Also, considering that neither of us want QT to direct a Bond film (for different reasons), why can't we leave it just that?
Sure I can agree to him not directing a Bond film.
Finally! )
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
No, but it has been hailed as an absolute classic.
Possibly, and by a slim margin, it dosen't deserve that status but it's not far off.
Well, obviously I don't think that Jackson does that. Are we going to have an argument now about Jackson's acting skills or the classic status of IALP? Why can't we just accept that we have different views on Jackson, IALP, QT and other related things, and leave it at that?!
Fine but it does drive me crazy what you have said like many other people's opinions about art that have angered me. Maybe I am curmudgeon, I'll admit it but I observe old films and look at new films and I think they are all just imitations of the past.
Well, obviously I don't think that Jackson does that. Are we going to have an argument now about Jackson's acting skills or the classic status of IALP? Why can't we just accept that we have different views on Jackson, IALP, QT and other related things, and leave it at that?!
Fine but it does drive me crazy what you have said like many other people's opinions about art that have angered me.
On this forum, there'll be alot of opinions that anger you. When I first joined, I took everything personal. I've since learned that there's no point in getting angry simply because people insult one's favourite artist/film. Life's far too short.
Maybe I am curmudgeon, I'll admit it but I observe old films and look at new films and I think they are all just imitations of the past.
In some ways I agree with that (three of my four favourite films are 70's films), but there' always a few films which come around which astonish me.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Fine, jesus christ. Did you even have to post this if you were just going to say one word ? C'mon that's **** annoying.
On this forum, there'll be alot of opinions that anger you. When I first joined, I took everything personal. I've since learned that there's no point in getting angry simply because people insult one's favourite artist/film. Life's far too short.
This is something I feel passionate about, very much so. So I can't just sit idly by.
Fine, jesus christ. Did you even have to post this if you were just going to say one word ? C'mon that's **** annoying.
So, now you're swearing. Nice. 8-) Yes, I said one word, as I don't want to have another endless discussion on the classic status of IALP. What else is there to say?
This is something I feel passionate about, very much so. So I can't just sit idly by.
Then you're not going to be around for long then. If you think that you were showing 'passion', then your stay will be very short.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Then you're not going to be around for long then. If you think that you were showing 'passion', then your stay will be very short.
So now your questioning what passion is ? What you the athority on what is genuine emotion ?
No, I'm questioning the way you showed it. If you continue to show passion in that way, your stay here will probably be quite brief.
Will there be an end to this?
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
That dosen't mean that response is still not annoying.
Oh, lord. You are like a fly who won't go away. WHEN IS THIS DISCUSSION GOING TO END?
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
]No, I'm questioning the way you showed it. If you continue to show passion in that way, your stay here will probably be quite brief.
I don't need any lectures from some random kid on the internet.
Whatever (although I'm hardly a kid.) Are we nearing a finishing point?
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
You whine about wanting to end the argument but absolutely insist on saying something stupid and aggravating .
According to you. But, fine, if it will end this discussion, I won't respond with another 'stupid and aggrevating' comment.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Let me correct that, I don't need a lecture from an immature young adult.
) Coming from you, that is an amazing compliment. Thanks.
Okay, I know what you think of me. Is the discussion over?
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Let me correct that, I don't need a lecture from an immature young adult.
) Coming from you, that is an amazing compliment. Thanks.
And there you go again.
Well, you can't expect me to ignore your offensive posts.
Is there anything really left to say?
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
8-) You know, what they say about opinions. I agree, yes you are educated
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,754Chief of Staff
Okay.
ENOUGH.
Back on topic - with POLITE discussion - or this thread will be closed.
Everybody is entitled to their OWN OPINION - this thread is turning into a farce. If anybody wishes to continue in the manner of the last page or so, then please do so via the PM system. Abusing other members will not be tolerated.
8-) You know, what they say about opinions. I agree, yes you are educated
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited August 2009
For my own part, I'm a fan of Tarantino, and enjoy all of the films I've seen---Pulp Fiction is my favourite, and I think in time it will be viewed as a classic---although I didn't see his half of that drive-in double-feature deal with Robert Rodriguez, because neither one interested me, striking me at the time as one pastiche too far...
And I do think his dialogue is one of his strong suits, although---like many successful artists---he tends to overindulge himself on occasion. At his best, though, the words 'dance around' the subject at hand, completely ignoring the thread of the plot, and revealing things about the characters that enrich the film for me. To compare dialogue from one film era to another, IMHO, is like comparing a Kandinsky to a Rockwell: many regular readers of the Saturday Evening Post, from years gone by, might not give the magnificent and startling Painting with Green Center a second glance...
Tarantino will get my ticket money for Inglourious Basterds (sic? ), because I like the genre/milieu, and I'm curious, because---like one half of Siegfried and Roy---if you play with tigers long enough, you're going to get bitten, and I'm dying to see if it's Quentin's turn to get mauled :v
But no...he shouldn't do Bond, and that works out, because Eon will never hire him )
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
To compare dialogue from one film era to another, IMHO, is like comparing a Kandinsky to a Rockwell
Styles may change for the times but their will be always the underlining principles to create captivating dialogue. IMO (see I used it now lay off me) Tarantino is completely incapable of doing anything more then infantile with the spoken word.
Tarantino is undoubtedly a very talented director, and IMO he may be able to do a Bond film provided that he tones down his propensity towards over-the-top violence, and shows some restraint in writing dialogue (if he gets to contribute to the writing process), since the dialogue in his films tend to stray to the verbose side.
