Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Dark Knight Rises' started by Thread Manager, Aug 23, 2016.
Let's move there.
The funny thing is a Kryptonian planted it on Earth.
If you smoke it you gain temporary superhuman powers, then faint.
Taxi Driver is a classic and above almost everything Spielberg has made, sorry. The ending is iconic.
Spielberg post-2000? BFG? Lincoln (way overrated)? War of the Worlds(enjoyable popcorn movie but unoriginal and dumb, with a terrible ending), Indiana Jones 4? Artificial Intelligence never did anything for me and felt like Kubrick could have done so much more. I don't remember caring for The Terminal.
Then you have SCORSESE. I haven't seen Hugo, but Wolf of Wall Street was 3 hours of pure entertainment and just really well done from start to finish without trying to make a single character likable for the general audience. I thought Shutter Island and Aviator were good solid films. The Departed is a modern crime classic (although it should not have won Best Picture). Spielberg has been dishing out snoozefests lately unlike Marty, in my opinion. Even Steven's (see what i did there?) films that i like since 2000 don't have much of that rewatchability factor. For me of course.
Goodfellas, Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, After Hours, King of Comedy, Mean Streets, Last Temptation of Christ. Even Color of Money, Bringing out the Dead and Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore are damn good. The only Berg' movies i go back to are Saving Private Ryan, Jurassic Park, some older Indiana Jones flicks, Jaws and Close Encounters. E.T is a fine movie but it doesn't really appeal to me anymore. A list like that is good enough for me. It's a decent amount. But compared to other favorites of mine, it's just not on the level.
Most importantly i'll take Scorsese over Spielberg because he's much more fascinated with character studies. And i can tell if i'm watching a Scorsese film in 3 seconds flat. I don't get that with Spielberg right away. His filmography is way too inconsistent for me to put him above Marty. And i'm not saying Marty is the most consistent director out there because that would be a lie.
When it comes to Spielberg's work from 2000 onward I prefer Minority report, Munich, and Catch me if you can to anything Scorsese has done post 2000.
Wolf of Wall street is entertaining but it's overlong, the fat needed to be trimmed. There are plenty of other Marty films I'd knock for being bad/mediocre before I get to Wolf of Wall Street. Cape Fear, Boxcar Bertha, The Aviator, Gangs of New York, New York New York, Shutter Island, The Last Temptation of Christ...
But I certainty wont begrudge anyone who prefers Scorsese. Scorsese kind of has his own "style" and does his own thing, and does that style amazingly well.
Spielberg is a lot more diverse than Scorsese is and he can adapt a lot more. I'd personally go with Spielberg due to the variety in his filmography.
I like those movies too.
Wolf being a bit long is a fair and popular criticism. I can see that, but it never bothered me because i could watch those guys behave like a-holes for 4 hours.
Cape Fear is one of my least favorite Scorsese movies. But that Deniro scene in the theater KILLS me, every single time. Im with you on that though. I do need to see it again, it's been a while.
Spielberg is diverse but he doesn't always nail every genre. He goes for it but sometimes i don't care for the execution. His dramas and epics sometimes feel too forced. He's at his best when he's going for the fun action blockbuster that can appeal to all ages. But he's proving that he either can't do those types of films anymore or he's struggling. He's hit and miss with the boring political biopics/period pieces.
They're both legends in their own right. Can't take that away from them.
Now how about Tarantino vs Paul Thomas Anderson? Two favorites of mine.
Today there was a freakout on twitter because of Live by Night. Several people posted negative impressions of it.
Kris Tapley from Variety, who also saw the movie, responded to the last tweet with
Affleck fans had a meltdown because of this. There were lots of hysterical tweets saying "Muh Batfleck can't make a bad movie", "I haven't seen the movie but I'm sure that's a masterpiece", "Clearly those people are lying/want to attract attention/hate Ben", "I'm blocking everybody who says that Live by Night is bad", "Do critics hate Affleck now for being in BvS? Will The Batman get bad reviews too?".
...yyyeaaaah, I'll see the movie and decide what my feelings are.
I'll be honest- the trailer kind of did give me that hollow, Gangster Squad vibe. I'll wait and see, but it just struck me as a potentially glossy and cliche-ridden type of movie.
I mean honestly, I think Affleck's movies so far have been really strong but it's always an unrealistic expectation to expect a director to hit a home run EVERY time. And I've been saying he needs to stop starring in his own movies for a long time.
I feel bad for the guy. Things have just been going downhill ever since he took the batman gig.
Wouldn't blame him if he decided to not direct the solo film now.
He simply didn't need the Batman gig. He was finally gaining momentum and respect in the industry.
Someone like Bale needs the role approaching 30 and can leverage it for other opportunities. Affleck didn't need the role and the extra exposure is not always a good thing.
Reading the criticisms: looks like Snyder's habits have rubbed off on him in a bad way.
Was Live By Night really expected to be some kind of Oscar darling? Based on the trailers, it just kind of looks like a fun gangster movie to me.
It looks like it's trying too hard to be Boardwalk Empire.
I think given the December release, and it being an Affleck film there's probably some expectation of that baked in, fairly or unfairly. At the very least I think it was expected to be good. The Town wasn't Oscar Bait, but it was still a damn good movie.
I guess we'll soon see if this is a case of too-high expectations, or if it's an actual misfire.
Eh, you know...it happens. It's been a rough year for him, but he can turn it around. No director worth their salt backs away from a project they're passionate about just because they get some bad reviews, let's hope he just uses all of this as fuel to make a great Batman movie. I do think it's possible he's been biting off a bit too much between all his DC obligations, other movies he's acting in, and the directing career.
I think this is probably it. He's been going pretty much non-stop and now WB are hanging over him to speed up production on the solo Batman.
What an exciting day on Twitter.
DCEU Fans on twitter always making everything about themselves
The Accountant was not a good movie. Very mediocre. Ben was good in it though. That's about it.
I don't. He's a grown man. If the movie has no substance, then who's fault is that?
Warner Brothers! Clearly they butchered Ben's movie!
The trailers look fun but dumb. Well shot though, and because of the talent involved i expected the trailers to be a poor representation of the film. Just their way of marketing the movie. But maybe the trailer is a good representation after all. We'll see.
Im glad critics didn't love The Accountant. it shows they're not kissing his ass every step of the way.
I agree with Batlobster that Ben should stay out of his movies. I felt that way about Argo. The Town was different. The whole character and Boston element? Yeah he fit that role. But now it's starting to become too much. Maybe he shouldn't be directing The Batman after all.
People disagree with me on a movie. It must be a conspiracy.
Because I am such an important person. People who don't even know me are conspiring against me.
Argo is the only movie directed by Ben Affleck that I watched.
I consider watching Live By Night.
"Live By Night" looks good, visually at least, thanks to Robert Richardson.
I'll give it a shot anyway.