Muse: The High Aesthetic Line
135 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
Andre Alessi, in reply to
Yup, the action sequences were still very well done. I don't think anyone's really captured the "titanic space battle" quite so well as Lucas.
The key there is that Lucas, much like Peter Jackson, is a fanboy of the old matinees-his space battles are WWII dog fights writ large, with a group of people behind him who are happy to create new technology to make it all look bigger and better than ever.
I think there were a couple of moments in Battlestar Galactica that approached the grandeur of those epic space battles in Star Wars, but they were few and far between and certainly didn't last as long.
-
Jacqui Dunn, in reply to
I’ll rein you in if you’re too far off what I need, but I trust you.” (Or as Stanley Kubrick reportedly once told an actor - "I can't tell you what I want, but that wasn't it.")
Which is absolutely fine...it's not actually lack of direction, if you see what I mean. Any director who can say that, gets the creative juices flowing for the actors. It's neglect, and a lack of any sort of honest communication, which dries those juices up. Actors can, and probably often do, feel antipathy coming from a director. When that particular bogey comes up, provided of course the actor gives a shit, there'll be thoughts/paranoia - "It's because I'm hopeless! It's because I'm so far off the mark s/he can't even begin to tell me where I'm going wrong!"
-
Islander, in reply to
May I add, 'the importance of a really good film editor with an excellent relationship with the director?'
I spent a couple of years as a tv director.
My arse was saved, time and again, by good editors who taught me how FILM worked.
Book editors are a very different kettle of fish, and I have had little experience with them. -
It is fascinating how different directors direct actors.
Woody Allen doesn't have rehersals and often the first time an actor sees their lines is on set. That's a lot to do with having a brilliant casting agent and fits with the "I hired you so I don't have to tell you your job" approach. He also does a lot of re-shoots.
Bresson tended not to use professional actors and rehersals often amounted to endless repetitions of one line with no talk about "motivation".
Fellini had actors repeat numbers with the dialogue to be post-synched.
I'd say all three have gotten brilliant performances with Fellini and Bresson in particluar being able to make a film that is a film and yet not a film.
-
Except for that one part where Yoda kicked some ass. I'll give you that.)
Interestingly (I thought the prequels were average, but not the complete disaster many people thought), Yoda was the character I hated the most in the prequels. I thought they betrayed the later character by having him jump around like a spazz in the fight scenes. Felt like it was done for a laugh and novelty value rather than being realistic.
Lucas never was particularly consistent however, for someone who apparently made up the whole universe.
-
Steve Parks, in reply to
Curious, Rotten Tomatoes agreed with my ordering of the merits of the films. From Wikipedia:
Film review site Rotten Tomatoes calculated an approval rating of 80% based on 250 reviews, making it the highest rated out of the prequel trilogy and the third highest-rated film of the entire Star Wars saga: The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones and Return of the Jedi are rated 62%, 66%, and 78% respectively, while A New Hope and Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back are rated 94% and 97% respectively
I think the first three films made (parts 4 – 6) were about equal, and all were better than the prequels. If pressed, my order would be Star Wars/New Hope marginally ahead of Jedi and Empire. The others are significantly less good, though they do have points of interest (mostly involving battles).
I think Return of the Jedi was underrated. The opening sequence through defeat of Jabba the Hutt was great for its time (some of the effects may now seem rusty). Then the build up and three way climatic battle was a great pay-off for the series. The lightsaber battle between Luke and Vader was as good as it got in the first three films (the action choreography got better in the prequels), and the melodrama around it was surpassed only by the “I am your father” part from the previous film. The epic space opera battle was also the best the series - and any movie ever - had had to offer to that point. And, Ewoks not withstanding, there was a lot to like about the ground assault part as well.
The only fault with Jedi that I can think of was the decision to go with the Ewoks. Some say that it doesn’t stand up as a complete film. But, that’s true of all the episodes except parts 4 and maybe 1. It was a serial. -
Seriously though, this is how you do an entertaining sci fi movie these days:
-
Josh Addison, in reply to
Interestingly (I thought the prequels were average, but not the complete disaster many people thought), Yoda was the character I hated the most in the prequels. I thought they betrayed the later character by having him jump around like a spazz in the fight scenes.
I thought that captured his character perfectly. Yoda is the kung fu master - the funny little old man who walks with a stick, who can kick anyone's arse when he needs to, then goes back to walking with a stick when he's done. The original films also had him flipping from comical to serious, just in demeanour, not actions.
-
Sam F, in reply to
Seriously though, this is how you do an entertaining sci fi movie these days:
What is this I don't even
-
Andre Alessi, in reply to
What is this I don't even
This is one of the main reasons I'm not completely anti the "Americanization" of many aspects of world entertainment. It gives producers in other countries with completely different storytelling traditions an opportunity to reinterpret the cliches of our genres and turn them into something wonderful (or awful, but the two aren't mutually exclusive as the above trailer proves.)
I feel the same way about the Night Watch films based on Sergey Lukyanenko's novels. They're recognisably Russian fantasy films, but they share just enough touch points with the film traditions I'm familiar with for me to enjoy them without feeling like I'm an outsider with no idea what's going on.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.