Topic: True or False

[SailorRipley]

Ok, this isn't exactly a game since there are no correct or incorrect answers; it's more of an opinion forum. Movies are always different in the eye of the beholder, so it's always cool to know what other feels about them and to find out if we agree or not.

  ***RULES***

• We begin by writing a statement or something that we feel strongly about a movie, an actor, a plot, awards, film genres, just about anything you may think of.
• You will have to type TRUE or FALSE depending if you agree or not with the above statement and will have to provide a reason for it.
  
• You will also provide the next statement.
• If you wish, you may want to provide a statement related to the subject you just answered. The choice is yours.

EXAMPLE:

TRUE OR FALSE:
I've always thought Forrest Gump was overhyped and overrated.

Poster answers:

TRUE
I don't get why everybody thinks this is a sweet film. It's manipulative and cynical. I rather watch Last House on The Left: Uncut: The Director's Cut: The 3-Hour version.

or

TRUE OR FALSE:
Wow, Julia Roberts sure has a big mouth. I bet she eats babies for breakfast.

Poster answers:

FALSE
What are you talking about? She is my wife!!!

Alright? Let's do this.

TRUE OR FALSE:
Election, with Reese Witherspoon and Matthew Broderick, is one of the best satires ever put on film. Definitely a high point for everyone involved.

[Kathy]

I just bought Election last week and haven't see it yet. 

[Najemikon]

TRUE
It plays like a typical high school movie, but has some of the sharpest wit in movies for years.   

[SailorRipley]

And your statement is...? 

[Najemikon]

Oh! Sorry. Thought other people would have a crack at the same subject ... ahem 

"Matrix Revolutions is one of the biggest missed opportunities of modern cinema. Taking a brilliantly raw idea (The Matrix) and reducing it to blockbuster clichéd incoherent nonsense, the very thing the original film was praised for not being."

[Kathy]

False – I HAD to buy the film to complete the trilogy so I’m going to praise it whether I like it or not. Who needs a story line anyways? Give me special effects.

Statement - The Dreamers has no artistic vision. There is no redeeming value to this type of movie; it merely uses sexually explicit material to sell the film.

[Najemikon]

FALSE - Your statement describes pornography, while The Dreamers is essentially a drama about freedom and identity, a last gasp before the responsibilities of adulthood. Using sex to illustrate such themes is cheap, but it isn't explicit, because the sex simply happens with no obvious attempt to arouse the viewer.

 

Here's a biggie:


"There hasn't been a truly original, high concept, fun for all the family, blockbuster event movie for over 20 years (Zemeckis' Back to the Future), not counting remakes, sequels or anything based on books, comics, cartoons or toys (built in audience)."

[SailorRipley]

FALSE - While I understand your point and I agree in terms of live action films, I'd have to name a very personal favorite of mine: Finding Nemo. This is one film that I not only enjoy, I think it's a huge, artistic and beautiful film for all ages. The screenplay itself is just one of those that I can take a look at it and wishing I could write something as original, fun, creative and diverse as this. Others may point to different Pixar films, this is my fave; overall I think Pixar has a very consistent super high quality standard record in all their films. If you also meant not to include animated films, Jon, I stand corrected. 

----

About The Dreamers I'd just like to expand on what Jon said. The Dreamers is also about the huge love for cinema. The three main characters immerse into themselves because first of all they love film, movies are their driving force. Also note that the backdrop of this film has the very tragic closing of the Cinémathèque Française and the removal of its main champion and founder, Henri Langlois, which was a key turning point for the protest movements in 1968. The film has an older Jean-Pierre Leaud playing himself, reading the manifest written by Jean-Luc Godard during the protests. This a very vivid recollection by Bertolucci, who was present at the time. In my eyes, The Dreamers stands as one of the most important (and sadly underrated) films of recent memory. If this film has no artistic merit, I don't know what does.

----

Statement:

My generation seems to have a fixation on nostalgia. They will pound, scream and shout about how George Lucas RUINED the Star Wars franchise. The way I see it, all six Star Wars films are more less in the same balance. People can yell all they want about how 'Jar-Jar sucks' or how the new trilogy is really bad, but I see the same weak material in the 1977-1983 films. The feel is pretty much the same to me, or maybe I just don't see what the big problem is. I think fanboys are just sick with nostalgia, and their memories of the original trilogy are clouding their notion that the new three movies really do belong with the others.

[RossRoy]

Statement:

My generation seems to have a fixation on nostalgia. They will pound, scream and shout about how George Lucas RUINED the Star Wars franchise. The way I see it, all six Star Wars films are more less in the same balance. People can yell all they want about how 'Jar-Jar sucks' or how the new trilogy is really bad, but I see the same weak material in the 1977-1983 films. The feel is pretty much the same to me, or maybe I just don't see what the big problem is. I think fanboys are just sick with nostalgia, and their memories of the original trilogy are clouding their notion that the new three movies really do belong with the others.

