 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
4.254.157.187
Haven't we seen Tom Cruise do all these scenes many, many times before?
Pretty good special effects but, as usual in these types of film, repeated ad nauseum.
Do women ever do anything of importance in a Spielberg film? I can't think of ONE instance...either they're window dressing, absent altogether when the action begins.
A good popcorn movie but certainly, because of the triteness of the writing, direction, and acting, nothing more.
Hell, I can't even think of one "catchy" line...(and...Spielberg doesn't seem to possess a sense of humor: history shows that humans will find a way to laugh no matter how grim a situation).
Follow Ups:
nt
a minor reason, anyhow.
The problem with WotW is there is no antagonist, except for overwhelming machines. And...there is no foil for Cruise. No one actor can carry an action film for that long, and Tom certainly can't. The movie is a one-trick pony which is fine for popcorn but, compared to The Terminator, for instance, it pales. Think of all the powerful characters in Terminator, their interractions, the orchestrated tensions, the complexity and number of scenes.
Now, WotW: monotonous "excitement" with extrordinarily repetitive scenes of slogging machines burning rays into exploding bodies.
When at last we see the creatures for a few moments, they look familiar, do nothing menacing, don't actually hurt a fly. They're inept, boring, and ineffective as plot devices.
Compare this to the wonderful acting ensemble in Jaws, Raiders, or Jurassic Park and realize how far Spielberg has fallen.
And the reason the aliens were so dull/simple when we finally saw them was to drive the home the idea that the technology of killing, the ability to do it in such a detached way, can turn even the docile into remorseless killers.That said, I thought it pretty much sucked in it's execution but not because of those things (in fact those things are what gave it the potential to be interesting and maybe even provocative). It sucked because it was sooooooo unreal in ways that could've and should've been more real if we were going to identify with the one person and feel the threat of our own technology without being taken out of the movie.
Things like the turbines of the crashed jet still spinning the next morning (or of a commercial jet flying the day after the whole world has been EMF'd and attacked by aliens). Like the son going over the hill and having the whole hillside blow up like the tree line in Apocalypse now but he gets to Boston before them. Like thier finding a clear path through every bit of highway littered with conked out cars and hysterical people (or through the jet crash debris). I mean, at least make it an off road vehicle and have them use it that way. I also never felt like TC was really those childrens' father. Never felt that bon. And the capper of ridiculousness was the mother's family coming to the door of the pristine street in Boston like they wer just about to sit down to a Sunday night lamb dinner. I mean the whole world is in flames except for one street in Boston where nobody even seems shaken up.
There were several more things like these but thankfully I've forgotten them.
Anyway, it seems like you're picking on the movie for the wrong reasons.
"Where are we going? And what am I doing in this hand basket?"
s
E.T. was a girl - betcha didn;t know that but did you see its dick? I didn't.Colour Purple
Sugarland Express
Really though as male directors he's probably wise to not try and do what he's not good at doing or knows less about. Kubrick never had a single well constructed female character unless you count the Shining -- and even then that was Stephen King's character and still weakened by Kubrick.Spielberg's Marion was easily the equal of Indy -- and Karen Allen had to battle Spielberg to make her tough.
One of the reasons the Temple of Doom was so far inferior was because the female character was so over the top an airhead that it didn;t work beyond slap-stick. Karen Allen made Raiders a more grounded film and may be one of the mains reasons it has resonated so well for so long.
And as dopey as Jurassic Park is -- the daughter in the movie had smarts and gile. idiotic dialogue but you can't have everything.
"history shows that humans will find a way to laugh no matter how grim a situation)."Yea, right. The boob should have known to put more guffaws in Schindler's List. Much too serious. I mean, come on, someone other than the Nazis must have had a smile on their face. You mean the Jews were not telling any jokes as they are marching to the gas chambers? Not smiling about their situation? Not finding a way to laugh as they were being gassed?
Do you ever think about what you are typing before putting finger on key? Perhaps you can give us concrete examples rather than vague generalities. Or are specifics not your forte'?
... politically, be such a dunderhead in his film taste? ;^)Cheers,
AuPh
.
----------
" . . . life, liberty, and the pursuit of daffiness."
that he can't stand another actor of any stature: he's on camera just about the entire movie, half of it in closeup, and says nothing of note. NOthing.
I will make your day, however, and say I was impressed with the machines, though they smacked a bit of Spiderman II.
"that he can't stand another actor of any stature: he's on camera just about the entire movie, half of it in closeup,"Um, well, he is a leading actor, and that is what leading actors do. They are on the screen because they sell tickets. Why blame Cruise because he sells tickets? Oh, right, you do not like him.
"and says nothing of note. NOthing."
Did Cruise get screenwriting credit? Blame Cruise for the screenwriting? Now, you are really reaching. Perhaps you should blame him for the set design. Or the costumes. Or the cold coffee.
"though they smacked a bit of Spiderman II."
That damn Cruise.
only someone so ill-informed in reality could do fiction so well. Are we talking about Speilberg or Cruise? Ah, I guess it doesn't matter.
I was refering to tinear's opinion of WoTW; it was sort of an inside joke, I guess, since those words were an exact quote he leveled at me a few weeks ago.Cheers,
AuPh
zt
.
----------
" . . . life, liberty, and the pursuit of daffiness."
Big, never ending appetite, large mouth, and attacks innocent people for three days at a time........JUST KIDDING! Are there a lot of female posters in here???
Be scared, very scared.
I don't know. I think there are one or two at least.
I like when they get a fair shake in movies, it makes the flick even better. Lead roles are great too(Aliens)
I guess it's how you define 'important' which there have been several, although not leading roles. Dr. Sattler in Jurassic Park, Marion in Raiders, Agatha AND Dr. Hineman in Minority Report, all these parts were great I thought. This is the first time i've defended Spielberg too, he can be good but he's down a little ways on my list of favorite directors.
but that was it....and how many years ago? My premise stands correct: women don't exist for him (anymore).
Oh yea, Poltergeist. Mom (Jo Beth Williams??) was a fairly strong character, so was the little spooky lady with the squeaky voice.
Uh oh, the culture police seem to be out again. It seems John Ford would not pass your test either. Your complaints are lodged by virtually every actress over 35, and have been the norm for the majority of directors, even great directors, in film history. Why single out Spielberg? If you do not like Spielberg, say so. But please do not provide specious reasons that you are not willing to apply to other directors. Why stop with women. How about minorities? Maybe more women directors should step to the plate.
you feel better now.
Well, helping to educate people always makes me feel better. By the way, brilliant retort.
But as a general rule, with that being one exception, I would agree with you.
"I can't think of ONE instance...either they're window dressing, absent altogether when the action begins."Um, The Color Purple. Whoopi Goldberg and Oprah Winfrey were certainly not windown dressing, most certainly not absent altogether, and were most certainly the subject of the action, to wit, violence and degradation.
..he's really good at those wonderful "coming up the hill because there's something really mind-blowing over the other side" shots.
That's all.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
