Coen's also have Fargo, The Big Lebowski, Blood Simple, Miller's Crossing, Raising Arizona; all good films. I'm also not a fan of Burn After Reading, it was one of my biggest disappointments of the year, and Tilda Swinton(an amazing actress) was completely wasted as usual.
As for Michael Mann, I like his films but Miami Vice was one big disappointment for me, wasn't crap just nothing special in my eyes.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
MIAMI VICE is an amazing movie? What the ****ing hell?With the exception of Heat (which isn't all that, either), Michael Mann has never made a movie that is considerably above alright.
Also, let's look at Michael Mann's 21st century filmography, shall we?
1. Ali
2. Miami Vice
3. CollateralI haven't seen Ali, but it has a 68% on Rotten Tomatoes, which is generally a good indicator of its quality. Miami Vice is shit. Collateral is okay.
Yeah, Miami Vice is amazing. Oozes style, and has a colour scheme to die-for. Ali is great compared to the other crap out there, but only good compared to Mann's other movies. As for Rotten Tomatoes, if I were you I wouldn't trust any other opinions apart from my own. Although I wouldn't call what I think an opinion, think of me as more fact-based rather than opinionated.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Some of the films pumped out by the other directors on the last in the 21st century:-Memento
-The Departed
-The Dark Knight/Batman Begins
-Zodiac
-The Aviator
-Kill Bill
-The LotR film series
-Letters from Iwo Jima
-Million Dollar BabyAnd many more. You know what they all have in common? They're far better than Mann's recent films.
Memento, Batman Begins, The Dark Knight and LOTR are all excellent, the rest are pretty average. Also, it's a bit embarrassing that you rate The Departed so highly. The original shits on it from a great height.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
He's made one genuine movie this century. Even if it was 'bad', this is no an indication there his style is deteriorating; simply that he, at one point, could not make a good movie. It happens to every brilliant director.... which is pointless, since Kill Bill is a great movie with a wonderful style.
The only reason why you would think Tarantino's post-modernism is outdated is because he's had so many ripoffs.
Nah, Tarantino lost it long ago. He's not even relevant anymore.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
So, why do you think Burn After Reading was bad? Was it too 'dumb' for you?
It was an embarrassing movie to watch. So dull. I couldn't wait for it to end.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Funny. I suppose you can say Zodiac is alright, but I cannot see how anyone can objectively deny Fight Club's greatness. Aside from being stylishly made in a powerfully atmospheric manner that combines hyper-realism, social satire, extreme violence, and a manic, almost psychotic energy, it's theme is far more intelligent and deep than anything Michael Mann could possibly comprehend.It's also the best explanation I've ever seen for the Columbine and Virginia Tech-styled shootings, if you can make the connection.
Fight Club wasn't deep. It was a show-off movie with a cheesy ending. I'm not surprised you liked it - you get bombastic movies, but subtle style slips right pass you. Don't worry though, a fine red wine is not for everyone's taste; some people prefer cherry cola.
Yeah, but Gran torino wasn't very good. It was shot well and Eastwoods performance was memorable everything else took back seat to Eastwoods cynical one-liners of wisdom. Sorry, i know this isn't the thread for criticizing Gran Torino but i just don't get how it's one of the best movie's of the year.
Anyway, i thought i'd include a lesser known Director. Shit, he is so lesser known, i don't even know his name but whoever is responsible for pet detective Jr is a prospect to watch. I mean, it takes a hefty par of balls to take the Pet detective story and continue the series without Jim Carey. For that alone, I admire the man who had confidence enough to take responsibility for turning the Pet detective into a fat child that can't act.
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Yeah, Miami Vice is amazing. Oozes style, and has a colour scheme to die-for. Ali is great compared to the other crap out there, but only good compared to Mann's other movies. As for Rotten Tomatoes, if I were you I wouldn't trust any other opinions apart from my own. Although I wouldn't call what I think an opinion, think of me as more fact-based rather than opinionated.
So... you like Michael Mann = he's the best director ever, fact?
