quote:

So basically only movies no one has seen but your elitist ass.

It's not my fault if you haven't seen them. All are readily available on DVD except Stalker (Amazon wants $45 for the Ruscico import) and The Silver Globe (not available in the US).

No, you probably can't buy the DVDs at Wal-Mart, but you can easily order them or get them from a library.

What's wrong with elitism? If the alternative is creating garbage for the lowest common denominator, I'm firmly an elitist. The difference is that it has nothing to do with 'class' per se but rather the individual's ability to perceive and appreciate art. That cuts across all social boundaries, which is why great filmmakers can come from any background.

I only like French and Japanese movies with subtitles and are in black and white. Therfore munich sucked.

I'm all for art. What I can't stand is when terrible lack of skill is excused as "art."

Film is first and foremost a technical medium. Anyone can learn the technology and rules and all that. THEN comes the art. Not everyone can learn that.

quote:

I only like French and Japanese movies with subtitles and are in black and white. Therfore munich sucked.

Heh, idiot. Two of the films I mentioned are in black and white. They happen to be two of the most powerful, significant, and humanist films ever created, and are completely contemporary in terms of the themes and issues developed.

Also, only the Trois Couleurs trilogy could be considered nominally French out of the films I listed.

Munich was bad because Spielberg attempted to pass it off at a level where it was unable to function. By this I mean that he basically created an exploitation movie and tried to ground it in a social and historical context. Rather than make a strong, cohesive statement, though, he tried to please bloodthirsty hardline Jews as well as Palestinian hatemongers and ended up with something that's a muddled mess. Ambiguity is only interesting when it's controlled and intentional.

Spielberg is a purveyor of light Hollywood entertainment. His attempt to break out of that mold has not been successful. No one demanded 'art' from Munich, but since it failed utterly as entertainment, I thought I would try to look for another agenda that could possibly justify the finished product. I couldn't find one.

*That's* why it sucked.

For the record, I like plenty of 'American' films:

Chinatown (Polish director)
The Brown Bunny
Citizen Kane
Straw Dogs

Please everyone... I've had my eye on this thread for a while. Let's try to remain civil.

The Brown Bunny, huh? I meant to see that, but I decided to stare at the wall for two hours instead. Was it good?

And speaking of Gallo, anybody see this about his sale of sperm? http://www.vgmerchandise.com/misc.html Scroll to the very bottom of the page. Good stuff.

All he was trying to do was remake an 80's movie ... chill. Movies entertain people, im not saying there at the same level with roller coasters but people go to a movie to be entertained. So they can exit there stressed out lifes for 2 hours and go home feeling like they accomplished something

quote:

Movies entertain people, im not saying there at the same level with roller coasters but people go to a movie to be entertained

And Munich wasn't entertaining to me. At all. Well, maybe the bit with the Dutch assassin/escort (when they blew her away with bicycle pump guns then left her robe open - shamelessly exploitative and out of step with the material's tone, but still funny).

'The Brown Bunny' is one of the best American films of the past couple years, IMO. Yes, I've seen all of his hilarious items on the website (clothes that he's worn, sperm, posters). Honestly, if I had earned money making such personal and uncompromising works, I'd probably have a similarly narcissistic website.

I have seen brown bunny, its garbage. I cant believe people actgually liked that POS.

quote:

His attempt to break out of that mold has not been successful.

...Schindlers list was very successful. What about Empire of the Sun or Amistad or even Saving Private Ryan. Lighthearted entertainment?

quote:

I have seen brown bunny, its garbage. I cant believe people actgually liked that POS.

I liked it. I think Ebert liked it in the edited version (not the one shown at Cannes). It did win the FIPRESCI award, so obviously someone liked it.

I haven't seen Empire of the Sun. Amistad was something I saw when I was 12 or 13... I don't remember much about it other than Anthony Hopkins shouting and that Cinque became a slave trader at the end of the movie.

Saving Private Ryan is inherently problematic because it attempts to present itself as an "honest" war movie when it's one of the least honest, most contrived things that have ever made it to the screen. You may not notice it at first because Spielberg is technically proficient and skillfully disguises it behind craft. However, Rodat's screenplay is basically pap that's elevated by a big budget, name actors, and generally high production values. I also don't really have anything bad to say about Kaminski's lighting and cinematography. Munich was well shot also.

However, compare something like "The Patriot" to SPR. Both share a script by Robert Rodat. This is their common flaw. If you actually stop to think about the script for SPR, it's pure melodrama in the most glossy and superficial sense. The only problem with that is that every frame drips with the intent to convince you that it isn't.

I wouldn't call Saving Private Ryan "pure melodrama." I think one of its themes (of which there were probably too many) was that normal people fit so easily into stereotyped slots during war. Under extreme conditions, people tend to shed their identities and operate in simplified, sometimes cliched, patterns. They revert to being the "loner," the "strong/silent guy," the "macho lug," the "zealot," the "I-wish-were-back-home nostalgia fiend," and whatever others there are.

Or maybe I'm reading too far into it...

The problem with that interpretation is that the characters were never shown as anything other than walking cliches/stereotypes, so inferring that as intentional is a little much.

I think the characters do appear to start of in those cliched roles Harris mentioned, but as the film goes on we learn more and more about them and they become a lot more 3 dimensional. Examples are when Wade (Ribisi) talks about his relationshp with his mother, or when Tom Hanks talks about how he justifies losing men in his squad, or his life as a schoolteacher back home.
While I agree Rodats screenplay does seem a tad melodramatic at times, it is also packed with excellent dialogue, and some greats scenes.

Saw Munich on friday night, and was very dissapointed. Was technically very good, but was missing something. I had a lot of trouble getting into the story, which dragged quite a bit. There's beginning to be less distinction between each of his films. Oh well.

I really wanted to like the Munich. The period is great, the incident was ripe for a compelling film version, and the cast was generally good. The script was pretty bad, IMO, and Spielberg's "touches" made it even worse.

I don't get it, this movie was very good.

I wanna see it

Munich was a very good film, however certainly not on par with "Schindler's List".
And why has nobody I talk to seen "Empire of the Sun". It is possibly his best film.