| Author |
Message |
|
| lissa |
 Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:55 am |
 |
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 2148
Location: my computer
|
My kids enjoy films (and television) that are way beyond the "prescribed" age for viewers. I agree, it's something that is an individual scale, not an all-encompassing decree. Sure, there are those films that absolutely shouldn't be seen by kids but any parent who exposes their kids to the graphic violence and sexual content wouldn't listen to a review anyway. When I went to see Se7en, a 9 p.m. showing as well, there was a couple with a THREE-YEAR-OLD in the theater. That was wrong on so many levels, but hey - their kid, not my business (except when the kid was a little restless, and then a little freaked).
The films (and, again, television shows) that began to offer multi-layered fare were the ones I enjoyed going to with my kids. The Rugrats franchise offers a lot for older kids and parents, not just the cartoons for kids. Even Spongebob offers some hidden grown-up content to make it palatable for parents to take their kids to age-appropriate films. So why shouldn't there be films which aren't overtly for young children (despite their source) with content for all? The more I read about Jonze's film, the more intrigued I am. Still baffled as to his thought process but I think it's something that'll work for him. If he'd made the original Where The Wild Things Are, he might have sacrificed a lot of his vision.
Once I see the movie, I'll be able to speak with more knowledge of its tenets and this whole age thing, but what I do appreciate is that Jonze didn't make a film that panders to kids; rather, he made a film that everyone can enjoy. I read books written for late teens and young adults - and like JK Rowling's books, they are being written in multi-layer fashion so that everyone can enjoy them, age notwithstanding. Stephanie Meyer (Twilight author) says she believes there should be no age-related bookstore sections. I concur.
As for lying - what Gervais says is that some lies make us better people; those that help others, or help them to avoid hurt. Our goalie this year is a child with special needs, and he has none of the fast reflexes or strategy that a non-challenged goalie might have. He was almost single-handedly responsible for the 7-1 blowout against our team Saturday, but we all patted him on the back when he came off the ice and told him he'd done a great job. He needs that, it doesn't hurt, and it makes us better people for it.
k, who wants to go see The Invention of Lying with me? I'm hankering to see it, like NOW...  |
_________________
Statistically, 6 out of 7 dwarfs aren't happy. |
|
| Back to top |
   
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:05 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Quote: When I went to see Se7en, a 9 p.m. showing as well, there was a couple with a THREE-YEAR-OLD in the theater. That was wrong on so many levels...
Anyone going to see that dreck is wrong on so many levels.  |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:05 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
Marc wrote: so billy are you going to see Where The Wild Things Are or are you just gonna quote snarky one liners from critics?
WTWTA is a true oddity of a film. I can honestly say I've never seen anything like it....which is really saying something. When a director brings something fresh to the screen I'm always interested, even when the results are not perfect. As I've said, WTWTA is flawed, but it is such a compellingly offbeat film that I admire it while not particularly loving it. I will see it again.
Comments like this are why I guess I have to see the movie, despite overwhelming instinctual suspicion that I will loathe it. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:11 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
| After reading very good and semi-good reviews of WTWTA, I get the feeling that I may hate it also. I am convinced that the visuals are excellent though. I'm hot and cold as far as Jonze goes. The statement about Cassavetes doesn't impress me because I never found him to be anything more than an average (though experimental) talent. As far as acting, he had a good face for acting, but wasn't much of an actor. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:17 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
| I agree with Gary about Cassavetes as a director. I think he was wildly, ridiculously overrated. His acting was good, and in The Dirty Dozen it was better than that. He was very miscast in Rosemary's Baby. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| gromit |
| Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:30 am |
|
|
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 9010
Location: Shanghai
|
| I only made it halfway through Husbands recently, with Cassavettes, Gazzara and Falk all seemingly improvising being buddies and ditching the other parts of their lives. It was very tiresome in a 70's improv kind of way. |
_________________
Killing your enemies, if it's done badly, increases their number. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:32 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
I actually thought of The Dirty Dozen, and considered that a good performance by him. As far as Rosemary's Baby, I just didn't like the movie, period. His acting fit right in.
The first time I saw Cassavetes was in a dumb little move called, I think, Wild in the Streets (I'll have to look it up) about a bad juvenile delinquent, Cassavetes. Not a square inch of scenery left unchewed. Brooding, brooding brooding, and evil. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:39 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
gromit wrote: I only made it halfway through Husbands recently, with Cassavettes, Gazzara and Falk all seemingly improvising being buddies and ditching the other parts of their lives. It was very tiresome in a 70's improv kind of way.
Another, sort of, Zelig moment. Driving my cab down 5th Ave. crossing 57th my fare said, There's Cassavetes and Falk. as we crossed. I looked in the mirror and they were having an animated conversation in the middle of the 5th Ave crossing. They were surely discussing Husbands. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| gromit |
| Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:45 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 9010
Location: Shanghai
|
Probably debating where Gazzara was.
I usually find Gazzara pretty irritating. |
_________________
Killing your enemies, if it's done badly, increases their number. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 11:30 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
Gazzara, Cassavetes, and Falk constituted their own kind of brat pack. They were self-indulgent as actors when they got together, and sometimes apart. Cassavetes as a director encouraged self-indulgence in his actors, and got it.
One weekend afternoon I saw Cassavetes and his wife Gena Rowlands walking around Columbus Circle. They looked preternaturally glamorous, incredibly sexy, and just slightly stoned. It was a very European moment. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| carrobin |
| Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 1:08 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 7795
Location: NYC
|
| I loved Cassavetes from the first movie I saw him in, "Edge of the City." And I thought most of his movies were interesting, especially the ones with Rowlands. But his sequel to "The In-Laws" was a disaster. I think it was called "Big Trouble" or some such thing. Same cast, same screenwriter, but it just wasn't funny. I adored Cassavetes but comedy wasn't his forte. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Ghulam |
| Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:01 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 4742
Location: Upstate NY
|
"Gazzara, Cassavetes, and Falk constituted their own kind of brat pack."
The first two were probably overrated, but Peter Falk and Alan Arkin in the 1979 version of The In-Laws were hilarious.
. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:11 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
| Correction, it wasn't Wild in the Streets, it was Crime in the Streets. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| whiskeypriest |
| Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:20 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 6916
Location: "It's a Dry Heat."
|
My wife's been a big fan of Ben Gazzara's ever since she met him one New Year's Eve in a little, basement, off the beaten path restaurant in Rome in the late 80's.
All of my Zelig moments are second hand. Except, the sister of pretty bad Hollywood actor Michael Pare once called me a complete fucking asshole for suggesting that her oral fixation - which she blamed for her smoking - would be a nice counter part for my genital fixation, and we might therefore be able to help each other out.
Well, I was also cast in a high school version of Sweet Charity as a freshman, in which he as a senior had a bit part, but the scripts never arrived so the whole project got torpedoed before the first rehearsal. That, I suspect, plus the dawning realization that she's actually a prostitute by the powers that be. |
_________________
I ask you, Velvel, as a rational man, which of us is possessed? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| lady wakasa |
| Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:55 pm |
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5911
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
|
| Well, but as long as you weren't playing Charity, you should be good. |
_________________
===================
http://www.wakasaworld.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
