyes '06.
Another 'unpopular opinion' - remakes (from '98 to today) exist purely to show how stupid some horror fans are by claiming they are in any way superior-to or as-good-as the originals. They serve no purpose but to separate the smart fans from the idiots.
The Godfather Trilogy is one of the biggest wastes of celluloid in cinema history!
Dressed to Kill wasn't that bad...
If Wes Craven was ever a hack, so was Carpenter.
It's fine to disagree but lets not resort to name calling, m'kay?
He's the last person that should be calling anyone that name.:lol:
DOTD 04 was shockingly watchable, and I typically hate remakes. Then again, I was lusting after Michael Kelly the whole time and only recently realized that we went to high school together!
I can respect that. You didn't like it, no big deal. I personally think The Conversation is Coppola's best film.
What I don't respect are people who don't enjoy "good" movies and refer to them as crap. Deliverance is not a crappy movie, neither is Carrie.
And that comment about DePalma's Hitchcockian style of directing being a ripoff, and how it's "inexcusable"...oh please. What does that even MEAN? You REALLY need more to your argument if that's the only reason you're going to knock DePalma.
And nobody seems to argue the fact that John Carpenter almost completely ripped off the style of Black Christmas (shit, about half the shots in the film are the same!) And how Carpenter frequently borrows from other directors...Howard Hawks, Orson Welles is a BIG one here. (The opening of Halloween.) And hell, Hitchcock too. If that's your argument against DePalma then you'd have to take into consideration every director who has borrowed from Hitchcock. (DePalma, Fulci (who fails miserably almost every time), Argento, Scorsese, Richard Franklin...) But what Carpenter did with Halloween is he borrowed from all these filmmakers but he MADE the film HIS OWN. He created his own directing style because of it.
You can't pass off DePalma's work as being a rip-off, it's an homage to Hitchcock. DePalma CLEARLY has his own very very distinctive style to his films. Sure Body Double was lifted heavily from Rear Window, and Blow Out was lifted heavily from Antonioni's Blow-Up, but he brings to it his own style and way of telling his story. If anything, DePalma was the only director who managed to capture Hitchcock's style successfully. I can hardly think of a director who can build suspense in his films as well as DePalma can.
Just because the stories are similar, doesn't mean the films are complete ripoffs. Body Heat is almost a virtual remake of Double Indemnity and Against All Odds is also almost a virtual remake of Out of the Past, but it's the style that these directors bring to their films that make them their own.
The only complete Hitchcock ripoff I can think of is Gus Van Sant's abysmal remake of Psycho. Shot-for-shot, line-for-line remake. THAT is a ripoff. DePalma built upon Hitchcock's style and made it his own.
Yeah, really. Calling people idiots is no way to gain the respect of other people. It's comments like that that make the person who made them look like the idiot. It's a great way to back up your opinion.
DePalma certainly references Hitchcock in many respects,however he himself was a much bigger fan of Goddard and I think that European arthouse feel comes through in several of his films.
Don't know how unpopular an opinion this will be (as I find many people have never seen this film and can't make a true comparison),but I think SISTERS might be DePalma's best "Hitchcockian" shocker.It's got a wonderfully creepy vibe to it.
Definitely. He was greatly inspired by the Eurpoean art films of the '60s. Blow Out is a perfect example of this.
I'd definitely agree. (Not to mention Bernard Herrmann did the score). For some reason though, this movie really reminds me of Polanski's Repulsion. I mean it too was an arthouse film from the '60s, but I can't help but feel these two films are very similar.
Yeah probably silly but is Deliverance really known for anything other then 'scream like a pig boy'? OMG this film drives me mad!! The fact that that guy climbs that rock face and then someone shoots himself through the kidney from behind with a crossbow?! Do i even need to mention the way they kinda put some effect on the film in those scenes to make it look like night?
After killing the rapist why do they hang about for ages discussing it? Matey could have been on his way with some back up for a gay rape orgy! If that story where real tho they would have been caught by now with forensic advances!
Maybe im being tough on it but how about this - 'Southern Comfort' has the same idea but i believe was delivered better.
I didn't mean to get yer dander up. Hell, I didn't even start the Carrie-bashing here, i was just commenting on how it had shown up again. It was meant to be a joke.
I know I dismissed Depalma's skill as a director in previous posts. You called me on it and I'll admit, I was exaggerating. He's not a bad director, let me clear the air and admit that right here.
Now, to be fair, I never said Depalma had stolen Hitchcock's directing style. What I don't like is the way some of Depalma's films mirror Hitchcock in their plot structure. Some may see them as homage, but to me they seem cynical and unpleasant, not a respectful nod to the material they're drawn from. This may not have been the intent, but that's how they seem to me.
So since this is an unpopular opinions page, I'd argue that Gus Van Sant's "Psy-clone" IS an homage. I'm not saying I liked it, I'm not saying it was necessary or in any way relevant, but wasn't the whole exercise a tribute to Hitchcock? He never tried to pass it off as his own. He even repeated the process shot of Arbogast falling down the stairs! It was misguided, but I think it was done respectfully.
Hey, I didn't mean to call you out on it personally. But DePalma's films certainly are not ripoffs. The only movie he really made that was a clone of one of Hitchcock's films (and still very loosely) was Body Double.
But hey, if you don't like him, that's cool. I'm just not going to put up with people who say he was a bad director (as people have done. Not specifically you.)
Yes it certainly is. It's known for being a film about courage and strength and the characters' ability to fight for survival. Sure that scene may stick out because of its shock value, but that's certainly not what the movie is solely remembered for. It's extremely well-directed, and has solid performances from John Voight and Burt Reynolds.
Yeah, that's called "day-for-night". It's been used in hundreds upon hundreds of films. Countless titles. It's actually a very common thing for a director to do. It's not really something to knock a movie for.
THIS WAS 1972! (Forensics, really?) Jesus Christ. What a moronic comment. I'm not one to name-call, but seriously. Your comments about this film have been nothing but stupid and childish. Sure, you didn't like it. That doesn't mean it was a bad film. Just like if you like a film, that doesn't mean it was neccessarily very good. Hell, I like Jaws 3. It's a TERRIBLE movie! However, I'm not a huge fan of The Godfather, but I respect it for what it is.
Sometimes there are movies you just have to respect for what they are. Sure you may not have seen anything in Deliverance, but many many people do, and that's why it has achieved such status, because there IS something there. Just beacuse you can't (or refused to) see anything meaningful in this movie doesn't mean it's not there.
The Evil Dead is highly overrated!?!. Have u been dropped on your head recently ???? It was so influential to other films and considering the budget they had to work with. It' s definitely in my top ten of horror film favourites.
The thing i remember most from it were the ideas of revenge and violence. When Jon Voight kills the man at the end he's not even sure if he got the right guy. In that film vengeance is hollow and uncertain. Paradoxically by resorting to violence one can loose their "right" to revenge. That ambiguity at the end was what stayed with me. That and the sodomy...
Matt's right, this technique has been used in TONS of films. I actually prefer this technique to lighting scenes at night with lights where realistically there should be no light source.
Yeah, totally. I like the impression it gives off sometimes. Gives the illusion of late night/early morning. It's quite effective, actually.
MY OPINION is that the 'day for night' effect wasnt done very well.
'If that story where real tho they would have been caught by now with forensic advances!' How is that a dig?
Sorry for having an opinion in the 'unpopular movie opinions' thread MATT89 and thanks for insulting me.
Southern Comfort is highly underrated.