|
Post by Prime etc. on Jul 29, 2020 1:23:08 GMT
Prime is reaching to the point of hilarity with Halloween and The Fog imo. You have to really be looking for for it with those movies and when you find it it is still a stretch. Like Sydney Pollock said, you can find politics in any movie even if it wasn't the director's intention. It reveals the liberalization of story and character. And we know it is transitory because how many people who watch the 1938 Adventures of Robin Hood are offended by Robin Hood's attitude? He says they need to defend England from foreigners, he says Kind Richard was wrong to go off fighting wars when he had a job to do back home. He has absolutely zero neurosis or doubts. The two politicized aspects of it is the fact that Robin Hood comes from the nobility and he has a romance with a Norman (Maid Marian was not a Norman in other versions). If liberalization was permanent in effect then people could not handle the 1938 Robin Hood--they would consider him too aggressive or intolerant of foreigners.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Jul 29, 2020 1:26:33 GMT
Yes, but now you are ignoring what the OP is asking for. He isn't asking for the Sydney Pollock definition of political movies. You just love to argue and I am done with this argument. I don't love to argue. It can be a big time waster.
Politics is a movie is subjective as we have seen.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Jul 29, 2020 1:29:57 GMT
I don’t know if it’s even possible to make a career off of movies that aren’t viewed through some kind of political lens. People have even applied politics to the Sonic the Hedgehog movie.
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Jul 29, 2020 1:33:34 GMT
I don’t know if it’s even possible to make a career off of movies that aren’t viewed through some kind of political lens. How so? Most franchises are built on apolitical messages, and many directors never leave the bounds of franchise filmmaking. And making a movie with no political slant is different than people hand-picking scenes and moments to fit their own beliefs. I can’t even tell you how many times I’ve been assured of how “progressive” and “radically liberal” a movie is only to watch it and catch literally nothing close to that.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jul 29, 2020 1:43:55 GMT
I don’t know if it’s even possible to make a career off of movies that aren’t viewed through some kind of political lens. How so? Most franchises are built on apolitical messages, and many directors never leave the bounds of franchise filmmaking. And making a movie with no political slant is different than people hand-picking scenes and moments to fit their own beliefs. I can’t even tell you how many times I’ve been assured of how “progressive” and “radically liberal” a movie is only to watch it and catch literally nothing close to that. I agree with you here. That is why I asked you to be more specific. You explained and then I understood what you were asking about. I've noticed people in this thread just making up any excuse to argue with you. I just can't think of many directors who haven't made ANY movies that sway in one political direction or another in an overt way. Curious? Are you considering Titanic political? It is certainly about class difference, but I wouldn't say that movie is being overtly political. I think that movie is fair. On the other side there is Avatar, which is an overtly political movie imo.
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Jul 29, 2020 2:35:57 GMT
How so? Most franchises are built on apolitical messages, and many directors never leave the bounds of franchise filmmaking. And making a movie with no political slant is different than people hand-picking scenes and moments to fit their own beliefs. I can’t even tell you how many times I’ve been assured of how “progressive” and “radically liberal” a movie is only to watch it and catch literally nothing close to that. I agree with you here. That is why I asked you to be more specific. You explained and then I understood what you were asking about. I've noticed people in this thread just making up any excuse to argue with you. I just can't think of many directors who haven't made ANY movies that sway in one political direction or another in an overt way. Curious? Are you considering Titanic political? It is certainly about class difference, but I wouldn't say that movie is being overtly political. I think that movie is fair. On the other side there is Avatar, which is an overtly political movie imo. I would agree on Titanic and Avatar to a certain extent. I think any social commentary trying to be made in Titanic is vastly overrun by the real point of the movie (romance and spectacle). Avatar is a little more political, but again, the point is more a show of spectacle, so it’s a tough balance there.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jul 29, 2020 2:49:54 GMT
I agree with you here. That is why I asked you to be more specific. You explained and then I understood what you were asking about. I've noticed people in this thread just making up any excuse to argue with you. I just can't think of many directors who haven't made ANY movies that sway in one political direction or another in an overt way. Curious? Are you considering Titanic political? It is certainly about class difference, but I wouldn't say that movie is being overtly political. I think that movie is fair. On the other side there is Avatar, which is an overtly political movie imo. I would agree on Titanic and Avatar to a certain extent. I think any social commentary trying to be made in Titanic is vastly overrun by the real point of the movie (romance and spectacle). Avatar is a little more political, but again, the point is more a show of spectacle, so it’s a tough balance there. We are somewhat on the same page then.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jul 29, 2020 3:03:53 GMT
The Farrelly Brothers (as a duo)
Wes Craven
Many horror directors.