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Memento, Batman Begins, The Dark Knight and LOTR are all excellent, the rest are pretty average. Also, it's a bit embarrassing that you rate The Departed so highly. The original shits on it from a great height.
... did you get what the Departed was about...?
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Nah, Tarantino lost it long ago. He's not even relevant anymore.
You could keep insisting on it, but the fact is, he's only made one genuine movie in the 21st century, and even that is an excellent movie. Saying that it doesn't exist doesn't make it so.
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
It was an embarrassing movie to watch. So dull. I couldn't wait for it to end.
... what was it about...?
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Fight Club wasn't deep. It was a show-off movie with a cheesy ending. I'm not surprised you liked it - you get bombastic movies, but subtle style slips right pass you. Don't worry though, a fine red wine is not for everyone's taste; some people prefer cherry cola.
... what was Fight Club about...?
And now, in turn, let me ask you this: what was Heat about?
Try to answer all of these questions, objectively. If you criticize something, at least get it, eh?
And please don't say Fight Club is an 'anti-consummerist' film. It's far, far more than that.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
So... you like Michael Mann = he's the best director ever, fact?
Now, that ain't the question, is it? This here thread is about 'the best director working right now' - says so at the top of the page, you see.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
... did you get what the Departed was about...?
Hahaha, you didn't until you saw the rat trotting by at the end, right? Now, that's what I call subtle film-making! Hahaha...
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
You could keep insisting on it, but the fact is, he's only made one genuine movie in the 21st century, and even that is an excellent movie. Saying that it doesn't exist doesn't make it so.
Nah, the fact is what I said the fact is, and that's the fact of the matter.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
... what was it about...?
It was about a bunch of actors running around congratulating each other on how funny and 'wacky' they are.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
... what was Fight Club about...?
Come on, now. You're the one who thinks it's a masterpiece! You should know what it's about!
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
And now, in turn, let me ask you this: what was Heat about?Try to answer all of these questions, objectively. If you criticize something, at least get it, eh?
And please don't say Fight Club is an 'anti-consummerist' film. It's far, far more than that.
A film isn't great due to 'what it's about'. A film is great due to what it is. Mann makes movies that are great, pure and simple. Fight Club is a hand-job for pseudo film buffs, whereas Mann's movies are actual examples of intercourse for the people who recognise great cinema.
Ya dig?
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Now, that ain't the question, is it? This here thread is about 'the best director working right now' - says so at the top of the page, you see.
So you think Michael Mann is the best modern filmmaker = law?
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Hahaha, you didn't until you saw the rat trotting by at the end, right? Now, that's what I call subtle film-making! Hahaha...
So the Departed is about... undercover work? Geez, that's brilliant. For somebody who claims to champion subtlety and intellectual filmmaking, you have no understanding of subtext and what exists beyond the obvious.
The Departed is about the concept of one's identity. Is it defined by their actions or by their thoughts? What about secretive urges? When is it that those things blur? Indeed, undercover work is only used as a tool in order to compromise the main characters' identity, and therefore create drama and thinking material for the film.
Also important is society's utilization of people due to their families, pedigrees, or whatever the preconception of it is. Another important factor? When the attempted deception blurs lines with the actual reality.
For example, Billy Costigan has sociopathic urges. His job as an undercover cop enables him to exert these urges in a 'legitimate' matter without fear of judicial retribution, as can be seen during the numerous scenes where he assaults people for absolutely no reason. Regardless, he still believes he's a cop- but does what he think happen to ring true, or is it simply the self-deception referenced earlier in the film? There's no denying that acting as a criminal is seductive to him, and therefore compromises his pre-conceived identity.
For Matt Damon's characters, it's considerably less obvious, but his cover-up still manages to infiltrate his personal life. Despite being part of his disguise, the relationship he developed with the psychologist was genuine- the feelings for the people he was deceiving were surprisingly genuine, which ultimately lead to an internal conflict within him. This eventually explains his pain when she finds out the truth about his loyalties.
