Guest Len B'stard Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 A script unto itself doesn't necessarily tell you what to shoot though. Unless it's actually been written by the director or someone who wants to direct it. And as for the storyboarding aspect directors tend to be a lot more malleable than that but Hitch had the shit down like a fucking jigsaw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haters Gonna Hate Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 So I saw John Dies at the end and it's probably the weirdest movie I saw. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixes Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 The Lovely BonesThe Bells of St. Mary'sThe Shootist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Len B'stard Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) Love The Shootist. Jimmy Stewarts cameo in it is brilliant!John Wayne: Give it to be straight Doc, no foolin'.Jimmy Stewart: OK...you got a CANCER!John Wayne: Can't ya cut it out Doc?Jimmy Stewart: TO CUT IT OUT I'D HAFTA GUT YA LIKE A FISH!!!!Fuckin' hell Jimmy, don't give it to him THAT straight You know it's sad when Richie Cunningham comes to your aid. Nah, crackin' film, directed by the great and greatly underrated Don Siegel. Apparently there was a scene where Wayne had to shoot someone in the back and he went to Don like 'John Wayne does not shoot people in the back!' and Siegel made the mistake of saying that Eastwood would and Wayne just let him have it like 'I DON'T MUCH CARE FOR CLINT EASTWOOD AND WHAT HE DOES IN MOVIES AND WHAT YOU HAVE HIM DOIN'!' and other such silliness. Edited February 3, 2014 by sugaraylen 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angelica Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 The Lovely BonesForever to be name checked in every article re the worst films of good directors. At least it got The Frighteners off the hook. While far from perfect, and a disappointment following Heavenly Creatures, it's not a terrible film at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Sabbath Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 I like The Lovely Bones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixes Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 it wasn't as bad as I was expectingjust watched...The Man Who Came To DinnerHoliday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 I love The Shootist also. Rooster Cogburn is another good late-period Wayne western. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Len B'stard Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) Y'know I couldn't bring myself to watch the remake of True Grit? Yeah yeah, closer to the original book or whatever but I dunno shit about the book, Rooster Cogburn is John Wayne to me, with Robert Duvall is Ned Pepper and Kim Darby is Matty Ross. Its just ingrained. Can't remember who the fuck played Tom Cheney but he's him too Love The Shootist. Jimmy Stewarts cameo in it is brilliant!John Wayne: Give it to be straight Doc, no foolin'.Jimmy Stewart: OK...you got a CANCER!John Wayne: Can't ya cut it out Doc?Jimmy Stewart: TO CUT IT OUT I'D HAFTA GUT YA LIKE A FISH!!!!Fuckin' hell Jimmy, don't give it to him THAT straight You know it's sad when Richie Cunningham comes to your aid. Nah, crackin' film, directed by the great and greatly underrated Don Siegel. Apparently there was a scene where Wayne had to shoot someone in the back and he went to Don like 'John Wayne does not shoot people in the back!' and Siegel made the mistake of saying that Eastwood would and Wayne just let him have it like 'I DON'T MUCH CARE FOR CLINT EASTWOOD AND WHAT HE DOES IN MOVIES AND WHAT YOU HAVE HIM DOIN'!' and other such silliness.58 secsHe does kinda spit it out though, doesn't he? 'YOU HAVE A CANCER!', what kinda Doctor are you? Edited February 3, 2014 by sugaraylen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haters Gonna Hate Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Hour into Matrix good but kind of confusing. Will watch Existenz soon. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgy Zhukov Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Watching Battleship. Brooklyn Decker... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 The Wrong ManFuck me, what a masterpiece. Is there an element of neo-realism there? It is certainly a long way from North By Northwest. Fonda, what an actor. Vera Miles also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Len B'stard Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 The Damned United Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixes Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Billy LiarBilly BuddBilly Bathgate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Len B'stard Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Billy Liar is fantastic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GivenToFly Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Pacific Rim - was that supposed to be good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Bond Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Watching Disney's The Sword in the Stone as I type. I've got to watch it for a class. I don't mind assignments like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Didn't Hitchcock just film the script. In the 70s you'd have directors going off rewriting the script and then actors just making stuff up. Basically if the script works on the page, film the actors saying the words. Sounds easy doesn't it. He co-wrote most of his pre-Gaumont films. He also worked closely with his screenwriters, handpicking them and dismissing what he did not like.What I mean was did he have a settled script that he shot all worked out? He added has input for it just right then shot it with little license given to actors or even ideas he had on set. Was he actually into psychoanalysis or was that just film theorists? