love

Author Topic: 1990s US Bracket: Verdicts  (Read 712489 times)

skjerva

  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 9448
  • I'm your audience.
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #850 on: August 01, 2008, 05:05:57 PM »
There are couple of minor scenes that have stayed with me:

One is where Hanks and crew are marching and as they crest a hill, the light seems to radiate from them - it shimmers across the the tips of the grass. Is he trrying to address the angelic innocence of soldiers in battle? I don't know but I really love that shot.

The other is another marching scene where a flock of sheep move across a meadow, perhaps speaking to the absurd surrealism or the hyper-reality of wartime.

Don't ask me why those two shots are ingrained upon me but they are, also the scene where Vin Diesel dies is very moving to me as well...as for the Normandy scene, I have relatives who fought in many wars and they say it captures the experience.
Masturbatory?
Maybe - but isn't that the point of art?
Spielberg has some chops, there's no denying it and perhaps he was indulging himself but again, I say that is the raison d'etre of art/film.
I would venture that your objection lies more in the subject matter than action of the director, and perhaps deservedly so if you feel that strongly about it. I don't think it glorifies war, just the opposite, that scene scared the sh*t out of me. It showed that people were puking, dying, crying all in the midst of performing a service to the free world (stopping the Nazis)...heroes are not cast in stone, but made of the same stuff we are...(if you buy into the fact that they were heroes). In fact it shows them committing acts of cruelty towards the end of that scene(letting the Germans burn instead of shooting them) so is it saying war leaves no one innocent or everyone is guilty?

yeah, i get everything you write, and mostly agree with it.  but i do think the film suggests that the horrors of war are a small price to pay for The American Way.  and again, i was very surprised that the film had essentially no effect on me.  i agree that Spielberg is as good as it gets at making movies, and getting audiences to emotionally invest in the stories, but i got none of it here.  while i agree that the subject matter/ideology bugged me, i was also disappointed in the film Spielberg put together.  i keep thinking to compare my recent viewing of Forrest Gump - despite being ideologically disturbed by the film, i was completely sold, the super-cheesy score actually worked, i sobbed several times over the course of the film - i think this is the experience i expected from Ryan, and it didn't come close.

skjerva, I'm curious about your reaction to other war films, say, The Thin Red Line? Did the combat scenes in that film feel less masturbatory to you, and if so, why do you think so?
(I'm really just curious - I have no interest in defending SPR since I haven't seen it and don't much want to.)

i wondered this too.  i've not done The Thin Red Line [maybe during the brackets?], and i guess i have little interest in war films.  i've done Platoon and Full Metal Jacket, and have no memory of being bothered by the combat scenes.  i think the excessiveness of the scenes in Ryan just bored and bothered me - i would not be surprised if there were more than two scenes that were over 15min long that were all combat; of course, there were also several other shorter scenes.  i just don't think it was necessary to have these scenes go on and on and on and on - it just seems unimaginative and unnecessary.

It seems skjerva and I will never ever agree on a movie. Ever.

i feel like we have.  maybe.  pixote, what have we agreed on? ;)
But I wish the public could, in the midst of its pleasures, see how blatantly it is being spoon-fed, and ask for slightly better dreams. 
                        - Iris Barry from "The Public's Pleasure" (1926)

Pacze Moj

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 90
    • Critical Culture
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #851 on: August 01, 2008, 05:12:23 PM »
I think Saving Private Ryan has had a huge influence on the way people "see" the Normandy landings and WWII in general: everything from first impressions by kids watching the film in schools and then having those pictures stuck in their heads if they ever read or learn more about the war to the colour scheme Spielberg uses and how it's been recreated in nearly every WWII video game since.

That doesn't mean it's a good film, of course, but it does mean there's something about the film's aesthetic vision that appeals to many people and sticks with them. Then again, it could also just be saturation; SPR is a film that's on TV a lot. Which is my own personal peeve about it, and also about Spielberg's Schindler's List: that the history and events become so associated with the films, it's no longer possible to separate the real from the recreated.

:D

Your post almost makes me want to see SPR and SL again, though, just because I'm curious what my reaction would be!

Critical Culture: cinema, literature, history.

sdedalus

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 16585
  • I have a prestigious blog, sir!
    • The End of Cinema
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #852 on: August 02, 2008, 02:09:45 PM »
It stinks.
The End of Cinema

Seattle Screen Scene

"He was some kind of a man. What does it matter what you say about people?"

