|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
Re: Re: Re: Now then (Reply to this comment)
by macresarf1
Dear Chris: You've said it all.
Thanks again.
[Macresarf1]
|
Apr 25 '03
10:30 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Now then (Reply to this comment)
by Simply_Crispy
That explains it then.
But I have to insist that your explanations are not necessary. I was merely partaking in an act of self-mockery. I think it is quite funny when people refer to me by my surname (yes, it genuinely is my familial name, always has been, always will), so I felt it necessary to highlight this. How could you think I was being serious for even a single second. Come on, you know me better than that.
A very successful project on you part, but where are those links?
Now that's a compliment. I see you got my email with those links in it, so there you have it. Can you believe that some people still haven't posted yet? Nearly two weeks late, they are. Pah.
All the best
Chris
|
Apr 24 '03
10:29 am PDT
|
|
Re: Now then (Reply to this comment)
by macresarf1
Dear Chris: Let me give you the simple explanation.
Until very recently, I have had not had much Email correspondence with people on the Epinions site, and so I tend to think of them by their handles, rather than their real names.
When I received a flurry of Emails from you about the W/O, I thought of you by your Email address as Biggar, not the Simply Crispy with whom I am more familiar.
I accepted "Biggar's invitation," without making a connection to Simply Crispy.
You have a wonderfully commanding name (if that is indeed your name), and I immediately formed the germ of what I was going to write as Biggar's Dictionary of Film.
Now that I look at the matter in retrospect, and consider the British lexicon, I can see that you might consider the title an insult.
None was intended, Chris.
A very successful project on you part, but where are those links?
Regards.
[Macresarf1]
|
Apr 23 '03
10:57 am PDT
|
|
Re: I . . . . (Reply to this comment)
by macresarf1
DAnneC: Inexpressibly pleased to see you here.
[Macrearf1]
|
Apr 23 '03
10:45 am PDT
|
|
Now then (Reply to this comment)
by Simply_Crispy
What's with this usage of my surname? I hope that's not a mocking tone you're employing their, sonny.
Intelligent work, regardless. If because of the manner in which you kiss my butt in your Bottom Line segment. Although, again, I sense irony.
|
Apr 23 '03
10:18 am PDT
|
|
I . . . . (Reply to this comment)
by DAnneC
Intriguing
Irreverent
Irresistible
Insightful
Irritating
and, last but not least,
Irrepressible
Regards,
DAnneC
|
Apr 22 '03
5:23 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Can (Reply to this comment)
by macresarf1
Dear Stephen: I believe that it comes down to the apparent fact that you are even more of an enthusiast than I am. My comparisons were simply to illustrate that there are times when flaws and exigencies of a work may deprive it (in my eyes, at least) of the highest rating. Much as I love Welles' films and elements of THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS, it is really the dream of what was (and yet may be, if Rick Schmidlin ever gets into that film vault in Rio) that puts the picture on some distinguished critics' ten best lists.
I would argue the same may be said of IVAN THE TERRIBLE. It was conceived as a trilogy, and to my mind, superb as its two completed parts may be, it is unfinished, incomplete. It does not exist whole except in our wishful memories.
In regard to AFT's THE ICEMAN COMETH, I connect these productions to TV because the series producer, Ely Landau, was basically a TV Producer. He is perhaps best praised for getting Richardson's performance in A LONG DAY'S JOURNEY INTO NIGHT recorded for posterity on TV, etc. The techniques of the most successful entries in the AFT series come out of TV -- such as Frankenheimer's direction and use of close-ups in THE ICEMAN COMETH. And of course, Frankenheimer learned his craft in TV.
Do see the new Kino DVD of the Series.
Regards.
[Macresarf1]
|
Apr 21 '03
11:49 am PDT
|
|
Re: Incredible. (Reply to this comment)
by macresarf1
Thank you, Brian.
I have never seen I DISMEMBER MAMA -- or I might agree with you. Should have added that Mama is as American an idol as apple pie (but not so exclusive to the culture). I perhaps should have been consistent and included in my list INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM . . .
But see Industrial Light and Magic. Actually, I have nothing against the technology (except that it needs work -- which it will get), nor the skilled individual who craft it. My quarrel is with cyber special effects' overuse and the purposes to which they are applied. A matter of taste, I suppose.
As for IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE, I would not argue against your premise. We know that Frank Capra was a rightwing egomaniac. Still, the best of his films get such energy from his performers and direction -- they are such a celebration of what we think (or, until recently, used to think) of ourselves -- that we tend to overlook his essential view that we are a nation of sheep -- and he thinks that's probably, all in all, for the best.
Ayn Rand at least gave us Alan Greenspan. If her influence on his thinking has not been terminal, perhaps he will finally challenge our President's insane financial schemes. Then someone can remake MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON, in a bottom line modern manner.
Thank you again for the interesting comments.
[Macresarf1]
|
Apr 21 '03
11:07 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Can (Reply to this comment)
by Stephen_Murray
Firstly, I think that "The Magnificent Ambersons" even as it was released is a great movie (3 stars?). I'd say that Eisenstein's Mexican film footage fits the status you attribute to "Ivan."
"Ivan" is on my list of the ten best movies ever made. It has two of the most powerful performances ever captured on film, a look all its own and no rough edges that bother me.
