MovieChat Forums > Ace_Spade > Replies
Ace_Spade's Replies
How could it get "better"? No, I think that films shot in black and white should remain so. They look how the filmmakers made them.
Pragmatically speaking, I think you would lose a tremendous amount of the spookiness of the show - especially Christmas Future, the graveyard scene, Marley and the Wailers, etc.
The whole gag there is certainly that the Cratchits are high spirited optimists, particularly Bob. It's more apparent in the book. The meal is meager, but it doesn't matter: the Cratchits are happy.
I watch it every year and every year there's a new "moment" that I find and love.
It's almost impossible to pick an absolute favourite scene for me because they are all brilliantly done.
One moment I really love is when Scrooge enters Fred's house. Everybody stops, scared and tense. Fred has spent years taking abuse from Scrooge, but does he get tense? No. Does he chide Scrooge? No. Does he kick him out? No. He leaps up *instantly* and takes Scrooge's hand. It's so touching how Fred is willing to move forward instantly and speaks volumes for his goodwill. Scrooge's line to Fred's wife is beautiful, too. "Can you forgive a pigheaded old fool who had no eyes to see with, no ears to hear with..."
If I had to pick one scene, I would probably agree with the chap below: Scrooge's first Christmas morning as a changed man is gangbusters worth of funny with Sim and Harrison playing it out beautifully together.
It's not about a plot, I don' think. I think it is portraying two main themes or storylines: (1) that teenage transition thing from high school to adulthood, and (2) Lady Bird's relationship with her mother. It does both really well.
The film has a lot of subtlety and nuance. It's relationships are shown or hinted at as much as explained. The people portrayed seem like real people to me (I've met a lot of people like this) and they are accurate to their ages.
I loved that the film didn't vilify anybody - shades of grey abound. It was surprising and thoughtful. When we first see Lady Bird, she is struggling with being an immature teenager. When we leave her, she is an adult.
I think it's a great picture.
I think people started to light this film up a little bit once the sequels came out. The first film is such a gobsmacker of a movie that it (rightly) blew people away; I love it. The second two films are ho-hum action-sci-fi pictures and tarnished the legacy of the original, opening the gate for people to start in with high levels of criticism.
I just don't listen to the detractors. The film has style in spades and a lot of depth. Don't care what anybody else says.
Adventures of Robin Hood (Errol Flynn)?
That's the best one I've seen. It gets the lore and the fun and goes to the hilt with it.
If you're asking whether or not they can do that again, yes. I think they need to consider the first Pirates of the Caribbean as inspiration: fun, swashbuckling, epic quest, takes itself seriously, but never morose.
As Good as it Gets
Where did he say that he didn't respect Alien? Anybody got a quote on this?
I don't know about his feelings about the first Alien movie, actually. Do you have an interview source or something you're pulling from?
The only thing I know about Blade Runner is that he was frustrated with the studio's interference.
I agree with BrunoAntony below: everyone involved deserves a hearty slap on the back for wonderful work. The cast are a great ensemble, the music and sound are atmospheric and haunting, the design is iconic (and I give Giger his due: this film owes him a tremendous debt), but, yes, the direction pulls it all together.
Even if Scott hated the film, he still was clearly doing some great work here.
As to the man's track record, I haven't seen every film, but Alien, Blade Runner, Gladiator, Black Hawk Down, Kingdom of Heaven (director's cut, anyway), and American Gangster are all great movies that I really have enjoyed. Thelma & Louise, the Duellists, and The Martian all have great reputations, too.
I don't think he was trying to kill himself at the road. I think he didn't care if he died, but he wasn't trying to die.
Rango's main motivation is to find an identity, meaning, and friends. He starts out thinking you need to be Mr. Cool Hero, then you get the other two things: meaning (a quest) and friends (fans). When Jake forces him to be a fabricated hero or tell the truth, Rango can't do it: he isn't that guy; he's been pretending and lying about who he is to himself and those around him. The one thing Rango can't stand to face is his own loneliness and his sense of self-worth - or lack thereof. As a non-person, he walks the road. He doesn't care if he lives or not because he already feels so alone and identity-less that he might as well be dead. He makes it across the road because in a zen-like way, he has to lose who he is to find himself. That's when he confronts the core of his loneliness and finds the Spirit of the West who tells him that he's got it backwards: get friends *first* and they give you purpose and identity.
Once Rango becomes his true self (a man seeking to help others, selfless) he can finish his quest and return to Dirt, a hero because of what he does, not because of who he is (or, rather, pretends to be).
Boy do I disagree.
Given that, as the director, Scott's job would be to use Giger's designs to their fullest, coordinate the whole production, wok with Weaver to get her brilliant performance (and the other actors), and put the whole thing together, I'd say that he had a pretty substantive effect on the film.
I rewatched it recently and the comedy stood out to me. The animators have a great sense of timing and facial expression. I love the sequence in the bar. Rango has just bragged himself up when in walks the gang of toughs. Rango gets cigar smoke blown in his face. He knows he wants to save face, so he grabs the cigar to do something manly and tough, but can't think of anything. Desperation kicks in, and, flailing at straws, his mind thinks, "Eat it...?" and he pops it in his mouth. It's a testament to the animators that they can get across all that information just with Rango's face. Then, of course, the fallout from eating the cigar is hilarious, too.
That's just one tiny sequence. Overall: this movie is a scream!
Try re-watching it in 2018 with the Bill Cosby stuff...
I disagree. I don't think the women were any more annoying or reprehensible than the men were, and most characters on the show had a lot of depth and nuance.
Jane's struggle with addiction is nuanced. Skyler's love for her family is nuanced. And if anybody thinks Marie's character has no depth, nuance, or subtlety, I would encourage that person to rewatch the talking pillow scene - hilarious for its premise, but how wonderful is the moment when Marie goes against the intervention and just says, "I think we should do what Walt wants." That's a lot of caring and bravery displayed by a deep character.
Everybody on the show could be very bad and very good. I have met people in real life who display similar character traits, and I think they're written as real people are: complex, annoying, evil, and lovable.
Yes, that's true. If the filmmakers want the audience to respond to their story, they need to put it in the movie (not the novelisation or the screenplay).
I think I bought the Bride just kinda having money because I assumed that she either had a stash somewhere or because she could steal it or acquire it by some means which, while perhaps not entirely mundane, would be less interesting than the scenes presented in the films.
We also do definitely see the Bride liberate the Pussy Wagon. We see her wits and her resourcefulness many times throughout the films, so her acquisition of funds isn't of paramount interest.
To drop back to the original question: by the time she got to the trailer, she probably didn't need the cash and it wasn't worth hanging around and risking a snakebite for.
Bane didn't break Robin, though...
Ultimately, it's the Falcon, for me, but The Big Sleep is stellar.
The Maltese Falcon has a crisper storyline which relies on character to drive it forward. The Big Sleep gets a bit too twisty for its own good at times.
The dialogue is sharp as tacks in both, of course, and both storylines are great.
One nagging thing, though, is that Bacall can't be beat for femme fatale - especially not opposite Bogey. It is a really close call...
Novel doesn't have the straightest of storylines, either, but just like with the film, they're well worth pouring over regardless of the clarity.
My favourite Bogey film is Casablanca, and my top noir might be either the Maltese Falcon or The Third Man, but that doesn't mean I'm not a HUGE Big Sleep fan!