St. Martin the Bald

  • Lurker
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 11205
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #853 on: August 02, 2008, 10:06:19 PM »
Yes, I do recall Sean, how you found it insulting to the viewer...right?
Hey, nice marmot!

sdedalus

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 16585
  • I have a prestigious blog, sir!
    • The End of Cinema
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #854 on: August 02, 2008, 11:35:15 PM »
Among other things.
The End of Cinema

Seattle Screen Scene

"He was some kind of a man. What does it matter what you say about people?"

gateway

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1621
  • Boom De Ah Da.
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #855 on: August 03, 2008, 01:26:20 AM »

That doesn't mean it's a good film, of course, but it does mean there's something about the film's aesthetic vision that appeals to many people and sticks with them. Then again, it could also just be saturation; SPR is a film that's on TV a lot. Which is my own personal peeve about it, and also about Spielberg's Schindler's List: that the history and events become so associated with the films, it's no longer possible to separate the real from the recreated.


I don't think you can chalk it up to saturation. A big reason Saving Private Ryan is on TV a lot is because it was a very successful film, the biggest grosser of 1998 in fact. I think it goes to Spielberg's vision, plain and simple. Simply being on TV once every month isn't going to generate endearment, there has to be something there to endear the people to the film.
"I hope someday to be rich enough to smoke giant cigars while cackling maniacally."
- Nathan Rabin (echoing my thoughts exactly)

m_rturnage

  • FAB
  • Elite Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1834
  • Beauty hurts.
    • Too Much Time on My Hands
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #856 on: August 05, 2008, 10:55:55 AM »
Finally, finally got around to watching Gas, Food, Lodging for the first time. While it was enjoyable and certainly shines as an example of 90s independent film, I will have to say that Jurassic Park is the better of the two films.

It was closer than one would think, but this one goes to the 800-pound T-Rex in the room.
I'm disappointed in the outcome, but could you elaborate on your decision?

You know, here we are about 20 pages in the thread later and I finally got up the gumption to reply to this - especially in light of the fact that I signed up for Round 2 and got a pleasant-but-firm private message saying, "You didn't elaborate. Please elaborate before Round 2."

Both Jurassic Park and Gas, Food, Lodging exemplify the extremes of what 90s American cinema became. Jurassic Park exemplified the big, loud, and dumb summer blockbuster that shook your ribcage with its thumping bass. Sure, some of the scenes didn't make sense (like how did the big T-Rex get into the building at the end?) but frankly who cares? This is a movie that promises one thing and one thing alone - dinosaurs eating people - and on that level it delivers the goods and then some. This film paved the way for other loud summer blockbusters like Twister, which promised (and delivered) little more than tornadoes sucking up cows and ID4, which promised (and delivered) little more than aliens blowing up stuff. This is sound and fury signifying nothing, but it is freakin' cool sound and fury. This is the type of film that people would buy to show off their home theater systems but never really watch. 2/5

Gas, Food, and Lodging on the other hand exemplifies the excess of American Independent Cinema. This movie has not aged well, probably because most of the cinematic territory that may have seemed fresh and invigorating at the time has been mined so thoroughly that it has become a cliche. It is a coming-of-age story about a family of working-class, yet incredibly good-looking, women who sling hash and live in a mobile home. For a talky film that is more of a character study than a story, the dialogue is not that sharp and the characterization consists of whining, crying, or yelling. The best aspects of this film come from its intents more than its actual execution - the main characters are women and the decision to focus on presenting a female perspective in a landscape that became dominated with the testosterone juices of Quentin Tarantino and Kevin Smith a few years afterward. But good intents do not necessarily make a good movie. The one scene that stands out for me - the scene where Ione Skye decides she really likes this guy enough to let him impregnate her - is a great example of intent vs. execution. The couple decide to copulate in a cave filled with luminescent rocks. The idea of filming in a textured environment as a way of conveying both the sensuality of the moment (much the way sand is erotically presented in Woman in the Dunes) as well as the symbolism of their relationship (the Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus book - published the same year as this film - made much hay about "men living in their caves" plus there is this vague thematic idea that Ione Skye is supposed to be something akin to an earth mother - she is at her happiest when being surrounded by ground) should combine to create a moment that is both rich with symbolism as well as hot. Unfortunately, the execution - with neon blue and purple rocks, cloying rock music, and sand-that-looks-more-like-glitter-than-sand struck me with all the force of two teens blindly groping in a rave. Throughout the scene, I kept asking myself questions like , "Aren't those rocks sharp?" "Does this drag-her-to-a-cave method for getting women actually work?" and "Is she getting glittersand in her buttcrack?" This is not the profound moment it was meant to be; this is unintentional hilarity. 1/5
http://www.26screenplays.com - Short screenplays for independent filmmakers.

