with the large number of wanna-be filmmakers out there i'm curious how many have actually gotten their foot in the door in Hollywood? have any of you actually submitted scripts and had offers? finished a film? premiered your work at a film festival? just curious.
i'm also curious how many here are genuinely into filmmaking for the love of it rather than as a means to potentially make a lot of money from it. there are plenty of success stories out there but I look to people like Robert Rodriguez & Quentin Tarantino (among others) as being true film acolytes. anyone can make a film but originality, creativity & vision play a large part in realizing one's potential at making film.
so I guess what i'm saying is, are you in it for the $ or are you in it for the sake of art?
quote:
I look to people like Robert Rodriguez & Quentin Tarantino (among others) as being true film acolytes. anyone can make a film but originality, creativity & vision play a large part in realizing one's potential at making film.
It's very strange to see the words 'Tarantino' and 'originality' in the same sentence.
quote:
It's very strange to see the words 'Tarantino' and 'originality' in the same sentence.
you could say that about any director really but you're correct, Tarantino does "steal" a lot of material from the classics, but he does have a way with dialogue and being able to piece together a decent film. "Amateurs borrow, but geniuses steal," as the saying goes. and let's face it, we all know just how much garbage there is floating out and about in Hollywood. I can honestly say that there are only a small handful of directors out there whom I truly admire, specifically because they're simply great storytellers and have a unique way of directing film.
quote:
but he does have a way with dialogue
But he stole that from Alex Cox. Watch 'Repo Man' sometime, then watch 'Pulp Fiction' again... might as well have called it 'Gangsta Man'.
quote:
Originally posted by MarkG
But he stole that from Alex Cox. Watch 'Repo Man' sometime, then watch 'Pulp Fiction' again... might as well have called it 'Gangsta Man'.
How so very true. The resembalance is uncanny. Though the movie is good, I fail to see how myriads of websites rate it as the #1 movie. Personally I liked Rez. Dogs better then pulp fiction.
You people have held me back long enough, I'm going to clown college!
That's it! You people have stood in my way long enough! I'm going to clown college!
quote:
Personally I liked Rez. Dogs better then pulp fiction.
I tend to agree, and I'd go as far as to say that the Tarantino version of 'City on Fire' (aka 'Reservoir Dogs') is better than the Hong Kong movie. However, I'd have preferred him to do something original of his own.
Then again, I suppose you could argue that Hong Kong rips off so many American movies that it was about time someone did the opposite :).
City on Fire is funny. Those crazy chinese, the gods bless them.
By the way, while on the subject of Tarantino, does anyone else find his endorsment of asian cinema annoying. I know its a marketing technique and hes not the only person that does it, but its irritating. People who normally would not watch that movie look at and say, "Ooo, Look Quentin Tarantino presents!!!" and automtically think its the best thing in the world. People are extremly incapable of forming their own opinons.
You people have held me back long enough, I'm going to clown college!
That's it! You people have stood in my way long enough! I'm going to clown college!
quote:
Originally posted by swordofdoom
By the way, while on the subject of Tarantino, does anyone else find his endorsment of asian cinema annoying. I know its a marketing technique and hes not the only person that does it, but its irritating. People who normally would not watch that movie look at and say, "Ooo, Look Quentin Tarantino presents!!!" and automtically think its the best thing in the world. People are extremly incapable of forming their own opinons.
it used to bug me but not so much anymore. besides, if Tarantino can use his name to give films some visibility then why not? like you said, these are movies some people normally wouldn't watch precisely because they're incabable of forming their own opinions - if he can get people to expand their horizons and watch something new then he's doing a service to the industry.
quote:
I do not watch asian cinema because I am not from asia, I do not live in asia, and I don't speak any asian languages.
dude, if this is your criteria for not watching Asian cinema then I truly feel sorry for you. seems like a rather close-minded approach to film.
I am also not from Asia but found Seven Samurai to be one of the best movies I've ever seen (no wonder its been copied so many times) and it sent me off into watching any number of Samurai flicks.
I also very much enjoyed Shaolin Soccer and think everyone with a sense of humor should check it out Asian or not.
RJSchwarz
San Diego, CA
RJSchwarz
quote:
Originally posted by Zack Zrull
lol...thanks for your sympathy...I intended that to mean tarantino's stuff is easily accessible (it's distributed in the US first), and deals with language or culture (american) with which I'm at least somewhat familiar. I do not understand asian culture to any significant degree because I did not spend the last 20 years of my life IN asia, let alone study asian history in school...I'd much rather watch films that might relate to events or situations familiar to me..and to be honest I have a hard time with subtitles because I hate not understanding vocal inflections or figures or speech. yeah, seven samurai is a great movie, from what i can understand, and laid the groundwork for much more storytelling in american cinema (and probably others), but I still don't think I can completely understand the movie without first learning about the samurai culture and even kurosawa's biography. LOL I hope you thought that I would go through life without ever desiring to watch or appreciate asian cinema, because that would make me laugh--don't get me wrong, I'm on a quest to learn as much about film as I can, but I'm starting where I can, where things might make some bit of sense to me. Sure, I could have read (or even just looked at or pronounced) the words in a book with a high flesch-kincaid level when I was in like 5th grade, but would that book have meant anything to me? probably not...or I could read a book in spanish and even though I could actually understand the literal meaning of some words, without having lived in a spanish speaking country or studied the respective cultures, I don't think I'd get much out of the book. Why not start with cinema that is easily accessible??? that is, the movies showing at the local cineplex, broadcast on movie channels, in your and your friends' movie libraries, on the bargain racks at blockbuster. by the way, i'm broke haha, I can't go out and buy all the books and movies i'd like to.I'm still very early in my studies, dude.
