|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Aug 26, 2018 10:05:49 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hobowar on Aug 26, 2018 10:09:19 GMT
He has an opinion that we should all respect.
Just kidding. He's a prick.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Aug 26, 2018 10:15:46 GMT
Wasn't his remake of Magnificent 7 kind of a superhero movie. All the way down to the over the top villain and each hero with a cliched power/specialty. I know in the original there was some of this, but they turned it to 11. Also the violence was also turned to 11.
|
|
|
Post by OldAussie on Aug 26, 2018 10:17:33 GMT
He's too kind.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2018 10:27:14 GMT
He is free to have his opinion as anybody else.
And really he is not actually wrong.
|
|
|
Post by summers8 on Aug 26, 2018 11:11:01 GMT
pretty true.
Not even Logan a film he refereed to as the best of the worst or a ''fine superhero'' but not a great film was enough to change the overall reception of comic films despite all the artistic praise Logan got even a major credible oscar nod
the comic genre today is mostly trash thanks. Most people did not talk like this before 2010 and even if they did not to this level of backlash. the genre has no credibility anymore.
|
|
|
Post by hobowar on Aug 26, 2018 12:14:17 GMT
pretty true.Not even Logan a film he refereed to as the best of the worst or a ''fine superhero'' but not a great film was enough to change the overall reception of comic films despite all the artistic praise Logan got even a major credible oscar nod the comic genre today is mostly trash thanks. Most people did not talk like this before 2010 and even if they did not to this level of backlash. the genre has no credibility anymore. How did they talk?
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Aug 26, 2018 12:54:41 GMT
Two thoughts.
1)It’s just more elitist grumbling from ‘serious minded’ actors who inevitably appear in superhero films one day. I wasn’t even a fan of LOGAN, but I’ll be damned if I’m gonna let people knock it as just another genre because it remains within the realm of speculative fiction, specifically comics.
2) I do get the concerns he has wrapped up in his own condescending attitude. But even the public want to see something other than men in tights at some point, and they just do it. Look at ‘Crazy Rich Asians’.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2018 15:07:09 GMT
lol of all the comic book films he chooses Logan?! Logan is a great movie period featuring some good acting / premise and it had lots of heart. Certainly better than The Purge or Getaway that Hawke has starred in . Keep in mind, I like Hawke as an actor in most things but he does come across as a condescending pretentious douche at times (this being one of those times) .
|
|
|
Post by hobowar on Aug 26, 2018 16:39:21 GMT
lol of all the comic book films he chooses Logan?! Logan is a great movie period featuring some good acting / premise and it had lots of heart. Certainly better than The Purge or Getaway that Hawke has starred in . Keep in mind, I like Hawke as an actor in most things but he does come across as a condescending pretentious douche at times (this being one of those times) . You'd know all about that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2018 16:45:20 GMT
lol of all the comic book films he chooses Logan?! Logan is a great movie period featuring some good acting / premise and it had lots of heart. Certainly better than The Purge or Getaway that Hawke has starred in . Keep in mind, I like Hawke as an actor in most things but he does come across as a condescending pretentious douche at times (this being one of those times) . You'd know all about that. lol why cause I don't get a boner over every single MCU film? I dig the Cap films at least!
|
|
|
Post by thenewnexus on Aug 26, 2018 18:15:35 GMT
I once wanted Hawke to play Punisher
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Aug 26, 2018 19:48:40 GMT
lol of all the comic book films he chooses Logan?! Logan is a great movie period featuring some good acting / premise and it had lots of heart. Certainly better than The Purge or Getaway that Hawke has starred in . Keep in mind, I like Hawke as an actor in most things but he does come across as a condescending pretentious douche at times (this being one of those times) . you misunderstand his meaning. Hawke's discussing the trivializing of film culture and reception. People talk about Logan as if it where a quality movie in the vein of CK, Godfather, Shawshank, Schindler's list etc because they have hardly any exposure to arthouse or quality films. He freely admits that Logan is a great CBM (nobody denies that) and did not imply that it wasn't superior to any of his own horror B-movies such as Purge or Getaway. Hawke made an objective observation on the state and reception of film, not a personal work comparison.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Aug 26, 2018 20:07:38 GMT
lol of all the comic book films he chooses Logan?! Logan is a great movie period featuring some good acting / premise and it had lots of heart. Certainly better than The Purge or Getaway that Hawke has starred in . Keep in mind, I like Hawke as an actor in most things but he does come across as a condescending pretentious douche at times (this being one of those times) . you misunderstand his meaning. Hawke's discussing the trivializing of film culture and reception. People talk about Logan as if it where a quality movie in the vein of CK, Godfather, Shawshank, Schindler's list etc because they have hardly any exposure to arthouse or quality films. He freely admits that Logan is a great CBM (nobody denies that) and did not imply that it wasn't superior to any of his own horror B-movies such as Purge or Getaway. Hawke made an objective observation on the state and reception of film, not a personal work comparison. Objective Observation? How can it be objective when he is using his personal opinion that Logan is just a fine Superhero Movie and not a Great Movie period? "I went to see Logan cause everyone was like, 'This is a great movie' and I was like, 'Really? No, this is a fine superhero movie.' There’s a difference but big business doesn’t think there’s a difference. Big business wants you to think that this is a great film because they wanna make money off of it." That's his subjective opinion and observation on the state of film and filmgoers.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Aug 26, 2018 20:20:16 GMT