Another important concept is the fact that every action, every lie (in the movie), has a consequence. Virtually every character is killed in the end because of their ultimate deception of both sides (remember, both Leo and Matt were killed by the people they were deceiving). Eventually, you're going to have to assume responsibility for your actions- you can't deceive both yourself and the world eternally.
Aside from that, the Departed is a ruthlessly violent, energetic, amazingly acted, stylish, and excellently edited film. Aside from having more intelligent themes than anything Michael Mann has to offer, it's more intelligent, anyway.
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Nah, the fact is what I said the fact is, and that's the fact of the matter.
So you think Tarantino is outdated = he is, fact?
Try telling that to the millions of Kill Bill fans around the world.
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
It was about a bunch of actors running around congratulating each other on how funny and 'wacky' they are.
Way to admit you have no idea what that movie was satirizing.
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Come on, now. You're the one who thinks it's a masterpiece! You should know what it's about!
I do. Now, you're criticizing it for not being deep. If you got the film, you'll have no problem explaining why it isn't deep.
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
A film isn't great due to 'what it's about'. A film is great due to what it is. Mann makes movies that are great, pure and simple. Fight Club is a hand-job for pseudo film buffs, whereas Mann's movies are actual examples of intercourse for the people who recognise great cinema.Ya dig?
What a film is about and what a film is are important to each other. In order for a film to be truly great, it has to operate on an intelligent, provoking theme that captures the mind, the imagination, and the emotional factor. It's impossible for a film to be simply well-made without having any sort of driving idea behind it.
Fight Club succeeds in having an intelligent theme to offer, deliver its messages in a creative and previously unseen manner, and be amazingly directed. Atmospheric, hyper-realistic, satirical, surrealistic to a point... all wonderfully made.
This is better than LOL MIAMI VICE HAS SHINY COLORS SO ITS GREAT!
I suppose the critics, the Award Circles, the Guilds, and movie goers who rated the majority of Mann's films as average-to-good (with the exception of Heat, again) aren't truly movie buffs.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
So you think Michael Mann is the best modern filmmaker = law?
There you go, partner! Ya got there in the end!
Oh...
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
So the Departed is about... undercover work? Geez, that's brilliant. For somebody who claims to champion subtlety and intellectual filmmaking, you have no understanding of subtext and what exists beyond the obvious.The Departed is about the concept of one's identity. Is it defined by their actions or by their thoughts? What about secretive urges? When is it that those things blur? Indeed, undercover work is only used as a tool in order to compromise the main characters' identity, and therefore create drama and thinking material for the film.
Also important is society's utilization of people due to their families, pedigrees, or whatever the preconception of it is. Another important factor? When the attempted deception blurs lines with the actual reality.
For example, Billy Costigan has sociopathic urges. His job as an undercover cop enables him to exert these urges in a 'legitimate' matter without fear of judicial retribution, as can be seen during the numerous scenes where he assaults people for absolutely no reason. Regardless, he still believes he's a cop- but does what he think happen to ring true, or is it simply the self-deception referenced earlier in the film? There's no denying that acting as a criminal is seductive to him, and therefore compromises his pre-conceived identity.
For Matt Damon's characters, it's considerably less obvious, but his cover-up still manages to infiltrate his personal life. Despite being part of his disguise, the relationship he developed with the psychologist was genuine- the feelings for the people he was deceiving were surprisingly genuine, which ultimately lead to an internal conflict within him. This eventually explains his pain when she finds out the truth about his loyalties.
Another important concept is the fact that every action, every lie (in the movie), has a consequence. Virtually every character is killed in the end because of their ultimate deception of both sides (remember, both Leo and Matt were killed by the people they were deceiving). Eventually, you're going to have to assume responsibility for your actions- you can't deceive both yourself and the world eternally.
Aside from that, the Departed is a ruthlessly violent, energetic, amazingly acted, stylish, and excellently edited film. Aside from having more intelligent themes than anything Michael Mann has to offer, it's more intelligent, anyway.