The procession/assassination and then Ivan's sulking away from Moscow are at the end of Part One. The mass procession to urge him back is at the end of Part One and at the beginning of Part Two (shot out the window with Ivan's long pointed beard in profile as he stands by the window... And there's the score that's almost as good as that Prokofiev supplied for "Alexander Nevsky." Etc. Not just an ambitious movie, but one fulfilling more ambitions than almost any other director dared to have.
I have to find time to watch "The Iceman Cometh." I got the newly released DVD. I don't see what tv has to do with the Landau filmed plays. They were special engagements in the 1970s, when I saw some. I saw some others at the Castro two months ago, but misread the time for "Galileo," the one I'm most curious about.
|
Apr 19 '03
5:11 pm PDT
|
|
Incredible. (Reply to this comment)
by voxpoptart
This was, of course, the stunningly well-informed and interesting piece of writing I should expect from you. A few random reactions:
- It shouldn't feel wrong that you consider I Remember Mama worthier of note than I Dismember Mama, but it does somehow.
- Your attack on Industrial Light and Magic came as a surprise to me, since one of my high school friends dreamed of working at IL M, and i have zero trouble appreciating what they do as Art. On the other hand, now that you say your piece, it's pretty obvious that i agree with you 100% about the company's effect on movies. IL M's Art should not be the enemy of storytelling as Art, but somehow, it is.
- Remind me someday when i'm more up to it than i am now, and we can argue about It's a Wonderful Life. To me that movie was, even more than Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, an incredibly misanthropic film using a few heartstring-tugging scenes to disguise a deeply pessimistic view of people as petty and easy to corrupt; later i'm sure i'll be happy to give examples, but i challenge you to guess what i mean in advance; it might be fun.
Then again, i never saw Ayn Rand could be seen as a hero of freedom and individualism when she hated everybody, either. Anyway, excellent writeup, and i'm glad i'm not the only person who liked The Insider.
cheers,
- Brian
|
Apr 18 '03
1:35 pm PDT
|
|
Re: hey there... (Reply to this comment)
by macresarf1
Thank you, Tom.
The entries just jumped out at me, for the most part. Happy to see you liked them, also that you agree with me about Industrial Light and Magic.
[I saw an Alan Rudolph movie last night, THE SECRET LIVES OF DENTISTS. What it lacked in buzzy melodrama, it made up for in insights about an American marriage and family. However, I'm pretty sure more families will be going to see RAMBO 23 on the weekend it opens wide.]
Keep an eye out for BIGGAR'S DICTIONARY OF FILM. We're all going to share the royalties with you!
(chuckle-chuckle.)
[Macresarf1]
|
Apr 18 '03
11:24 am PDT
|
|
hey there... (Reply to this comment)
by sleeper54
..
Very..nicely..done !!
I look forward to "BIGGAR'S DICTIONARY OF FILM being added to
the Eps database so it might be reviewed as a 'total' entity...
You have hit so many essential films starting with the letter I. I did
not realize there were so many.
And you give a shout out to Ub Iwerks. Can't beat that!
you said...
"George Lucas's highly successful special effects factory . . .has
probably done more to estrange moviegoers from the real experience
of immersing themselves in Movies than any other recent factor. . .
. . .turning many of the younger generation into people who see
movies more as a kind of amphetamine than a humanly emotional
or artistic experience."
Hear, hear !!
...tom...
"Last call! All over but the shouting !!"
"Re-Write Write-Off"
Quit talking about it! . . .Do it before it's too late !!
. . .read the essay at my user-page !!
|
Apr 17 '03
11:25 am PDT
|
|
Re: Can (Reply to this comment)
by macresarf1
Dear Steven: In a word: YES!
Your reference leaves me a bit confused. Are you not speaking of Part 2. Maybe, my memory is going . . . .
Anyhow, look at it this way: I could, on the basis of the sleigh scene in Welles' THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS, say to you that the entire film is one of the five greatest films ever made -- IF you allow me to ignore all the cuts that were made in finished picture, and the fuzzy reshoots that were added later by other hands, without Welles' permission. As it stands, I think THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS is on the high side of a three star movie.
IVAN THE TERRIBLE had an ambitious concept, and I take nothing away from its acting, photography, framing and cutting, nor its allegory of power, but it is two parts of a trilogy. In its wounded state, without the final act of Part III, I cannot give the film five stars.
In addition, setting aside the annoyance of subtitles to non-Russian speakers, we have to give some weight to the fact that a knowledge of 16th Century Russian history is useful in appreciating what Eisenstein left us. Even with such knowledge, it is easier to appreciate the film intellectually than emotionally. Finally, the color sequence, which for 20 years Western audiences did not know existed, does leave a sympathetic viewer wondering at its splendor -- but also wondering what its full purpose was to be in the context of Eisenstein's projected three parts.
My four star rating takes nothing away from my admiration for much that makes up IVAN THE TERRIBLE, I & II.
Thank you for another provocative comment, Steven. I do welcome them.
All the best.
[Macresarf1]
|
Apr 17 '03
11:13 am PDT
|
|
Can (Reply to this comment)
by Stephen_Murray
you really believe that "In Cold Blood" is greater than "Ivan the Terrible"?> My current view is that the last part of Part One (from dressing up idiot boy to going off to the country) is the best--the best of the best I-movie!
|
Apr 17 '03
7:56 am PDT
|
|
|
|
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.