Credible directors like Ridley Scott (although that description doesn't extend to his brother) could do more though. Actually, I don't believe I have the right to accuse a director like Scott of not doing enough for his indigneous industry, hell I don't even know the guy, but none the less, he could be capable of doing something commendable.
Certainly, that's an arguable point, but none the less he is a recdible British director, among many others.
Perhaps it really does not matter, perhaps I'm getting ahead of myself, where there are other struggling industrys which deserve more attention, but I'm really getting tired of kitchen sink dramas of skinheads, irrelevant of how good they are.
I think foreign cinema has proved it can do the whole gangster theme a lot better than us sometimes. For example City of God, that was an absolutely marvellous depiction of gang culture.
British cinema seems unable to do this without including some cliche. There are of course, exceptions, but generally this is true.
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
I think foreign cinema has proved it can do the whole gangster theme a lot better than us sometimes. For example City of God, that was an absolutely marvellous depiction of gang culture.
British cinema seems unable to do this without including some cliche. There are of course, exceptions, but generally this is true.
there is a world of difference between gang and gangster films but in sentiment i agree that some countries do exceptional films that wouldn't work all that well from a UK perspective...the equivalent of citade de deus in the UK would be film about chavs...and that's not EVER going to be interesting
Love Honour and Obey being a prime example of the cliche ridden Uk gangster flick
which was the entire point of the film...it's essentially a parody of other gangster film but it's a hell of a lot more subtle about it that the smack in the face parodies that hollywood turns out
Went to Notting Hill the other day. Got a friend with a flat there. Not a white face in sight, not that I have a problem with that, but what I do have a problem with is Richard Curtis' Notting Hill, where I do not think there is a black face in sight. If I was a resident of Notting Hill, I think I really would be quite offended. It leads to some uncomfortable questions.
Do we have to see England as a purely caucasian society?
Why did Richard Curtis or Roger Michell (director) use a strictly white cast in a traditionally multi cultural area of London?
Are relations between black and white communities and bridging gaps a moot point if we do need a white cast to relate to?
I understand there are places in the world where race issues affect everyday live on a dramatic basis, and that the afore mentioned points might seem small in comparison, but surely we don't need to throw a veil over our eyes to watch a film in the cinema in 2007?