Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's what every movie should do.
Acting, direction, cinematography, special effects, music, etc. ... it should all serve the story. If it doesn't, then it is just self-indulgent Oscar bait.
I sort of agree with you ... but I also think that there's nothing wrong when serious moviegoers have a passing thought of "Almendros is such a fabulous cinematographer" or "Wow, those 1940s writers were witty."
Actually, now that I look back, I didn't talk about serving the story. In this case, it's more like anything lackluster becomes irrelevant.
I sort of agree with you ... but I also think that there's nothing wrong when serious moviegoers have a passing thought of "Almendros is such a fabulous cinematographer" or "Wow, those 1940s writers were witty."
The last PLANET OF THE APES flick had some gorgeous cinematography and fine acting. But it was a bore of a movie.
I don't think Ridley Scott could make a bad looking movie if he tried, but the last truly great movie he made was BLADE RUNNER in 1982. Great visual director, but the man has no story sense.
Alan Rickman is brilliant in ROBIN HOOD: PRINCE OF THIEVES, but the movie itself is horrible.
Yes...it's even more compelling if something is merely entertaining but we're careful to view it as just a part of history with absolutely no links to current events.
I have no idea what you're implying. But my point is if I want a movie to preach to me then I would go to church. Charlottesville is not a current event by any means, it's old news.
I don't care to see humans being ran over on a big ass movie screen, dead bodies on the ground, followed by screaming and crying plus a 30 foot Trump in my face. If they want to draw connections then make a different movie. The movie was over, no need to shove year old footage of dead people down our throats.
I have no idea what you're implying. But my point is if I want a movie to preach to me then I would go to church. Charlottesville is not a current event by any means, it's old news.
I don't care to see humans being ran over on a big ass movie screen, dead bodies on the ground, followed by screaming and crying plus a 30 foot Trump in my face. If they want to draw connections then make a different movie. The movie was over, no need to shove year old footage of dead people down our throats.
A Spike Lee is going to have a message, no doubt about that but maybe you aren't familiar with his work? ...it is far from just mere "entertainment".
I'm really looking forward to seeing this and I'm glad it is starting out being in wide release and not just major cities.
We have second home in area just south of Sarasota Fl--in one of the most Anglo/wealthy counties in FL--
Our local AMC is playing both "Black Klansman" and "Death of a Nation" by Dinesh D'Souza which opened last week.
I would be very curious to see which one draws more boxoffice--
In fact most but not all movie theaters in the SRQ area are showing both---"Death of a Nation" is absent in couple
This area has an "art house" cinema that plays independent films that never show up in other mainstream theaters which in DFW area might show in more neighborhood multi-cinemas
Needless to say "Death of a Nation" is not playing there --it is small (3 screens) facility-right now it is showing "Leave no Trace", "Far From the Tree" and "Three Identical Strangers"--all 3 available only there...
We are getting ready to return to DFW area and likely will wait to see it in DFW when we get back this weekend
It looks really funny--Spike Lee has done some really good movies and some really bad ones--
IMO his passion is really his downfall because he usually does better w/restraint than full-blown--
The last PLANET OF THE APES flick had some gorgeous cinematography and fine acting. But it was a bore of a movie.
I don't think Ridley Scott could make a bad looking movie if he tried, but the last truly great movie he made was BLADE RUNNER in 1982. Great visual director, but the man has no story sense.
Alan Rickman is brilliant in ROBIN HOOD: PRINCE OF THIEVES, but the movie itself is horrible.
Alan Rickman was brilliant in whatever he was in--
Movies were graced by his presence
We disagree on some points--
Last PoA movie did have some non-boring moments IMO
And you think "Alien" lacked story sense???
ALIEN is brilliant. But ALIEN came out in 1979. I said the last great Scott movie was BLADE RUNNER, which came 3 years later in 1982. "Last" being the keyword. And I stand by that. He has made some okay movies since then. But nothing great.
ALIEN is brilliant. But ALIEN came out in 1979. I said the last great Scott movie was BLADE RUNNER, which came 3 years later in 1982. "Last" being the keyword. And I stand by that. He has made some okay movies since then. But nothing great.
Ok
I take your point
I wasn't paying attention to the dates...
And pretty much agree with you
We saw "BlacKKKlansman" today
Very good
Thought Driver was really good
I have to agree that the juxtaposition of Charlottesville into the movie's end made me think Lee who had been so restrained and, well, directorial in all aspects of the movie prior to,that--so well-balanced w/humor, danger, the topics of black power vs white power, and the masterful inclusion of Harry Belafonte's character combined to offer one of the best movies this year until the end...it is likely going to be nominated for best picture but that ending weakens the film to me...
Spoiler
Belafonte's recounting a lynching viewed first hand while at the same time there is violence afoot by the local KKK---those photos and his testimony were to me so much more violent and offensive and hateful that Charlottesville, even with its carnage, came second...
It was too abrupt, not well-edited IMO since it was difficult to assess who was being violent to whom. And maybe that was his point, but the idea that both parties were at fault doesn't seem like Lee's philosophy as much as Trump's...
I don't know about the timing--which came first: the movie or Charlottesville. But it seemed like Lee felt he had to include Charlottesville because that put racism in the forefront of people's consciousness in way we haven't seen since Civil Rights era, with water hosing of protestors and the March at Selma and other acts of violence...that younger people had not experienced or seen in real time...
Juxtaposing a recreation of history w/actual film we had seen was supposed to round it off or bring the prophecy of violence to fulfillment...Maybe it did for some
But for me it didn't work... Like eating ice cream as dessert after a Vietnamese dinner...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
