love

Author Topic: 1990s US Bracket: Verdicts  (Read 712484 times)

sdedalus

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 16585
  • I have a prestigious blog, sir!
    • The End of Cinema
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #200 on: March 19, 2008, 01:23:07 AM »
The end of RD is ripped pretty much straight from Ringo Lam's City On Fire, for one.
Ah, thank you. It was killing me.

Is that an example of over-reference that makes the moment generic?  Or just an example of a Hawksian homage/borrowing/theft that works?

Bumped.

pixote

I don't follow.
The End of Cinema

Seattle Screen Scene

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

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #201 on: March 19, 2008, 01:35:09 AM »
Well, the question is mainly for faceboy, who made the argument about Tarantino's over-referencing to the point of becoming generic, but asked another way:  Does the City on Fire reference diminish the end of Reservoir Dogs?  This is, is it a good example of what faceboy was talking about?

Hawks' stealing (from others and from his own earlier films) goes beyond genres, by the way.  I'll dig up some examples if I have time.  For now, here's a not fully relevant passage from another interview:

Quote from: Howard Hawks
You've said you didn't think there were any good directors making Westerns at the time you made "Red River" in the mid-40's. What about John Ford?

Oh, yes, Ford and I were very good friends; he's the only man I think was any good. That was a long time ago, but he and I were the best at it. As a matter of fact, Ford came down to the desert to die. I used to play golf and go over and see him and have a drink with him. I went in one day and he started laughing and I said, What are you laughing about?" He said, "I just remembered all the things I stole from you." And I said, "Well, I stole a lot more from you than you did from me." We would sit around and tell each other what we'd stolen from each other, and each of us was pleased that the other would steal from him, because we didn't think that the other fellows knew how to make westerns.

pixote
« Last Edit: March 19, 2008, 03:03:16 AM by pixote »
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

sdedalus

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 16585
  • I have a prestigious blog, sir!
    • The End of Cinema
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #202 on: March 19, 2008, 01:44:44 AM »
Yeah, I don't think they were talking about the same kind of stealing.  I think they're more talking about something like Tarantino giving Uma Thurman Anna Karina's haircut in Pulp Fiction, rather than Tarantino grafting the ending of another film onto his own.

But I'd rather have that than, say, Brian DePalma perverting Eisenstein's Odessa Steps sequence with The Untouchables.  Too make this even more convoluted.
The End of Cinema

Seattle Screen Scene

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

facedad

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10983
  • World Phucking Champions.
    • Be my netflix friend
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #203 on: March 19, 2008, 02:01:56 AM »
Well, the question is mainly for faceboy, who made the argument about Tarantino's over-referencing to the point of becoming generic, but asked another way:  Does the City on Fire reference diminish the end of Resevoir Dogs?  This is, is it a good example of what faceboy was talking about?

Hawks' stealing (from others and from his own earlier films) goes beyond genres, by the way.  I'll dig up some examples if I have time.  For now, here's a not fully relevant passage from another interview:

Quote from: Howard Hawks
You've said you didn't think there were any good directors making Westerns at the time you made "Red River" in the mid-40's. What about John Ford?

Oh, yes, Ford and I were very good friends; he's the only man I think was any good. That was a long time ago, but he and I were the best at it. As a matter of fact, Ford came down to the desert to die. I used to play golf and go over and see him and have a drink with him. I went in one day and he started laughing and I said, What are you laughing about?" He said, "I just remembered all the things I stole from you." And I said, "Well, I stole a lot more from you than you did from me." We would sit around and tell each other what we'd stolen from each other, and each of us was pleased that the other would steal from him, because we didn't think that the other fellows knew how to make westerns.

pixote
Remind me with a targeted bump tomorrow. It's far to late right now for me to think coherently.
You're just jealous! Nobody loves you because you're tiny and made of meat!

https://twitter.com/thefaceboy

http://www.thereelists.com

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #204 on: March 19, 2008, 02:07:58 AM »
Yay, the internet offered up a minor example:

Quote from: TCM
Director Howard Hawks borrowed a visual gag from The Lady Eve later that year for his comedy Ball of Fire (1941). He featured a scene between stripper Barbara Stanwyck and college professor Gary Cooper where the latter takes hold of her bare foot, just as Henry Fonda had done with Stanwyck in the earlier film.