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Len B'stard Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 (edited) What I mean was did he have a settled script that he shot all worked out?Yes, as well as all storyboarded out. Who truly knows about all this shit though, fuck knows what really went on, it's nice to say after the fact cuz it paints a certain fastidious picture of him which fits in with the image of the master craftsman, could just as easily be true, just saying. Like John Cassavetes, i've variously heard that it was total improv shit that he was just an instinctive master of or it was all tightly scripted and planned by way of making transcripts of improvisations and then going over it again and again and again and again and again.Actually, the latter seems a good way to make movies. Edited February 4, 2014 by sugaraylen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixes Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 KluteJayne Mansfield's Car Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixes Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 East Of EdenQuality Balls: The David Steinberg Story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nosaj Thing Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Just watched Elysium. Great movie, I liked it a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angelica Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 KluteFonda at her best. Which is saying a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) What I mean was did he have a settled script that he shot all worked out?Yes, as well as all storyboarded out. Who truly knows about all this shit though, fuck knows what really went on, it's nice to say after the fact cuz it paints a certain fastidious picture of him which fits in with the image of the master craftsman, could just as easily be true, just saying. Like John Cassavetes, i've variously heard that it was total improv shit that he was just an instinctive master of or it was all tightly scripted and planned by way of making transcripts of improvisations and then going over it again and again and again and again and again.Actually, the latter seems a good way to make movies.What I've read about script writers is that often the script is good but directors get involved or worse the studio and that ruins it. Because its the story that has to work and if you change things it unbalances. So the good directors are sensitive to the script that worked. From the Hitchcock movies I've seen its pretty nononsense. He filmed the story. Whereas progressively directors have moved away from that. To now where they are stylists. Like Baz luhmans Gatsby is so excessive.That's what Hopper did shoot tons and sort it out in editing. To me it's insanity but if you can put the story back in place maybe it's ideal. But just shooting nice background scenes and opulent action isn't going to be great. But Out of the Blue it worked. The problem is if you just shoot random stuff you most likely wont ever get a tight narrative drive. But for more impressionistic art narrative who cares, you're looking for magic. The story is often very simple. Like abused daughter comes to terms with death of father. There's no real right way or order to it just a balance of it. She cries for first 20 minutes, then goes on bender, then leaves to find love in Cambodia. Edited February 5, 2014 by wasted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Didn't Hitchcock just film the script. In the 70s you'd have directors going off rewriting the script and then actors just making stuff up. Basically if the script works on the page, film the actors saying the words. Sounds easy doesn't it. He co-wrote most of his pre-Gaumont films. He also worked closely with his screenwriters, handpicking them and dismissing what he did not like.What I mean was did he have a settled script that he shot all worked out? He added has input for it just right then shot it with little license given to actors or even ideas he had on set.Was he actually into psychoanalysis or was that just film theorists?It is not so much the screenplay but Hitchcock's famous storyboards - he believed in 'pure cinema' you see. Hitchcock had everything drawn out like a comic book, every single shot. In a way, the film was already shot before it was actually shot. He had everything worked out in advance. He also had little time for method actors. He worked with two, Clift and Newman, and had problems working with both.Psychoanalysis? That is certain films, isn't it? The one that is most singled out is Vertigo but this theorist approach has also been applied to Shadow of a Doubt, Strangers On A Train and Psycho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts