|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 17, 2019 18:22:59 GMT
Face/Off is "real cinema"? Wow. I always saw it as just an action flick. Same for Broken Arrow & Hard Target. He turned down a Marvel movie because he lacks the imagination to make one? When I rethink of face off, civil war is like a dumb take of the film.
Face/Off and Civil War have zero in common so this comparison is just plain dumb, Face/Off is a variation of Mark Twain's The Prince and the Pauper about John Travolta as an FBI agent taking on a highly advanced, top secret surgery that replaces his face with that of Nicolas Cage's insane but stylish, coked-up, terrorist for hire so that he can stop a bomb from going off in Los Angeles but the mission is compromised when Cage wakes up and decides to take Travolta's face and be in his shoes for a while - and to achieve this has all the people aware of the top secret mission killed so everyone thinks one is the other. How the f--- is Civil War a 'take' on Face/Off?
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 17, 2019 18:53:28 GMT
Face/Off is "real cinema"? Wow. I always saw it as just an action flick. Same for Broken Arrow & Hard Target. He turned down a Marvel movie because he lacks the imagination to make one? Woo is not saying his movies qualify as 'real cinema', or that they are such in comparison to the quality of that of a Marvel movie, he is approaching the topic as a cinema fanatic first and contributor second. Woo's relationship to the cinema is a pretty deep one; he grew up in a very scary environment and often had to carry something for self defense, and the cinema was really his biggest escape to the hardships he was facing. All of Woo's work, even his weaker ones, have something in them that pays respects to the golden age of Hollywood, as far as contemporaries are concerned his masterpiece THE KILLER was a love-letter to Scorsese. When Woo found his footing in the cinematic marketplace he was considered a trailblazer in essentially creating a new sub genre of action-adventure, 'heroic bloodshed', where he incorporated the choreography of the musical and the grit of crime into a singular package. And yes, despite that he has made films which contained science fiction elements in them he has never viewed himself as someone who has ever really aspired to be associated with the genre. The original concept for Face/Off was set far into the future with suspended animation, hovering buildings, flying cars, and holograms, much of these were done away with once Woo came on board the project and the story was made more contemporary.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 17, 2019 18:54:42 GMT
Paul Thomas Anderson loves Adam Sandler movies. Stanley Kubrick loved White Men Can’t Jump. Two of Tarantino’s top ten films of 2013 were Kick Ass 2 and The Lone Ranger. Everyone has a different idea of what they consider to be “cinema”. You forgot Terrence Malick...He LOVES Ben Stiller's Zoolander.
|
|
|
Post by Nicko's Nose on Nov 17, 2019 18:55:20 GMT
I didn’t know John Woo was more than one person.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 17, 2019 19:05:46 GMT
1) That is not a slam. A slam would be if he were to say "They are junk, and those thinking they are anything else are morons." He is not saying they are bad movies or badly made at that(In the Deadline article which contains more information about said interview he says that he appreciates that they entertain and make profit) but he has concern for youth who may think big spectacle features are the beginning and the end of the cinematic marketplace. This concern is nothing new, and has always been around in culture by experience artists even before the motion picture was created, when something extremely popular and commercially successful with youth the older folk express concern that they may avoid seeking out something older or even less commercial that may be of better quality. and 2) In the same interview he admits that he recounts a personal story with Stan Lee and says that he had to reject the offer to direct a superhero movie because "I'm not a sci-fi guy - I don't think I could make a good one. There's so much imagination...I don't think I can reach that level." I also see that you've not mentioned that Roland Emmerich isn't too big on Marvel movies, either, odd since you seem to cling on just anybody's opinion on Disney-Marvel which isn't 100% in their favor. The funny thing about all these movie makers hating on the MCU is not because the movies are bad, it's because the movies are popular. They don't like that people are following these movies so closely and mostly only going to see them (pushing them past $1 billion) instead of their movies.
And Woo thinking he can't make one because he's not a sci-fi guy is looking at them all wrong. There are plenty of low key characters that is closer to his wheelhouse. Winter Soldier is a movie he could have directed.
And Roland Emmerich is Roland Emmerich. He might as well trot out Uwe Boll.
And people, such as summers8, think this kind of attitude is all new when it isn't. Popular and commercial works of fiction have always been criticized by others in comparison to a perceived standard of 'art', people used to look down on some painters, sculptors, and illustrators if their creations were not religious or realistic(as the church used to be THE place to create). Not only Winter Soldier, but especially Daredevil(In particular regarding Elektra and The Hand). Given that they trotted out Jennifer Anniston and are always making threads that receive little to no support, why not trot out Emmerich? Uwe Boll also has trashed Marvel before, I'm sure they can accomplish some mental gymnastics to present Postal or Blubberella as top tier works in comparison to Marvel somehow...
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 17, 2019 19:18:20 GMT
It doesn't effect my opinion on Nolan's movies, but it does effect my opinion on his tastes in movies, yeesh. I mean, really? You did not know this already? Its been knowledge on the internet for going on ten years now that Christopher Nolan is a fan of Michael Bay, he even invited Bay to see a sneak peak of The Dark Knight Rises to show off the capabilities of IMAX as a format. And he's not the only acclaimed filmmaker to like Bay, others include Sir Ridley Scott, James Cameron, David Gordon Green, Joss Whedon, Mark Webb, Jason Reitman, Roger Avary, Quentin Tarantino(Even worked as a script contributor to The Rock), and of course Steven Spielberg who ended up producing several of his movies. Then there's David Fincher who can be said to be 'daddy' of the entire Propaganda Films gang(which included him, Bay, Antoine Fuqua, and Dominic Sena).
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Nov 17, 2019 19:26:07 GMT
Since Woo works in the action genre it has widened the criticism--so he is saying in effect, if you want action movies that are not about superheroes you have less choices. It's more useful that Scorsese saying it since he does not make action films. This is getting closer to the problem-the loss of story choice in popular genres.
For suspense purposes, it is better to have an action movie with characters that are not a brand name franchise since you have less expectations. If it is a superhero you know their powers or they can't die for good etc..
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Nov 17, 2019 19:41:47 GMT
It doesn't effect my opinion on Nolan's movies, but it does effect my opinion on his tastes in movies, yeesh. I mean, really? You did not know this already? Its been knowledge on the internet for going on ten years now that Christopher Nolan is a fan of Michael Bay, he even invited Bay to see a sneak peak of The Dark Knight Rises to show off the capabilities of IMAX as a format. And he's not the only acclaimed filmmaker to like Bay, others include Sir Ridley Scott, James Cameron, David Gordon Green, Joss Whedon, Mark Webb, Jason Reitman, Roger Avary, Quentin Tarantino(Even worked as a script contributor to The Rock), and of course Steven Spielberg who ended up producing several of his movies. Then there's David Fincher who can be said to be 'daddy' of the entire Propaganda Films gang(which included him, Bay, Antoine Fuqua, and Dominic Sena). I don't know why this tidbit of information has passed me by. I guess mostly movie makers list of movie makers they like doesn't really effect me, so it's not something I would normally seek out.
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Nov 17, 2019 22:03:08 GMT
Here's the thing: the MCU has raised the bar when it comes to making action movies, adventure movies, and blockbusters in general. Based on the new bar that the MCU set, Woo's movies would fall somewhere from mediocre to terrible. The MCU's success is making it hard for other action movies to keep up. Like a supermall that takes away business from a mom 'n pop store. So I get it, I understand his frustration. But let's not pretend his movies are somehow "better cinema" than the MCU. Yup, especially given that John Woo is responsible for the worst Mission: Impossible film of all time.
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Nov 17, 2019 22:14:42 GMT
Scorsese has Problem Child in his Top 995 films (yet no room for DC, X-verse or Christopher Nolan films) DC, X-Verse Nolan films were not damaging cinema. they had ups and downs like any franchise but MCU is just an film embarrassment now. "cough" Catwoman, Jonah Hex "cough"
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 17, 2019 23:03:40 GMT
Here's the thing: the MCU has raised the bar when it comes to making action movies, adventure movies, and blockbusters in general. Based on the new bar that the MCU set, Woo's movies would fall somewhere from mediocre to terrible. The MCU's success is making it hard for other action movies to keep up. Like a supermall that takes away business from a mom 'n pop store. So I get it, I understand his frustration. But let's not pretend his movies are somehow "better cinema" than the MCU. Yup, especially given that John Woo is responsible for the worst Mission: Impossible film of all time. Actually a large portion of his Mission: Impossible film was cut for theatrical release, largely for timing concern and probability of receiving an R rating; an hour's worth of material was deleted from release.
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Nov 17, 2019 23:08:18 GMT
Yup, especially given that John Woo is responsible for the worst Mission: Impossible film of all time. Actually a large portion of his Mission: Impossible film was cut for theatrical release, largely for timing concern and probability of receiving an R rating; an hour's worth of material was deleted from release. I honestly have doubts that releasing his version in full would've made it better. Unless, of course, there IS actually an uncut version out there somewhere and someone has seen it already.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 17, 2019 23:11:49 GMT
Here's the thing: the MCU has raised the bar when it comes to making action movies, adventure movies, and blockbusters in general. Based on the new bar that the MCU set, Woo's movies would fall somewhere from mediocre to terrible. The MCU's success is making it hard for other action movies to keep up. Like a supermall that takes away business from a mom 'n pop store. So I get it, I understand his frustration. But let's not pretend his movies are somehow "better cinema" than the MCU. His American movies anyway, his stuff from Hong Kong is pretty legendary like A Better Tomorrow, The Killer, Hard Boiled, To Catch A Thief, Bullet in the Head, and then there was his big return Red Cliff and its sequel Red Cliff II.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 17, 2019 23:12:46 GMT
Actually a large portion of his Mission: Impossible film was cut for theatrical release, largely for timing concern and probability of receiving an R rating; an hour's worth of material was deleted from release. I honestly have doubts that releasing his version in full would've made it better. Unless, of course, there IS actually an uncut version out there somewhere and someone has seen it already. I am not saying it would've made the movie better, I am saying that he is not solely responsible for the quality of M:I-2.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Nov 17, 2019 23:42:46 GMT
Here's the thing: the MCU has raised the bar when it comes to making action movies, adventure movies, and blockbusters in general. Based on the new bar that the MCU set, Woo's movies would fall somewhere from mediocre to terrible. The MCU's success is making it hard for other action movies to keep up. Like a supermall that takes away business from a mom 'n pop store. So I get it, I understand his frustration. But let's not pretend his movies are somehow "better cinema" than the MCU. His American movies anyway, his stuff from Hong Kong is pretty legendary like A Better Tomorrow, The Killer, Hard Boiled, To Catch A Thief, Bullet in the Head, and then there was his big return Red Cliff and its sequel Red Cliff II. Legendary for HK films maybe, I doubt they can match the MCU flicks. Of those you mentioned I've only seen Hard Boiled and I don't recall it being anywhere near MCU quality.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 18, 2019 0:35:23 GMT
