In Reply to: Re: You dare.... posted by patrickU on March 20, 2004 at 02:49:01:
No I'm comparing Raiders to 81/2 and Raiders is a vastly superior film on all counts. Intelligence, interest, fun, depth(and let's face it wasn't about depth).I have not seen Amacord...judging by this thread Amacord isn't the one to see to judge Fellini...so I will pick one of the ones people like and give him a second chance. Perhaps that will change my mind about 81/2.
Also, you like to dismiss Raiders. Interesting how both MOST critics - you know the people who are professionals and so called artsy fartsy conissours generally consider Raiders to be one of the 100 greatest films ever made.
This is not just about what the masses like - unlike Jurassic Park which the masses liked the critics felt it was good or worse.
This is why you need to distinguish between a big seller like Raiders and a big seller like JP. The first is critically praised the second really isn't.
The numbers in both camps are on Raiders' side whether two people on this forum disagree - you'll find more Spielberg movies on a best 100 list than you will from Fellini on MOST professional film critics list.
From what it sounds like Amacord Fellini is a one trick pony, a complaint i have with a lot of so called great fdirectors...they make one narrow field very well and when they go outside of that they bomb. Scorcese? If it's not seady side of life his films are hardly good. Woody Allen? Horny nerd who's a misfit in society ---same films over and over.
Sure they're great at that aspect - but Woody Allen trying to make an action film - it would probably suck even compared to Michael Bay(well maybe not that bad).
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: You dare.... - RGA 11:47:30 03/20/04 (0)