|
|
Post by mstreepsucks on May 22, 2019 5:36:42 GMT
Because in most of his best films it seemed, like it's a man's world. And then from that you get this interesting dynamic from it , from the female characters. And that is because it's one man whose directing it. So therefore it's one man's vision. You don't get that from movies made today, they don't feel like one man's vision.
So if you think you're in favor of some sort of pc type of film-making, then you're actually not. Because then you don't get rio bravo, or at least you don't understand why it's a good film.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fox in the Snow on May 22, 2019 12:19:56 GMT
I will agree with you that films that come from one person's singular vision, despite or many times because of various personal indulgences and even (gasp!) pretentions are 9 times out of 10 more interesting and enjoyable than films concocted by a committee to "please the masses", PC or otherwise.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on May 22, 2019 14:29:58 GMT
I don't like Rio Bravo as much as his other films. But I get the appeal of a Hawksian woman just fine: "I'm not gay so I'll settle for this mouthy broad  ." |
|
|
|
Post by vegalyra on May 22, 2019 15:58:51 GMT
A great director. One of the best. Outside of his Westerns, I've always liked Scarface, The Dawn Patrol, Sgt. York, Air Force, The Big Sleep, and Land of the Pharaohs.
|
|
|
|
Post by mstreepsucks on May 26, 2019 3:07:42 GMT
I will agree with you that films that come from one person's singular vision, despite or many times because of various personal indulgences and even (gasp!) pretentions are 9 times out of 10 more interesting and enjoyable than films concocted by a committee to "please the masses", PC or otherwise. Yea,I will say. If you have movies made by PC guidelines they will certainly always suck. You definitely need one 'mans' vision. If it's going to be a good film to begin with.
|
|
." 