Having said that, I think that QT, being an experienced and skillful action-movie director, would bring an assured style and his own vision to the action scenes in a Bond movie, rather than copying techniques that are in vogue and overcompensating for his lack of experience by forcing weird and unnecessary flourishes into the action sequences (which, unfortunately, was what happened in the mess that is QoS).
As long as we can post IMO and ask people to back off of them I may as well point out that Tarantino is quite baffling to those who fail to understand him or his work and overcompensate by incessantly using words like hack, infantile, rip-off, hack, hack, hack and even attacking others with different opinions.
That being said, I agree frostbitten, it would be a very assured style that only an auteur (and I use that in the purest sense of the word) could deliver. But referring to your comment about his writing the dialogue, I don't believe he would take on a directing project over a film he wasn't allowed to write, which as Loeffelholz pointed out, EON would never allow to begin with.
Please if there is a God, no!!! (Could anyone really see Uma Therman as Vesper? She was bad enough as Mrs. Emma Peel!)
If someone big wanted to do a Bond film it should be out of care. The essentials of 007 must still be present in any incarnation.
Ridley Scott or Mike Hodges would make interesting Bond films.
And of course Hitchcock was pursued...but North by Northwest is essentially the pre-Bond movie.
Here is the big what if: a Kubrick Bond film.
A brilliant director, and one of my all-time favourites, but he had a coldness which I don't think was suited to Bond. I'm not at all disppointed that Kubrick never directed a Bond film as I don't think he would have done a good job, as great as he was.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Well, Kubrick did make his mark on a Bond film--he showed Ken Adam how to light the massive set in TSWLM. That said, I agree with Dan--Kubrick was a great director, but not a BOND director. Besides, he'd have taken YEARS just to get one 007 film in the can!
Besides, he'd have taken YEARS just to get one 007 film in the can!
Yes, indeed. ) The other problem was that he demanded total control. There was no way on earth he would have agreed to be in a situation (post-Spartacus) where he had to cede authority to the producers.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Comments
Possibly, and by a slim margin, it dosen't deserve that status but it's not far off.
Fine but it does drive me crazy what you have said like many other people's opinions about art that have angered me. Maybe I am curmudgeon, I'll admit it but I observe old films and look at new films and I think they are all just imitations of the past.
On this forum, there'll be alot of opinions that anger you. When I first joined, I took everything personal. I've since learned that there's no point in getting angry simply because people insult one's favourite artist/film. Life's far too short.
In some ways I agree with that (three of my four favourite films are 70's films), but there' always a few films which come around which astonish me.
Fine, jesus christ. Did you even have to post this if you were just going to say one word ? C'mon that's **** annoying.
This is something I feel passionate about, very much so. So I can't just sit idly by.
Then you're not going to be around for long then. If you think that you were showing 'passion', then your stay will be very short.
I am not shocked. All I am saying is why are replying with just one word ? That is annoying. Just don't say anything at all.
So now your questioning what passion is ? What are you the athority on what is genuine emotion ?
You whine about wanting to end the argument but absolutely insist on saying something stupid and aggravating .
No, I'm questioning the way you showed it. If you continue to show passion in that way, your stay here will probably be quite brief.
Will there be an end to this?
That dosen't mean that response is still not annoying.
I don't need any lectures from some random kid on the internet.
Let me correct that, I don't need a lecture from an immature young adult.
Okay, I know what you think of me. Is the discussion over?
And there you go again.
Is there anything really left to say?
No.
Just nevermind what I said.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
ENOUGH.
Back on topic - with POLITE discussion - or this thread will be closed.
Everybody is entitled to their OWN OPINION - this thread is turning into a farce. If anybody wishes to continue in the manner of the last page or so, then please do so via the PM system. Abusing other members will not be tolerated.
And I do think his dialogue is one of his strong suits, although---like many successful artists---he tends to overindulge himself on occasion. At his best, though, the words 'dance around' the subject at hand, completely ignoring the thread of the plot, and revealing things about the characters that enrich the film for me. To compare dialogue from one film era to another, IMHO, is like comparing a Kandinsky to a Rockwell: many regular readers of the Saturday Evening Post, from years gone by, might not give the magnificent and startling Painting with Green Center a second glance...
Tarantino will get my ticket money for Inglourious Basterds (sic?
But no...he shouldn't do Bond, and that works out, because Eon will never hire him
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Styles may change for the times but their will be always the underlining principles to create captivating dialogue. IMO (see I used it now lay off me) Tarantino is completely incapable of doing anything more then infantile with the spoken word.
Having said that, I think that QT, being an experienced and skillful action-movie director, would bring an assured style and his own vision to the action scenes in a Bond movie, rather than copying techniques that are in vogue and overcompensating for his lack of experience by forcing weird and unnecessary flourishes into the action sequences (which, unfortunately, was what happened in the mess that is QoS).
That being said, I agree frostbitten, it would be a very assured style that only an auteur (and I use that in the purest sense of the word) could deliver. But referring to your comment about his writing the dialogue, I don't believe he would take on a directing project over a film he wasn't allowed to write, which as Loeffelholz pointed out, EON would never allow to begin with.
If someone big wanted to do a Bond film it should be out of care. The essentials of 007 must still be present in any incarnation.
Ridley Scott or Mike Hodges would make interesting Bond films.
And of course Hitchcock was pursued...but North by Northwest is essentially the pre-Bond movie.
Here is the big what if: a Kubrick Bond film.
I could see him doing a loyal adaptation of You Only Live Twice. That would really have been something to see.