love

Author Topic: Top 100 Club: Dave the Necrobumper  (Read 37984 times)

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 23082
Re: Top 100 Club: Dave the Necrobumper
« Reply #40 on: December 13, 2017, 08:46:40 PM »
Sorcerer (1977)

Apparently when William Friedkin watched Wages of Fear, his main thought was "this movie needs an hour of backstory to explain why these men are here and desperate." And so we get little blips of the life of each of the men picked to drive the dangerous cargo. Somehow the film is shorter than the original even with this. But I don't remember the original seeming too long. While there is certainly a few tense scenes, much of the time Friedkin cuts to provide the backstory comes from the journey that makes the film. I mean, it's still the same core story that is emotionally effective in a certain nihilistic way, but it seems a slightly lesser version.

My interest was sparked in this in part because Mark Kermode always touts it. Having liked the original it seemed less believable than his contention that Breathless is better than A bout de souffle, because Godard is awful, and I guess that is somewhat borne out.

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 19044
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: Top 100 Club: Dave the Necrobumper
« Reply #41 on: December 14, 2017, 01:35:35 AM »
You don't remember the hour of backstory in the original?  Because it was there.  And Sorcerer's back story is more interesting, although with both it's a pretty slow start to such intense cinema.   The nice thing with Sorcerer is that the intensity of the second half more than makes up for the laxity of the first half.
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

DarkeningHumour

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10453
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: Top 100 Club: Dave the Necrobumper
« Reply #42 on: December 14, 2017, 04:45:26 AM »
Yeah, Wages takes its sweet bloody time.
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 23082
Re: Top 100 Club: Dave the Necrobumper
« Reply #43 on: December 14, 2017, 05:18:35 AM »
Wages backstory is all local isn't it? Not scenes from around the world?

DarkeningHumour

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10453
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: Top 100 Club: Dave the Necrobumper
« Reply #44 on: December 14, 2017, 05:29:01 AM »
It all takes place in that small village kind of thing, yes.
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

Dave the Necrobumper

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 12730
  • If I keep digging maybe I will get out of this hol
Re: Top 100 Club: Dave the Necrobumper
« Reply #45 on: December 14, 2017, 11:56:15 PM »
Sorcerer (1977)

Apparently when William Friedkin watched Wages of Fear, his main thought was "this movie needs an hour of backstory to explain why these men are here and desperate." And so we get little blips of the life of each of the men picked to drive the dangerous cargo. Somehow the film is shorter than the original even with this. But I don't remember the original seeming too long. While there is certainly a few tense scenes, much of the time Friedkin cuts to provide the backstory comes from the journey that makes the film. I mean, it's still the same core story that is emotionally effective in a certain nihilistic way, but it seems a slightly lesser version.

My interest was sparked in this in part because Mark Kermode always touts it. Having liked the original it seemed less believable than his contention that Breathless is better than A bout de souffle, because Godard is awful, and I guess that is somewhat borne out.

So it would seem that you are ambivalent about Sorcerer. The backstory helped me be more invested in the men, which increased the tension later on and the short film length tightens up the tension further. For me this is the much superior version of the story. The original just did not give me the same level of tension.

Thanks for watching it.

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 23082
Re: Top 100 Club: Dave the Necrobumper
« Reply #46 on: December 15, 2017, 03:54:49 AM »
It's possible that a function of time on my memory of The Wages of Fear has been to edit out all the boring stuff or overlong stuff into a retroactive distillation of the tense and effective bits. Thus I'm comparing the fresh reality of Sorcerer against an artificial nostalgic version, which is hardly fair. Not to mention that burdening Sorcerer through comparison rather than being able to interact with it as its own entity is not entirely just. I imagine taken on its own terms I would rather like it.

Dave the Necrobumper

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 12730
  • If I keep digging maybe I will get out of this hol
Re: Top 100 Club: Dave the Necrobumper
« Reply #47 on: December 15, 2017, 05:45:39 AM »
First seen makes it harder for the second, it gets lost in comparison (but not starring Bill or Scarlett). Which of course means if you are not spending the time comparing the second will be the better. Which in this case for you does not appear to have occurred.

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 19044
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: Top 100 Club: Dave the Necrobumper
« Reply #48 on: December 15, 2017, 09:35:04 PM »
And I have some of the same issue, only the films were the other way around.  I saw both Sorcerer and Wages of Fear within a year, but I saw WoF second, so I enjoyed it, but certainly it felt less intense.
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 23082
Re: Top 100 Club: Dave the Necrobumper
« Reply #49 on: December 15, 2017, 10:48:33 PM »
The Vanishing (1988)

Now there's a movie. It took a little time to get its hooks in me, but there was a bit of the criminal gamesmanship of something like Rope, where crime is more about the criminal's relationship to himself rather than others. I suppose as such, that is why it isn't until the film switches perspective from the one traumatized by the act to the one who committed it that it really gains its footing. Especially these past few months make the question, is a hero someone who does good or someone who cannot do bad, seem particularly relevant. Moral puzzles can be fun in the safe space of cinema.

 

love