what the hell leave the classics alone
-
-
Re: Reason 10000 to hate Hollywood
I really don't understand why people whine about remakes or sequels, if you don't want to see them then don't go.Originally posted by Blzer -
Re: Reason 10000 to hate Hollywood
Considering that the character is a real person, I don't see anything wrong with having multiple movies about him.
Comment
-
Re: Reason 10000 to hate Hollywood
Leave excellence alone..... be original. People "whine" because something like this reveals HW for what it is, not what they claim to be in their "work" and in their "art".
But I see you're point. I didn't go to "The Honeymooners" movie and I've already let it slip away into oblivion.Comment
-
Re: Reason 10000 to hate Hollywood
I was pretty angry when Matt Reeves (director of Cloverfield) announced a remake of Let The Right One In (one of my new all-time favorites, it's an excellent Swedish vampire film released a year ago), but there's still a big percentage of the US population that refuse to read subtitles, so I understand the dilemma about remaking foreign films. It's been done a million times already (The Grudge, The Ring, Bangkok Dangerous, Oldboy, even The Magnificent Seven).
EDIT: The LTROI remake is an obvious cash-in of the teen vampire craze caused by Twilight. The title was also changed because it was "too long" (it's called "Let Me In"). The setting has been changed from Sweden to Colorado and the characters' names have been changed to Owen and Abby. Obviously fans of the film aren't impressed, but what can you do? This is all to appeal to Joe American moviewatcher. Anyhoo, back to the actual post.
But I think that "the original" is always a tough act to follow and that while a new remake or sequel will expose the film to a wider audience, the original still will retain a lot of appeal.
I have a feeling that this "Raging Bull II" may have to change its title to something else before it's released, because neither Scorsese nor DeNiro is involved.Last edited by CarryTheWeight; 08-19-2009, 07:23 PM.Owner of URWL CAW WRESTLING: http://www.rantboard.net/Comment
-
Re: Reason 10000 to hate Hollywood
Sooo, how much you wanna bet this will be done in color because younger audiences' eyes hurt watching B&W movies.
"blech"Member of the Official OS Bills Backers Club
"Baseball is the most important thing that doesn't matter at all" - Robert B. ParkerComment
-
Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-7009-7102-8818Comment
-
Re: Reason 10000 to hate Hollywood
It adds an aura of pretentiousness to the situation.
I think that you and I should win an indie film award by filming us in black and white. We'll be sitting in a titty bar (it's artistic if it's in black and white; instead of exploitative and pandering, it's artistic and a homage to noir films) talking about the extrapolation of the quotient ratio and the suppression of the feral mind and then 10 minutes later, the screen cuts and we're lying dead on the ground and 2 cockroaches are sitting in our place.
Art award championshipComment
-
Re: Reason 10000 to hate Hollywood
Photography is the easiest thing in the world.
There are two ways to go at it:
1. Take a good picture
2. Take a crappy picture and add black and white or a grain filter
The only question is what would happen if a good picture was taken in black and white with a grain filter?Comment
-
Re: Reason 10000 to hate Hollywood
Photography may seem easy but it's not. You'll probably be surprised by how many people don't know how to light for photography or even follow rules (ie: rule of thirds) to capture an image and give it strength in the frame.
Also, black and white only looks deep because of the color tone. But, give someone who knows how to light for it a camera and they'll make black and white look astonishing. And it has nothing to do with being pretentious. It'll just look amazing.
It's not like black and white films of the past didn't have extensive lighting kits. That simple black and white option in post-production or on your camera is a cop-out and does not capture black and white in it's best form.
Most people I know that say negative things about photography or lighting make crappy looking black and white films on their expensive HD camera."It may well be that we spectators, who are not divinely gifted as athletes, are the only ones able to truly see, articulate and animate the experience of the gift we are denied. And that those who receive and act out the gift of athletic genius must, perforce, be blind and dumb about it -- and not because blindness and dumbness are the price of the gift, but because they are its essence." - David Foster Wallace
"You'll not find more penny-wise/pound-foolish behavior than in Major League Baseball." - Rob NeyerComment
-
Re: Reason 10000 to hate Hollywood
Well I was referring to the original Raging Bull which was made in 1980. Color was already well in swing but Scorsese chose to go the B&W route to be evocative of the times and also to give the movie a distinctive and interesting look.
B&W can be evocative of the times, give a movie a certain look that you can't really get with color. A great use of B&W would be lighting and shadows. Some of the best made films cinematography wise were film noirs which made extensive use of the contrast between light and shadow which gave those movies a grit and a sense of forboding that you can't quite capture with color.
That's not to say i'm one of those artsy fartsy people that hate color because I love it. It's just that the younger generation who'll dismiss a classic film just because it's in B&W are sometimes missing out on something worthwhile.Member of the Official OS Bills Backers Club
"Baseball is the most important thing that doesn't matter at all" - Robert B. ParkerComment
Comment