Oh, dear god (me)! You're kidding, right? Infernal Affairs was about the concept of identity, the remake was a frivolous pastiche on the original. Instead of being subtle, it favoured the good ol' Hollywood approach of attempting skull-f*ck the audience - "THESE ARE THE THEMES! THESE ARE THE THEMES!". It was laughable in comparison. Although, I'm not surprised you thought it was more intelligent than it actually is considering your whole "Fight Club is deep!" train of thought.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
So you think Tarantino is outdated = he is, fact?Try telling that to the millions of Kill Bill fans around the world.
Well, I'm telling you, so maybe you can pass it on to rest of the kids.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Way to admit you have no idea what that movie was satirizing.
Haha, I'm commenting on what the movie was, not what it attempted to be.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
I do. Now, you're criticizing it for not being deep. If you got the film, you'll have no problem explaining why it isn't deep.
What's going on here? It's a thrill ride masquerading as philosophy filled with puerile philosophizing and trenchant satire. It's also gimmicky, pretentious (Oh, the ending!) and sensationalistic. Use a dictionary if you're having trouble with any of those words.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
What a film is about and what a film is are important to each other. In order for a film to be truly great, it has to operate on an intelligent, provoking theme that captures the mind, the imagination, and the emotional factor. It's impossible for a film to be simply well-made without having any sort of driving idea behind it.
No, you're wrong. A great film isn't the sum of its parts.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Fight Club succeeds in having an intelligent theme to offer, deliver its messages in a creative and previously unseen manner, and be amazingly directed. Atmospheric, hyper-realistic, satirical, surrealistic to a point... all wonderfully made.
I've already dealt with this. Stop repeating yourself, stop repeating yourself.
(Hehehe, let's see if you get what I did there...Probably only after you've read this parenthesis.)
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
This is better than LOL MIAMI VICE HAS SHINY COLORS SO ITS GREAT!
Not 'shiny' colours! Pastels! Pastels!
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
I suppose the critics, the Award Circles, the Guilds, and movie goers who rated the majority of Mann's films as average-to-good (with the exception of Heat, again) aren't truly movie buffs.
Well, they may be movie buffs, but they're also idiots!
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
There you go, partner! Ya got there in the end!Oh...
You're brilliant.
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Oh, dear god (me)! You're kidding, right? Infernal Affairs was about the concept of identity, the remake was a frivolous pastiche on the original. Instead of being subtle, it favoured the good ol' Hollywood approach of attempting skull-f*ck the audience - "THESE ARE THE THEMES! THESE ARE THE THEMES!". It was laughable in comparison. Although, I'm not surprised you thought it was more intelligent than it actually is considering your whole "Fight Club is deep!" train of thought.
... of course. Considering you evidently don't get any of the movie you bash (if you do, show me an analysis of Fight Club and Burn After Reading, please), I'm sure you picked up on all of these themes.
Here's a question- what purpose did the psychologist fulfill for Billy Costigan?
What does Costello's opening quote "I don't want to be a product of my environment. I want my environment to be a product of me" mean, and how does it relate to real world criminality?
If you're so brilliant, you'll have no problem answering the above questions.
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Well, I'm telling you, so maybe you can pass it on to rest of the kids.
.... your genius is impeccable, sir.
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Haha, I'm commenting on what the movie was, not what it attempted to be.
Then what did attempt to be? What was it actually satirizing?
Go ahead, give me a straight answer or just admit you have no idea what you're talking about.
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
What's going on here? It's a thrill ride masquerading as philosophy
Way to quote Roger Ebert...
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
filled with puerile philosophizing and trenchant satire. It's also gimmicky, pretentious (Oh, the ending!) and sensationalistic. Use a dictionary if you're having trouble with any of those words.
Alright. If you're such a genius, you'll have no problem answering the below questions:
1. What is, ultimately, Fight Club's theme and how does it relate to real world violence?
2. What inherent hypocrisy does Fight Club talk about, and how does it relate to real-world groups?
3. What is the purpose of the uber-violence in which the white collar men indulge?
Again, answer these or admit you simply did not get any of the films you bash.
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
No, you're wrong. A great film isn't the sum of its parts.
Yes...
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
I've already dealt with this. Stop repeating yourself, stop repeating yourself.
