 
|
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 |
In Reply to: Thelma and Louise.... posted by AudioHead on June 01, 2001 at 11:10:00:
At the risk of having Victor tell me I'm a cultural philistine . . .I enjoyed T&L for what it was, A female buddy picture with attractive actresses, artful cinematography and the message that women don't have to take crap from anybody. I'm also a sucker for a desert road picture and the movie worked on that level for me as well. It was no "Alien" or "Blade Runner", but it was an entertaining movie and yes, I enjoyed it way more than "Easy Rider" which is terribly dated and . . . virtually plotless.
Follow Ups:
personal favorites. Not exactly plotless, but rather loosely plotted
with interlaced thematic threads of symbolism. The acid-trip in the New Orleans
cemetery is one of the best simulations of its kind in cinema; Jack Nicholson's
performance is a pure delight; of course, the ending is a classic, not
to mention the superb soundtrack. - AH
I will generally agree with you on that. There is something undenyably "true" and original about the Easy Rider that the T&L just can't possibly have.I think Troy is being too hard on it by calling it plotless... it IS plotless, if you judge by the more traditional American movie standards, but in my view the plot is not really needed, at least the plot in the traditional sense... in order to make a good movie. One can perfectly convey the atmosphere, the emotion, etc without resorting to "plot" (what is the plot of the Wild Srawberies?).
So the choice between these two would be very easy for me, even if I am not the "Rider's" fan. But it definitely has the feel, the atmosphere and it does make T&L look like a cardboard cut-out.
One additional word - I don't think anyone had ever produce anything worth watching by following in the footsteps of something true and original. Scott is not that kind of director, anyway, but even the undisputed giants like Tarkovsky had fallen into that trap - with his Berman-esque "Sacrifice", for instance. But if in case of Tarkovsky this was just one silly mistake, Scott has really nothing to counterbalance this flap. Flap? No, a norm, rather...
So no, the Easy Rider is NOT one of my favorite films, but it is something that has the right to exist, as it probes and pushes the envelope, searches for something new. T&L? Sam ol' crap from same ol' crapsters.
> > So no, the Easy Rider is NOT one of my favorite films, but it is something that has the right to exist, as it probes and pushes the envelope, searches for something new. < <So why don't you feel the same way about Alien and Bladerunner? I agree with Doug Schneider about both of those movies and would use your own words to describe the fact that they probed and pushed the envelope, searching for something new.
AS
Aurelio, art is strange and personal thing, as we all know. Just to be "pushing and searching" is not sufficiet for something to be considered art. Dipping Christ in urine indeed "pushes", but only very few would consider that art.I don't mean to turn this into some philosophical discussion, but since you asked, those two movies do nothing for me, I just get bored and turn them off. I was only able to tolerate perhaps 15 minutes of the Runner, but saw most of the Alien. To me they are waste of time and have nothing to do with art. Most importantly their entertainment value to me is zero.
Now, a movie doesn't have to be "art" to be enjoyable, and I personally have spent many hours watching something silly and sometimes idiotic, but usually those things don't pretend to be anything else.
I am only saying this because a comparisson was drawn between the two completely well, alien, in my view, movies.
I certainly respect your opinion, which is why I asked.Personally, I never considered BR or Alien (or Easy Rider for that matter) to push the envelope - but I do think that each had something new to offer their respective genres - not unlike Terminator. Yes T had Aahnold....had heart-stopping action and memorable cliches, but I thought it had a wonderfully conceived and executed plot for a MAINSTREAM film (mainstream being the operative word here). I believe this to be true of BR and Alien, too. I agree with Audiohead that, at this point, Alien is only interesting if watched several years apart or under the influence of mind altering substances (I prefer 1 or 10 good micro beers, myself ;-) but nevertheless, upon their original release, I thought all these movies had something new and fresh to offer.
I hope that made sense.
AS
Although I enjoyed both "Alien" and "Bladerunner" upon their initial
releases, I find it hard to watch them now due to boredom. In "Alien"
after the surprise/shock value wears off, it comes off as too slow-paced. However, I do enjoy watching it every 6 or 7 years, just once,
and I have to be very stoned at that just to endure that pace, although I do enjoy the classic "chest-bursting" scene EVERYTIME I
watch. Also, the scene where the Alien drops down behind Harry Dean
Stanton, while Stanton is looking for a cat, is timeless and never
fails to mesmerize me. Concerning boredom: ditto for 2001 Space
Odyessy. - AH
Ridley Scott's commentary on the Alien DVD was pretty interesting.
I don't mind slow pacing although I have yet to get past the first 15 minutes of 2001: A space Odyssey. ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzz
:O LOL!
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 ]