you misunderstand his meaning. Hawke's discussing the trivializing of film culture and reception. People talk about Logan as if it where a quality movie in the vein of CK, Godfather, Shawshank, Schindler's list etc because they have hardly any exposure to arthouse or quality films. He freely admits that Logan is a great CBM (nobody denies that) and did not imply that it wasn't superior to any of his own horror B-movies such as Purge or Getaway. Hawke made an objective observation on the state and reception of film, not a personal work comparison. Objective Observation? How can it be objective when he is using his personal opinion that Logan is just a fine Superhero Movie and not a Great Movie period? "I went to see Logan cause everyone was like, 'This is a great movie' and I was like, 'Really? No, this is a fine superhero movie.' There’s a difference but big business doesn’t think there’s a difference. Big business wants you to think that this is a great film because they wanna make money off of it." That's his subjective opinion and observation on the state of film and filmgoers. That was not the point. His opinion is of course subjective. His assessment and observation may be based on objective facts. His concern seem to be that formulaic, commercialized B-movie are sold as quality films and the public buys it.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Aug 26, 2018 20:31:21 GMT
This looks more of the same with actors saying something isn't good because they want their work recognized.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Aug 26, 2018 20:33:35 GMT
Objective Observation? How can it be objective when he is using his personal opinion that Logan is just a fine Superhero Movie and not a Great Movie period? "I went to see Logan cause everyone was like, 'This is a great movie' and I was like, 'Really? No, this is a fine superhero movie.' There’s a difference but big business doesn’t think there’s a difference. Big business wants you to think that this is a great film because they wanna make money off of it." That's his subjective opinion and observation on the state of film and filmgoers. That was not the point. His opinion is of course subjective. His assessment and observation may be based on objective facts. His concern seem to be that formulaic, commercialized B-movie are sold as quality films and the public buys it. That's kind of my point. In his opinion it seems that blockbuster movies in general and apparently superhero movies in specific aren't great films. The qualifier of Great in itself is subjective. Art it is Art. If it's mass produced art you get at Target or from a Master Painter who spent decades crafting his technique guess what? Judging the quality of it is still opinion. Who determines if a movie is quality? Who determines if a movie is a B-Movie? As for commercialized unless it's an independent movie I would say all movies are Commercialized if made by a studio just in varying degrees. I mean I share his concern that lower budget movies are getting less spotlight as a whole but with 700+ movies a year being produced there are plenty of good smaller fair movies out there to enjoy. Edit: I equated the movies he consider's great to smaller budgeted as blockbusters in general tend to be big budgeted. I probably shouldn't have done that.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Aug 26, 2018 20:52:43 GMT
That was not the point. His opinion is of course subjective. His assessment and observation may be based on objective facts. His concern seem to be that formulaic, commercialized B-movie are sold as quality films and the public buys it. That's kind of my point. In his opinion it seems that blockbuster movies in general and apparently superhero movies in specific aren't great films. The qualifier of Great in itself is subjective. Art it is Art. If it's mass produced art you get at Target or from a Master Painter who spent decades crafting his technique guess what? Judging the quality of it is still opinion. Who determines if a movie is quality? Who determines if a movie is a B-Movie? As for commercialized unless it's an independent movie I would say all movies are Commercialized if made by a studio just in varying degrees. I mean I share his concern that lower budget movies are getting less spotlight as a whole but with 700+ movies a year being produced there are plenty of good smaller fair movies out there to enjoy. these are all fair points that warrant discussion. I tend to agree with Hawke on the principle. TDK or Logan as peak genre movies are not equal with say character studies such as CK, Amadeus or Godfather. Star wars has not the same mature quality as 2001-ASO or other cerebral sci fi. Rambo or Juck Norris are not Platoon, Full Metal Jacket or Saving private Ryan etc. The former are consider B-movies the latter are not because "serious" films. Even though the delineation here blurs considerably as the former are often character based films about death, guilt and social responsibility too (eg Logan) or at least expression of innovative art design (SW). Thus the recognition in award ceremonies.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Aug 26, 2018 20:57:01 GMT
It also sounds like he believes that a supherhero movie can't be a Great Film by definition.
"It still involves people in tights with metal coming out of their hands. It’s not Bresson. It’s not Bergman. But they talk about it like it is..."
And he objectively got something wrong. There was no one in tights in the movie. Even if you stretch the word "tights" to me a Uniform he's still wrong. Unless you consider tactical gear a private security force wears as tights or a superhero uniform.
And this comes from someone who doesn't think Logan is a great film suphero or otherwise. I think it's just a good film.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Aug 26, 2018 20:59:05 GMT
That's kind of my point. In his opinion it seems that blockbuster movies in general and apparently superhero movies in specific aren't great films. The qualifier of Great in itself is subjective. Art it is Art. If it's mass produced art you get at Target or from a Master Painter who spent decades crafting his technique guess what? Judging the quality of it is still opinion. Who determines if a movie is quality? Who determines if a movie is a B-Movie? As for commercialized unless it's an independent movie I would say all movies are Commercialized if made by a studio just in varying degrees. I mean I share his concern that lower budget movies are getting less spotlight as a whole but with 700+ movies a year being produced there are plenty of good smaller fair movies out there to enjoy. these are all fair points that warrant discussion. I tend to agree with Hawke on the principle. TDK or Logan as peak genre movies are not equal with say character studies such as CK, Amadeus or Godfather. Star wars has not the same mature quality as 2001-ASO or other cerebral sci fi. Rambo or Juck Norris are not Platoon, Full Metal Jacket or Saving private Ryan etc. The former are consider B-movies the latter are not because "serious" films. Even though the delineation here blurs considerably as the former are often character based films about death, guilt and social responsibility too (eg Logan) or at least expression of innovative art design (SW). Thus the recognition in award ceremonies. I tend to agree, but I get a bee in my bonnet when people especially actors and actresses start to dictate what should and shouldn't be considered great. Hell critics too.
|
|