HAHA UR SO WITTY AND PHUNNY!!1!
'Dealt with this'? You haven't even proven you got the movies you were talking about. If you didn't, stick to shiny colo- sorry, pastels.
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Well, they may be movie buffs, but they're also idiots!
... this is the ridiculous film snob attitude I cannot stand. "I'm smarter than everybody else! Everybody else is wrong! They're all morons!"
Considering the well-made colors are more important than philosophy for you in a film, I think you're going to have to inspect yourself in a mirror for all the idiocy you claim to hate, eh?
If don't succeed in the tasks I gave you above, this is proof you simply have no idea what you are criticizing and therefore there is no point talking to you.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
You're brilliant.
I think we'll leave it at that, shall we?
Hmmm, I'll attend to your dribble a little bit though...
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
... of course. Considering you evidently don't get any of the movie you bash (if you do, show me an analysis of Fight Club and Burn After Reading, please), I'm sure you picked up on all of these themes.Here's a question- what purpose did the psychologist fulfill for Billy Costigan?
What does Costello's opening quote "I don't want to be a product of my environment. I want my environment to be a product of me" mean, and how does it relate to real world criminality?
If you're so brilliant, you'll have no problem answering the above questions.
Hey, hey, hey! I've already explained why Fight Club isn't deep. I'm not going to get into baby-talk with you about a film with pretensions beyond its station as that would be indulging it more than it deserves. Fight Club is a popcorn flick for me, but a deep, thought-provoking one for the pseudo-enlightened. You're giving it way too much credit, and if you really did 'get' the film, you'd realise it's not all that and a bag of chips.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
.... your genius is impeccable, sir.
I think we'll leave it at that, shall we?
Oh, there's more...
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Then what did attempt to be? What was it actually satirizing?Go ahead, give me a straight answer or just admit you have no idea what you're talking about.
Nah, it's just a load of dull, boring crap. If it didn't get to where it wanted to be, I'm not going to spend time commenting on what it wasn't. That'd be silly.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Way to quote Roger Ebert...
Aha! Look at how those critics you love have left you now! They're backing me up! Whoop!
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Alright. If you're such a genius, you'll have no problem answering the below questions:1. What is, ultimately, Fight Club's theme and how does it relate to real world violence?
2. What inherent hypocrisy does Fight Club talk about, and how does it relate to real-world groups?
3. What is the purpose of the uber-violence in which the white collar men indulge?Again, answer these or admit you simply did not get any of the films you bash.
Listen, kid. If I know a film is trying to be way more than it actually is, I'm not going to indulge those pretensions, am I? By entertaining these delusional questions I'd be feeding the fire of its flatulence. Now, that's something I'm not going to do because there are enough silly teenagers doing that already. Oh, wait...
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
HAHA UR SO WITTY AND PHUNNY!!1!
I think we'll leave it at that, shall we?
Oh...
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
'Dealt with this'? You haven't even proven you got the movies you were talking about. If you didn't, stick to shiny colo- sorry, pastels.
Come on, now. Come on...I've told you Fight Club is "filled with puerile philosophizing and trenchant satire. It's also gimmicky, pretentious (Oh, the ending!) and sensationalistic." So, quite obviously I do 'get' it because I'm able to critique it so accurately. You're the one not getting it, shown by all the bubbles you're blowing up its bum.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
... this is the ridiculous film snob attitude I cannot stand. "I'm smarter than everybody else! Everybody else is wrong! They're all morons!"
Little kids who mistake gimmicky pop-corn flicks for something deeper make me laugh.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Considering the well-made colors are more important than philosophy for you in a film, I think you're going to have to inspect yourself in a mirror for all the idiocy you claim to hate, eh?If don't succeed in the tasks I gave you above, this is proof you simply have no idea what you are criticizing and therefore there is no point talking to you.
I like my colours on the tin, but my philosophy a little deeper. Fight Club's 'philosophy' has all the subtlety of man having his head bashed in by a hammer. How ironic that a film that superficially purports an ethos of rebellion is so desperately imploring the audience to accept its ideas. Hmm, probably explains why so many fools indulge it. Thinking is easier when it's done for you. Haha, so basically you embody the ideals that the main characters are supposedly rebelling against! Hahaha! I am too good.