I think your unwillingness to open yourself to different avenues of film is surprising, if you are in fact a film student. the fact of the matter is, you don't have to have a background in Asian history let alone non-Western/non-American history to be able to understand the context of a movie. your inability to read subtitles strikes me as apathy of the worst kind. silent films utilized subtitles because there was no sound, therefore you still had to read the screen, foreign films are no different - it's storytelling plain and simple.
quote:
Originally posted by Zack Zrull
by the way, i'm broke haha, I can't go out and buy all the books and movies i'd like to.
For $20 a month you can get as many DVDs you can watch through Netflix (or a similar program through Blockbuster or others). Librarys are even cheaper and many have videos these days. You don't need to *own* the DVDs or movies.
RJSchwarz
San Diego, CA
RJSchwarz
quote:
Originally posted by rjschwarz
I am also not from Asia but found Seven Samurai to be one of the best movies I've ever seen (no wonder its been copied so many times) and it sent me off into watching any number of Samurai flicks.
I also very much enjoyed Shaolin Soccer and think everyone with a sense of humor should check it out Asian or not.
You're my new best friend. We can't agree on cheese for the life of us, but we can agree on Seven Samurai.
Now in response to Angus and Zrull's little foray, The reason that Tarantino or other directors annoy me when they do this is because they inspire people to be fake, which I can't stand. The people see a movie in a forigen language with subtitles that is endorsed by him, and suddenly they feel they know everything about the genre.
That and everybody reveres him as a god, the best thing since sliced bread when hes not. He's really not that influential and greatly pales in comparison to the greats. Just look at Polanski, Fukasaku, Hitchcock, Romero, Kurosawa, Miyasaki, Allen, Jaramucsh, Coppla (Francis Ford and Sofia), Brooks, Okamoto, Rodriguez, Jackson, Capra, Welles, and even though its a cliche, Kubrick. There are loads of better and more influential directors then him. I'm simply asking, why is he the one getting idolized?
You people have held me back long enough, I'm going to clown college!
That's it! You people have stood in my way long enough! I'm going to clown college!
quote:
I do not watch asian cinema because I am not from asia, I do not live in asia, and I don't speak any asian languages.
Then you're missing a lot of movies that you really should see: Kurosawa's being an obvious example, as mentioned.
Asian movies often feel odd because they don't stick to the Hollywood standard of screenwriting, and they're often ripping off successful Western movies, but they seem to do a better job of it than most people ripping off Asian movies. I preferred 'The Eye' to 'Sixth Sense', for example, and I think it's pretty funny that Hollywood are remaking a movie that was a 'homage' to a Hollywood movie in the first place.
quote:
Originally posted by swordofdoom
Now in response to Angus and Zrull's little foray, The reason that Tarantino or other directors annoy me when they do this is because they inspire people to be fake, which I can't stand. The people see a movie in a forigen language with subtitles that is endorsed by him, and suddenly they feel they know everything about the genre.
I don't know of any other directors besides Tarantino that openly endorse film, and he's only done it for a few if my memory serves me correctly. besides, you can't keep these movies a secret forever, not only is it elitist but it does nothing to help Asian cinema or ?insert director/actor/genre here?. it's almost as if all the film snobs in the world are mad at him for giving exposure to these talented new actors/directors rather than keeping it confined to the "in-crowd". I don't think this is what the true spirit of film is supposed to be about. what do you do if you see a really good film? you tell as many people as humanly possible about it right? Tarantino is no different, except he can reach far more people through his endorsement alone.
quote:
That and everybody reveres him as a god, the best thing since sliced bread when hes not. He's really not that influential and greatly pales in comparison to the greats. Just look at Polanski, Fukasaku, Hitchcock, Romero, Kurosawa, Miyasaki, Allen, Jaramucsh, Coppla (Francis Ford and Sofia), Brooks, Okamoto, Rodriguez, Jackson, Capra, Welles, and even though its a cliche, Kubrick. There are loads of better and more influential directors then him. I'm simply asking, why is he the one getting idolized?
I don't think everyone idolizes everything he does, I just think some people respond to his style of filmmaking the way you would to any of the directors you mentioned above. I find some of his films entertaining but some of his others quite dull. and yes, he rips other directors off but who doesn't steal in Hollywood? Lucas did it, hell, even Jim Jarmusch ripped off Suzuki Seijun for his Ghost Dog movie, the most overrated piece of garbage ever to grace the big screen. different strokes for different folks.
