Main > Everything Else
Weak year in movies
Vigo:
Lucas gets probably 90% of the credit for conceiving Raiders of the Lost Ark. It was completely his idea for the character, the plot, the tone of the film.
When it came down to taking the idea and making it a tangible and enjoyable film, it was 90% Spielberg and his team. The actual script, the directing, the style it was filmed in. Spielberg is not a brilliant idea guy, but he knows something good when he sees it. If he puts in 100% of his efforts, as he did with Raiders, it will be good.
Lucas has great ideas but he is not a talented film guy, every disaster in Star Wars and Indiana Jones is heavily tributed to him having too much control over the work. His major successes are almost always linked with someone taking his ideas and making them even better. In fact, if Lucas had his way, Indiana Jones would have been called Indiana Smith. Spielberg pushed him away from that name.
Le Chuck:
Somewhat back on topic, I watched "I am #4" last night, not sure if it's a '10 or '11 release. It's a little thick in the exposition and a little tweeny in the plot development but it was an ingaging fun little movie.
As for Scott Pilgrim, I can see how the fight sceens may drag for some audiences but it is one of the most faithful screen adaptions i've seen for a comic. Some of the shots are frame for frame from the books which was fun to see. That said I liked the movie first then read the books which made me like the movie even better.
Well Fed Games:
--- Quote from: Howard_Casto on January 29, 2012, 05:36:53 am ---
I hope he does do well, but if this were vegas, the odds of him making a good film would be pretty slim.
--- End quote ---
You do sound like a fan of his! ::) Whatever, man. If you don't like his stuff, don't see his stuff, but don't act like you have some inside info the rest of the internet doesn't. I'll be checking out anything that has his name in the credits. If it is good (Buffy), I will throw my money at it, if it is bad (Dollhouse) I will hope for something better next time. Pretty much the same way I approach Christopher Nolan- some creators- be it in movies, games, music, have earned my optimism about their projects, and Whedon is at the top of my list.
shmokes:
In Howard's defense, Christopher Nolan has a far more consistent track record than Whedon. Buffy and Firefly were both great TV, and Serenity proved that he has the chops to do a feature length film well. But Dollhouse was absolute garbage. And plenty of directors debut with one great film and then go on to never live up to their promise.
The fact that Whedon is attached gives me hope for Avengers, thanks to Serenity, but I'd call it very cautious optimism. Nolan on the other hand, given Memento, Batman 1 & 2, Inception, and to a lesser degree everything else he's done, is in another category altogether. I don't go into a Nolan film with cautious optimism. More like I would leave the theater surprised and dismayed if the movie were less than excellent.
Rando:
--- Quote from: thefearsomefearful on January 29, 2012, 04:17:36 pm ---If it is good (Buffy), I will throw my money at it, if it is bad (Dollhouse) I will hope for something better next time.
--- End quote ---
Dang,
I liked Dollhouse, wife did too. Can't remember if it was shaky in the beginning and then got better as it went on, but we really really enjoyed it.
For the record, Whedon does have some Comic background which could (or could not...) not help regards to the Avengers movie. He wrote or was involved with a number of Buffy books, and got some critical acclaim for his work with the X-Men and the Runaways. FYI.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version