TRUE

They are not comparing the movie themselves, they are trying to achieve the same sense of wonder they got back then. Problem is, they were seeing a movie with kids eyes, today, they are adults, so for most people, they just can't see the movie the same way they did as kids. Take me personally. I wasn't even born when the first Star Wars came out, yet, it is the second movie I watched the most growing up (after Annie...  ). I have all those memories of being amazed at the movie and how heroic Luke Skywalker is and all. But now, as an adult, it is not the same. The new trilogy fits with the old ones in their own context, if I take a step back. If I look at it from an emotional side, of course the new ones can't equal what I felt back then! But that will not make me enjoy them any less (both old, old-new and new). The best example of the nostalgia kicking in is my younger cousin. He discovered Star Wars when he was about 10-11 years old, with Episode I. He had never seen any of the other SW movies before. Of course, he knew I had them, so he came over to watch the original trilogy (the modified ones). He thought they were wonderful, just the same as Episode I. He didn't have all those years of idolizing the story, and speculating of what happened before, and after, and all that. He came in a complete "virgin", and enjoyed the movies for what they are: a special effects galore. And, to this day, we both love Star Wars completely.

Statement (oh boy, get ready folks! )

"Citizen Kane. Considered THE best movie in the history of cinema by many. I've seen it. And I didn't care much for it. Did I miss something? Was it simply praised way too much so my expectations were too high? Is there something in the history context of the movie I just didn't grasp? Who knows. But it felt like a simple, run of the mill, completely boring movie. I, personally, really don't see what the fuss is all about."

[Najemikon]

FALSE!

I liked Citizen Kane from the first viewing. Only liked though. I couldn't understand the massive appeal. After three viewings and a film studies course where it was dissected :bag:I finally understood it's absolute genius. A truly perfect film; technically so far ahead of its time (still ahead today), but the core of the screenplay has an emotional punch that when you understand it, you understand cinema. It gets better with every viewing.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sailor, I DID mean to discount animated films! Heck. Again with the . I think Pixar is the current saviour of cinema, but an animated film can take years of planning and so for me, no matter how brilliant it is, it has to lose a sense of spontaneity that only live action can have. I thought of this statement when I was driving home and The Power of Love came on the radio. I link that directly with Back to the Future. Zemeckis said "wouldn't it be cool to go back in time in a shit hot car!"; Spielberg said "I want to see an alien make friends with a kid and hide in his room!". They and no-one else have said anything similar for bloody years. Independence Day and Pirates of the Caribbean are the closest I can think of, but both, although great, have a sense of baggage. No room for skateboarding in there.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think the Star Wars saga should be discussed separately. Obviously you two have to understand how wrong you really are. I've thought about this argument before and I am confident I can illustrate the HUGE differences between the great trilogy and the crap one. 

[Najemikon]

Whoops! I forgot a new statement, you both upset me so much with that rubbish about Star Wars ... 

"American cinema is now incapable of making a scary film. Mired in gorno, all it can do is regurgitate other countries more powerful output: UK, Australia, Far East."

[Kathy]

Whoops! I forgot a new statement, you both upset me so much with that rubbish about Star Wars ... 

"American cinema is now incapable of making a scary film. Mired in gorno, all it can do is regurgitate other countries more powerful output: UK, Australia, Far East."

Definition of "gorno" please. 

Aren't the statements meant to provoke or inspire?

You should start a "Star Wars" thread!

[Najemikon]

"Gorno" is a play on the word "Porno" and has been recently adopted to mean "Gore Porn" or "Torture Porn". Films like Saw and Hostel basically.

I think the statements can be whatever you want them to be. I like mine to be a bit provoking, so you wither absolutely agree or absolutely don't! 

[SailorRipley]

"American cinema is now incapable of making a scary film. Mired in gorno, all it can do is regurgitate other countries more powerful output: UK, Australia, Far East."

FALSE. While it's true that I don't have many examples to counterpoint your statement, I think it's unfair to to render a whole industry as 'incapable' just because right now gorno and remake films are fashionable. It sounds a bit as it every single American person involved with filmmaking suffers some kind of strange idiocy illness. During the course of the years, American horror films have been based on trends, just the same way slasher movies were trendy during the 80's and serial killers were in the 90's. So, as with everything else, this is something that will pass when people get tired of them. To provide a recent example I'll refer to an American film that apparently many people hated but that I think it's brilliant in its simplicity: Open Water, which deals mainly with just the primal fear of being stranded, no food, no drinking water and the constant menace of being eaten alive.

Statement:
People's infatuation with Harry Potter just baffles me. I don't think the concept of wizard kids is anything new, nor terribly original. I feel these movies are way overlong, simple-minded, and cliché-ridden. Is there a point to them? I just feel each of these is a cliffhanger for the next.

[Najemikon]

FALSE! But your statement is too wide open. First, the books. You're right that child wizards aren't original, but they are to the 7 year olds who love them. The continuing adventures play to everything kids love and, what I think is brilliant, the books grow with the readers, becoming more complex with each instalment. All this is second-hand as I haven't read them, but people tell me this seventh book is much darker than the others. I feel like the only person who hasn't sometimes! You can't argue with the power of the stories; the latest book is one of the most anticipated ever. Kids of all ages bypass the hype and do actually enjoy them all. But the films? Thorny subject. There is no point to them really. It's partly what inspired my earlier statement about cinema producing nothing truly original. Half the audience have read the books and enjoy the films while allowing for what's missing, the other half enjoy them wondering what's missing. It's commercial film-making at its most impotent.

"Martin Scorcese is overrated. Brilliant, with maybe three films at least that are up there with the absolute cream. But somehow his reputation for that brilliance is outstripping his output."