You light a man a fire, and he's warm for a night. You light a man ON fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.

m_rturnage

  • FAB
  • Elite Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1834
  • Beauty hurts.
    • Too Much Time on My Hands
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #857 on: August 05, 2008, 10:58:51 AM »
Finally, finally got around to watching Gas, Food, Lodging for the first time. While it was enjoyable and certainly shines as an example of 90s independent film, I will have to say that Jurassic Park is the better of the two films.

It was closer than one would think, but this one goes to the 800-pound T-Rex in the room.
I'm disappointed in the outcome, but could you elaborate on your decision?

I'd be curious to hear a little more about this matchup, too.  I have only the vaguest memories of what Gas, Food, Lodging was even about.  I can picture a trailer and ... maybe fireworks?

Had you seen Jurassic Park before, MR?  If so, how did it hold up?

pixote

I have seen Jurassic Park many many many times. I managed a video store when it came out on VHS and we were forced to play it on our TV screens non-stop for about three months solid. It is one of those movies that you do not have to really pay attention to in order to get the general feel of the plot (dinosaurs go on a rampage - not much room for a subtle twist ending there).
http://www.26screenplays.com - Short screenplays for independent filmmakers.

You light a man a fire, and he's warm for a night. You light a man ON fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.

facedad

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10983
  • World Phucking Champions.
    • Be my netflix friend
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #858 on: August 05, 2008, 04:39:11 PM »
That's a shame, I had higher hopes for Gas, Food, Lodging, but at least it gave you a chance to promote Teshigahara some more.

That said, I'm glad you clarified because I couldn't imagine how that outcome could come from anyone but Junior and it makes much more sense now how the mediocre at best JP could take down a much more ambitious film. Is there any chance in hell that anyone else would have a better experience with G,F,L than you did?
« Last Edit: August 05, 2008, 04:49:01 PM by faceboy »
You're just jealous! Nobody loves you because you're tiny and made of meat!

https://twitter.com/thefaceboy

http://www.thereelists.com

m_rturnage

  • FAB
  • Elite Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1834
  • Beauty hurts.
    • Too Much Time on My Hands
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #859 on: August 05, 2008, 05:57:30 PM »
That's a shame, I had higher hopes for Gas, Food, Lodging, but at least it gave you a chance to promote Teshigahara some more.
Is there any chance in hell that anyone else would have a better experience with G,F,L than you did?

I am sure it was considered quite groundbreaking at the time (about fifteen years ago). This was when American Independent Film was just beginning to blossom and things really held the promise of something great. This is pre-Reservior Dogs, pre-Clerks, and about the same time that Simple Men was hitting screens. I think it was an exciting time when films looked like they could be about people in small towns or teenage girls moving from adolescence to adulthood. Part of it was that I came to the film with high expectations. For years I never understood why anyone thought Liza Minnelli had any talent, but when I finally got around to watching Cabaret, I thought, "Of course. Now I understand why people go gaga for her." Having only seen and been underwhelmed by both Grace of My Heart and the one segment of Four Rooms, I was hoping for a similar moment from writer/director Alison Anders. Instead, I saw a lot of elements that were perfected in other films. This film pioneers some of the trailer park aesthetic that was later perfected in films like Boys Don't Cry.  Even a completely unrealistic light comedy like the recent Waitress does a more entertaining job of showing the working poor being working poor. GFL is too stylized to be considered completely realistic and too realistic to draw the audience into the drama of the situation.

I will say that the performances are pretty good, but there isn't much there to work with. I respect the ambition of the project much more than the actual execution. I really did want to like this movie and I really wanted to see it kick in the teeth of a nearby raptor, but it was just too much miscalculation.

So I would recommend it for historical purposes. Films like the aforementioned Boys Don't Cry and Waitress both could have not been made without a film like this pioneering the way.
http://www.26screenplays.com - Short screenplays for independent filmmakers.

You light a man a fire, and he's warm for a night. You light a man ON fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.