His American movies anyway, his stuff from Hong Kong is pretty legendary like A Better Tomorrow, The Killer, Hard Boiled, To Catch A Thief, Bullet in the Head, and then there was his big return Red Cliff and its sequel Red Cliff II. Legendary for HK films maybe, I doubt they can match the MCU flicks. Of those you mentioned I've only seen Hard Boiled and I don't recall it being anywhere near MCU quality. Dude, John Woo is one of the major reasons why action cinema in the states had to amp itself up in the late 80's and early to mid 90's. The choreography of the action and filming techniques he displayed put everybody to shame, that's why the Die Hard, Lethal Weapon sequels kept getting bigger and raised the stakes higher, that's why more movies required more emphasis on stunt work and wire work. Not only that but Woo redefined the action hero on screen, Keanu Reeves' iconic look in The Matrix would be nothing without Chow Yun-Fat in A Better Tomorrow or The Killer, in fact most of what we associated with The Matrix probably wouldn't be what it is now without John Woo's influence. Woo's work ain't just legendary overseas, it's legendary everywhere else. As for whether or not matching MCU quality Woo's not really identified with making the same kind of movie, Face/Off and Mission: Impossible are as big as they've ever gotten with him and aside from the highly stylized action sequences most of his movies are centered around pretty grounded threats and situations. Woo's associated with the sub-genre of 'heroic bloodshed', which the MCU has done yet and probably will never do as its really a market that flourishes when made primarily overseas.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Nov 18, 2019 1:04:49 GMT
Legendary for HK films maybe, I doubt they can match the MCU flicks. Of those you mentioned I've only seen Hard Boiled and I don't recall it being anywhere near MCU quality. Dude, John Woo is one of the major reasons why action cinema in the states had to amp itself up in the late 80's and early to mid 90's. The choreography of the action and filming techniques he displayed put everybody to shame, that's why the Die Hard, Lethal Weapon sequels kept getting bigger and raised the stakes higher, that's why more movies required more emphasis on stunt work and wire work. Not only that but Woo redefined the action hero on screen, Keanu Reeves' iconic look in The Matrix would be nothing without Chow Yun-Fat in A Better Tomorrow or The Killer, in fact most of what we associated with The Matrix probably wouldn't be what it is now without John Woo's influence. Woo's work ain't just legendary overseas, it's legendary everywhere else. As for whether or not matching MCU quality Woo's not really identified with making the same kind of movie, Face/Off and Mission: Impossible are as big as they've ever gotten with him and aside from the highly stylized action sequences most of his movies are centered around pretty grounded threats and situations. Woo's associated with the sub-genre of 'heroic bloodshed', which the MCU has done yet and probably will never do as its really a market that flourishes when made primarily overseas. Yes dude, I know who John Woo is. Still doesn't change the fact that his movies, American or HK, can't exactly match the MCU movies. He does great action scenes but the MCU movies have more to them than just good action scenes.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Nov 18, 2019 3:53:44 GMT
I had no idea that he was still alive
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Nov 18, 2019 7:07:31 GMT
Dude, John Woo is one of the major reasons why action cinema in the states had to amp itself up in the late 80's and early to mid 90's. The choreography of the action and filming techniques he displayed put everybody to shame, that's why the Die Hard, Lethal Weapon sequels kept getting bigger and raised the stakes higher, that's why more movies required more emphasis on stunt work and wire work. Not only that but Woo redefined the action hero on screen, Keanu Reeves' iconic look in The Matrix would be nothing without Chow Yun-Fat in A Better Tomorrow or The Killer, in fact most of what we associated with The Matrix probably wouldn't be what it is now without John Woo's influence. Woo's work ain't just legendary overseas, it's legendary everywhere else. As for whether or not matching MCU quality Woo's not really identified with making the same kind of movie, Face/Off and Mission: Impossible are as big as they've ever gotten with him and aside from the highly stylized action sequences most of his movies are centered around pretty grounded threats and situations. Woo's associated with the sub-genre of 'heroic bloodshed', which the MCU has done yet and probably will never do as its really a market that flourishes when made primarily overseas. Yes dude, I know who John Woo is. Still doesn't change the fact that his movies, American or HK, can't exactly match the MCU movies. He does great action scenes but the MCU movies have more to them than just good action scenes. Okay but I would recommend seeing The Killer and A Better Tomorrow and its first sequel, there is a lot more going on in them than just good action.
|
|
|
Post by miike80 on Nov 18, 2019 10:44:26 GMT
Yup, especially given that John Woo is responsible for the worst Mission: Impossible film of all time. Actually a large portion of his Mission: Impossible film was cut for theatrical release, largely for timing concern and probability of receiving an R rating; an hour's worth of material was deleted from release. Still like it way more than the JJ Hack one
|
|