So... what have we proven here?
1. You have no idea what Fight Club is about, considering you imply it is an actual endorsement of the nihilism and anarchism it presents. What Fight Club is a very negative, extremist response to empty capitalism and alienation/disappointment with society. If you think Fight Club is bad, I'm sure you'll have no problem saying what it's about, right? And how it pertains to the real world?
2. You have no idea what Burn After Reading is satirizing, which leads you to say it is 'stupid'.
3. Because you do not get any of the films, you dub them as moronic and their very large crowd of followers as being moronic, too. This is what I like to call 'insecurity', and is largely prevalent amount similar absolutists and snobs like yourself. "Wait... what was the movie about? Hmm... I dunno! That means it's stupid and everyone who likes is a pseudo-intellectual teenager!". The problem isn't with the movie, it's with the mind comprehending it.
4. You prefer fancy colors to philosophizing, because that is very simple to get.
5. You're a ridiculous Michael Mann fanboy. "OMgZ Miami Vice >>>>>> the Departed, Kill Bill, Fight Club, whoteva!".
6. For someone who claims to like subtlety and intellectualism, it's very strange that you adore Mann to such a degree, considering none of his films are particularly 'deep'.
My friend, until you are reasonably able to analyze these movies (like I do with every movie I watch, Heat included.), we are done here. Thankfully, it also supports my point that the majority of snobs are simply well-spoken morons and fanboys.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
So... what have we proven here?1. You have no idea what Fight Club is about, considering you imply it is an actual endorsement of the nihilism and anarchism it presents. What Fight Club is a very negative, extremist response to empty capitalism and alienation/disappointment with society. If you think Fight Club is bad, I'm sure you'll have no problem saying what it's about, right? And how it pertains to the real world?
2. You have no idea what Burn After Reading is satirizing, which leads you to say it is 'stupid'.
3. Because you do not get any of the films, you dub them as moronic and their very large crowd of followers as being moronic, too. This is what I like to call 'insecurity', and is largely prevalent amount similar absolutists and snobs like yourself. "Wait... what was the movie about? Hmm... I dunno! That means it's stupid and everyone who likes is a pseudo-intellectual teenager!". The problem isn't with the movie, it's with the mind comprehending it.
4. You prefer fancy colors to philosophizing, because that is very simple to get.
5. You're a ridiculous Michael Mann fanboy. "OMgZ Miami Vice >>>>>> the Departed, Kill Bill, Fight Club, whoteva!".
6. For someone who claims to like subtlety and intellectualism, it's very strange that you adore Mann to such a degree, considering none of his films are particularly 'deep'.My friend, until you are reasonably able to analyze these movies (like I do with every movie I watch, Heat included.), we are done here. Thankfully, it also supports my point that the majority of snobs are simply well-spoken morons and fanboys.
Oh, dear. This is sad...
1. I've repeatedly made my thoughts on why Fight Club is over-rated quite clear! Go back and read them, dear boy. Take note of that special bit where I said you may need a dictionary...
2. Wait...Is it satirizing a bad movie by being a bad movie? That's just genius! Seriously though, it's a bad movie. Bad, bad, bad. You know I'm right, just accept it.
3. You're right. The minds that think pretentious, gimmicky pseudo-philosophical movies are deep do have problems. I agree with you there. However, those people are generally youngsters, so they have time to mature. When that happens, they will realise their silliness, and the world will turn again.
4. Haha, let's go slow: The. Reason. I. Don't. 'Get'. Your. Meaning. Of. Fight. Club. Is. Because. It's. Not. Even. There. It is pretentious. Do you understand that word? It's trying to be something it's not, but some people don't see this, so they take it at 'face' value - "Oh, man. That's a smart movie. Did you hear all that philosophy stuff? Woah. Deep. And the end, man. The end...They're, like, the same person. Woah."
