Miscellaneous Movie Musings

[flippyshark]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Tarrantino's style is all about the artifice of film making. He had no interest in suspending disbelief, he always wants you to be aware that you're watching a movie, being told a story. That's why, I believe, he uses so many idioms from the early days of film, when they were still toying with the medium, hadn't mastered the suspension of disbelief, and were still just putting plays and telling stories on screen.

Actually, I find suspension of disbelief frequently tougher in current mainstream movies than in much fare from the thirties through seventies. Quick case in point: A Night To Remember (58) vs. Titanic (97). The latter is so impressed with itself and its shiny effects that it pulls me out of its story constantly. AN2R is subtle, unflashy, and even if the effects are primitive, I leave that movie feeling like I lived through it much more than Cameron's effort. Another quick example; I prefer The Longest Day (62) over Saving Private Ryan (98) for Normandy landing sequences, largely because it doesn't go out of its way to throw snazzy techniques, severed limbs and surround sound whooshes and explosions in my face. Ryan almost seemed like a (very grisly) theme park attraction. And don't get me started on Pearl Harbor. Okay, rambling, must get ready for work.

[Strangler Lewis]

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

Getting back to Michael Clayton:
Does anyone have an opinion about the last shot of the film. Clooney in the taxi. The shot goes on and on. Kinda cool but I'm wondering why it was there and what it meant. I'm not sure. I liked it, I guess.

Then you liked the last shot of Jackie Brown.

I liked the performances in Michael Clayton, but I thought the script was trying too hard to be Networky. I also didn't buy the basic set-up. (He's a "fixer" at a law firm? With a gambling problem?)

Originally Posted by flippyshark

Actually, I find suspension of disbelief frequently tougher in current mainstream movies than in much fare from the thirties through seventies. Quick case in point: A Night To Remember (58) vs. Titanic (97). The latter is so impressed with itself and its shiny effects that it pulls me out of its story constantly. AN2R is subtle, unflashy, and even if the effects are primitive, I leave that movie feeling like I lived through it much more than Cameron's effort. Another quick example; I prefer The Longest Day (62) over Saving Private Ryan (98) for Normandy landing sequences, largely because it doesn't go out of its way to throw snazzy techniques, severed limbs and surround sound whooshes and explosions in my face. Ryan almost seemed like a (very grisly) theme park attraction. And don't get me started on Pearl Harbor. Okay, rambling, must get ready for work.

It's my dream to film black box versions of all the recent special effects extravaganzas: "Black Box Titanic," "Black Box Beowulf," etc.

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by Strangler Lewis

Then you liked the last shot of Jackie Brown.

But I liked the rest of Michael Clayton...

I prefer The Longest Day over Saving Private Ryan as well, flippy. I found SPR to be pretentious in places. Also I was confused on how the movie was supposed to be Ryan's flashback but he didn't see any of what happened.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

But I liked the rest of Michael Clayton...

I prefer The Longest Day over Saving Private Ryan as well, flippy. I found SPR to be pretentious in places. Also I was confused on how the movie was supposed to be Ryan's flashback but he didn't see any of what happened.

I've watched Saving Private Ryan a couple of times. I like the beach landing scene. Lot's of action and great sound effects. It's like a theme park ride. I've never made it much past that point however, I assume from comments above that they eventually find the guy....

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by flippyshark

Actually, I find suspension of disbelief frequently tougher in current mainstream movies than in much fare from the thirties through seventies. Quick case in point: A Night To Remember (58) vs. Titanic (97). The latter is so impressed with itself and its shiny effects that it pulls me out of its story constantly. AN2R is subtle, unflashy, and even if the effects are primitive, I leave that movie feeling like I lived through it much more than Cameron's effort. Another quick example; I prefer The Longest Day (62) over Saving Private Ryan (98) for Normandy landing sequences, largely because it doesn't go out of its way to throw snazzy techniques, severed limbs and surround sound whooshes and explosions in my face. Ryan almost seemed like a (very grisly) theme park attraction. And don't get me started on Pearl Harbor. Okay, rambling, must get ready for work.

I'm not saying everyone other than Tarrantino succeeds at it, just that Tarrantino or that all old movies failed, simply that Tarrantino actively avoids it preferring the purposeful effect of putting style and film making technique in the forefront of your mind during his movies (as opposed to the examples you give where the same may happen for you but not for the reasons it does in a Tarrantino film).