Not that it matters much, since most of our disagreement on Hawks seems to be semantic (and largely tangential to the discussion of Reservoir Dogs).

pixote
« Last Edit: March 19, 2008, 03:02:59 AM by pixote »
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #205 on: March 19, 2008, 02:26:28 AM »
...adding, I generally have no problem with direct borrowing from one film to another, so long as it works.  Reference for reference sake does very little for me, but if, say, Goodfellas gives you the perfect template for your film, and you make it work, more power to you.  Same with bands that imitate Bends-era Radiohead.  The more songs that achieve that sound, the better (especially since Radiohead themselves have long since moved on).

pixote
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

sdedalus

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 16585
  • I have a prestigious blog, sir!
    • The End of Cinema
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #206 on: March 19, 2008, 03:29:51 AM »
It doesn't really bother me either, depending on the way it's used and for what purpose.
The End of Cinema

Seattle Screen Scene

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

skjerva

  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 9448
  • I'm your audience.
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #207 on: March 19, 2008, 09:08:52 AM »
cute, you two are swapping

  Too make this even more convoluted.

Remind me with a targeted bump tomorrow. It's far to late right now for me to think coherently.
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)

facedad

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10983
  • World Phucking Champions.
    • Be my netflix friend
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #208 on: March 19, 2008, 10:53:45 AM »
cute, you two are swapping

  Too make this even more convoluted.

Remind me with a targeted bump tomorrow. It's far to late right now for me to think coherently.
Grammar was never my strong suit.

The end of RD is ripped pretty much straight from Ringo Lam's City On Fire, for one.
Ah, thank you. It was killing me.

Is that an example of over-reference that makes the moment generic?  Or just an example of a Hawksian homage/borrowing/theft that works?

Bumped.

pixote
To explain myself more clearly, I am basically contending the situation in much the same way as you referenced my posts. Hawksian seems to me to be the reuse of something in an attempt to repurpose the use whereas I feel that Tarantino is more likely to simply reuse because it works well in his film in the exact same context. I'm not saying that such direct reuse is bad (I've made it clear that I like Reservoir Dogs, right?), so much as I find it to be less interesting and ultimately less fulfilling for the spectator than such repurposing. In reference to My Own Private Idaho, I was simply pointing out the deficiency in RD's reuse as a way of exemplifying one of the qualities in Tarantino's film that keep it from achieving the cinematic level of van Sant's film. If you're going to borrow from another filmmaker, I want to see something interesting and different expressed. If you simply want to say the same thing the original scene said, I'd prefer it if you could develop a scene entirely your own and organic to your film.
You're just jealous! Nobody loves you because you're tiny and made of meat!

https://twitter.com/thefaceboy

http://www.thereelists.com

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28709
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
Re: 1990s US Bracket commentary
« Reply #209 on: March 19, 2008, 10:38:21 PM »
The Thin Red Line
vs.
Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas

The Thin Red Line

Flaws: There wasn't enough time spent with most, if not all, the characters. Only one scene with dialog for John C. Reilly and George Clooney? That's just not right. I did also feel that it was a tad slower paced than what I could handle. Those criticisms seem to contradict each other, and the certainly do, but I can't reconcile them.

Attributes: This movie is beautiful. You could take any shot and frame it in your living room. The performances are also top notch, with special nods to Jim Caviezel, Elias Koteas, and Nick Nolte. There were also a few touching moments.

Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas

Flaws: There isn't much happening here story-wise.

Attributes: Johnny Depp, Benicio Del Toro, and Terry Gilliam are on top form here. I enjoy each separately and together they are wonderful! There are a bunch of little things that add up to a lot: going from a line said aloud to a voice over and vice versa, the visual gags (bats in glasses, monsters in the bar, floral pattern growing up the wall and people's legs.) and the dialog is hilarious. I also hear from very reliable sources that it is the closest book-to-movie adaptation ever made in the history of always. For whatever that's worth.

Winner: Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas
Check out my blog of many topics

“I’m not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!”

 

love