Visual Stimuli

Oct 25, 2007 15:27

Okay, am finally getting around to talking about some of the movies I've seen over the last couple of weeks. It's a diverse list, and I still have Prick Up Your Ears to finish at home tonight (damn that young Gary Oldman, he's simply too engaging and crazy at the same time).

Gangster No. 1, or that movie in which Paul Bettany aims lots of suggestive looks at David Thewlis )

movie reviews

Leave a comment

2_perseph August 11 2009, 06:29:55 UTC
Sorry to be butting in here after 10,000 years, but I was reading through some old posts to see what old flisters have been up to, and saw this.

My argument wasn't that filmmakers should be permitted to circumvent history to tell "their even better, engaging story." My argument was that screenwriters--who face a challenge of structure and time in their craft--should not and cannot be held to the strictures of historical chronologies. That they have to select whatever they feel is necessary to best dramatize whatever the point of the movie is, which in the end is all the space a feature film allows for. (The writer did it with arguable success for the first Elizabeth.) This is because a feature film is actually an artform and a medium of its own. They can draw from history, or whatever the source material might be, but the fact is that from that source material, they have to craft something entirely new. Something that speaks to audiences in an entirely different form of communication from a book or even a documentary. It's not an easy thing to do, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with a desire to change history for egotistical purposes.

And as I said in my original argument, I make the point only in defense of skilled screenwriters, not hacks. Because hacks will tend to be egotistical and hack away at things for all the wrong reasons.

Reply

andolinn August 12 2009, 06:08:34 UTC
Good grief woman, you are wandering back into ancient history. *grins*

I'm trying to muster energy for this, but I'm afraid I'm giving up on Hollywood. Actually, though it's not all horrifying. Milk was beyond brilliant and Public Enemies was pretty good. Missed Food, Inc. but seriously nothing else at all calls to me these days. :(

*runs back* Wait! Fast and Furious was fun in a truly-stupid-but-full-of-Hotfuckers-and-bring-on-the-slash kinda way!

Reply

2_perseph August 12 2009, 06:48:55 UTC
but I'm afraid I'm giving up on Hollywood.

In a nutshell, yes.

I still haven't seen Milk for some reason, but I was blown away by Public Enemies, which I think is an actual step forward in film. I haven't seen one of those in a long time.

lol. I LOOOOOVED, enjoyed SO VERY MUCH, Fast and Furious. If the writers had been bolder, they could have made the definitive slash movie. I finally got the appeal of the pairing. But Laz Alonso can have me any day.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up