5. I no understandy your language. But I like you. You're special.
6. Oh, lovely. More delicious irony. I have merely been correcting the fallacies you attach to Fight Club. Your welcome.
Congratulations, you now perfectly represent the label you're trying to give me - I'm the snob, but you're the one who goes around telling people how you analyse all the movies you see! Hahaha! Too perfect. Teehehe...
Snobs are defined as individuals who think they know better than everybody else, that the entire world is stupid compare to them, and that their opinion is law. Quotes to support this:
Although I wouldn't call what I think an opinion, think of me as more fact-based rather than opinionated.
Also, it's a bit [B]embarrassing
that you rate The Departed so highly.[/B]
I'm not surprised you liked it - you get bombastic movies, but subtle style slips right pass you. Don't worry though, a fine red wine is not for everyone's taste; some people prefer cherry cola.
There you go, partner! Ya got there in the end!
Oh... (referencing your word on Michael Mann being universal law
Well, I'm telling you, so maybe you can pass it on to rest of the kids.
Well, they may be movie buffs, but they're also idiots!
Little kids who mistake gimmicky pop-corn flicks for something deeper make me laugh.
Hurts, doesn't it?
1. No, you haven't. You said it's sensationalistic, pretentious, whatever. What you haven't explained is why you think that. And really, if you're so beyond Fight Club, why can't you explain what the movie is at least supposed to represent or what its themes are? I do the same with bad movies, too, and then explain why their philosophies and narratives are flawed, wrong, simplistic, moronic, whatever. Simply calling a movie "Lolz teh pretentions!' does not make it so.
Now, imagine you have an essay to write; make a detailed analysis of Fight Club. Examine it's 'attempted' philosophy and explain why it sucks, in DETAIL. Which means using more than big words and quotes from Roger Ebert.
2. WTF? Burn After Reading is a very smart movie. Now, if you did not even get what the movie attempted to satirize, you have no right to criticize it for being dumb.
3. Which is exactly why the vast majority of critics (30+ year-old men on average, at least) loved it and why it constantly mentioned among the greatest movies ever made.
But I'm sure you simply know better than the whole world, because your intellect is marvelous and is law.
4. And besides, it's better than "FANCY COLORS!!!11 GOD, IT'S A CLASSIC!".
The primary difference between you and I? I inspect substance in films. When I don't like a film, I get it; I understand its attempted films, and then do my best to rationally explain why I don't think they translated well or why it was flawed. Even if a movie is pretentious, it has pretend to be something to do so, right, bro?
Then you'll, of course, have no problem explaining what Fight Club pretended it was (beyond PHILOSOPHY!) and why it failed to accomplish that (beyond using fancy words which make you think you look smart).
Or, you could of course admit you simply did not get the movie at all.
5. It's mutual. I love you too. But, wait a second... you're not special. You're not unique. You're nothing more than another snobbish troll who pretends to be smarter than everybody else, while championing ridiculously simplistic and substance-less movies while calling anything that exists beyond the scope of your comprehension 'pretentious'.
6. Avoiding the question doesn't make it go away. Go ahead- what's so deep about Mann's films?
The only intelligent movie of his was Heat, and even that was relatively flawed. The best thing about it was Pacino's performance, not the direction.
I don't think my opinion is law. That's the difference between you and I. I think Fight Club is a clever, deep, and superbly-directed film. But you know what is universal law? That Fight Club had themes. That those films attempted to relate to the real world. Of course, you can analyze, in a detailed manner, why those themes are stupid and pretentious and why the film failed in portraying them. But if you say there are none, you're simply a moron without any understand of film.
You know what? Let's do a challenge. If you're so smart, you'll have no problem beating a kid like myself. Here it is- write a detailed analysis of three Michael Mann movies of your choice. I'll write a detailed analysis of the Departed, Fight Club, and either Burn After Reading or No Country for Old Men- you choose. Then we can see who 'got' his favorite movies more, eh?
You'll probably avoid this request completely and call me a pseudo-intellectual teenager or whatever, which is proof of your insecurity, stupidity, and general lack of solid film appreciation.