Many comedy directors.
Oliver Stone - Just kidding
|
|
angel
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@angel
Posts: 275
Likes: 142
![](http://storage.proboards.com/6692551/images/CTEdkGf0wmfSETIzYiXk.gif)
|
Post by angel on Jul 29, 2020 12:16:12 GMT
I tend to agree with those who say all films are political whether intentionally or not. A classic case would be D W Griffith, who despite making one of the most politically charged (and racist) movies in film history was said to be surprisingly apolitical personally and was rather surprised by the backlash he received for it, even naming his next film "Intolerance" as a rebuke to what he saw as the many critics of his last one. Contemporaries claimed he never had a political thought in his head and chose films he thought would wow audiences rather than for their specific politics.
And listening to some of his interviews, I also get the slight impression Ridley Scott is fairly apolitical. Despite directing what could be perceived as overtly political films, he is what Andre Bazin describes as a metteur-en-scene or stager - a very good technician but one who merely adapts material given to them rather than having a strong opinion on it's content.
|
|
angel
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@angel
Posts: 275
Likes: 142
![](http://storage.proboards.com/6692551/images/CTEdkGf0wmfSETIzYiXk.gif)
|
Post by angel on Jul 29, 2020 12:43:19 GMT
The Farrelly Brothers (as a duo) Wes CravenMany horror directors. Many comedy directors. Oliver Stone - Just kidding Wes Craven's People Under the Stairs has always been seen as a political satire on Reaganomics, trickle down capitalism and class warfare.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jul 29, 2020 13:29:21 GMT
The Farrelly Brothers (as a duo) Wes CravenMany horror directors. Many comedy directors. Oliver Stone - Just kidding Wes Craven's People Under the Stairs has always been seen as a political satire on Reaganomics, trickle down capitalism and class warfare. OP said allegory doesn't count.
|
|
angel
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
@angel
Posts: 275
Likes: 142
![](http://storage.proboards.com/6692551/images/CTEdkGf0wmfSETIzYiXk.gif)
|
Post by angel on Jul 29, 2020 14:37:25 GMT
Wes Craven's People Under the Stairs has always been seen as a political satire on Reaganomics, trickle down capitalism and class warfare. OP said allegory doesn't count. Did he? In one of his replies to you earlier in the thread he stated... "Then you have someone like John Carpenter, who worked almost completely with allegorical movies, but never had a straightforward political movie. But it was his intention to make a political statement with said allegories, so he wouldn’t be apolitical."
...and I took it to mean allegories did count, (I would need clarification on that one OP). Having said that, if allegories don't count my first question would be -- why not? That would disqualify someone like Bunuel who was probably more political than say a Costa Gavras but whose films only dealt in allegory.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jul 29, 2020 14:44:57 GMT
OP said allegory doesn't count. Did he? In one of his replies to you earlier in the thread he stated... "Then you have someone like John Carpenter, who worked almost completely with allegorical movies, but never had a straightforward political movie. But it was his intention to make a political statement with said allegories, so he wouldn’t be apolitical."
...and I took it to mean allegories did count, (I would need clarification on that one OP). Having said that, if allegories don't count my first question would be -- why not? That would disqualify someone like Bunuel who was probably more political than say a Costa Gavras but whose films only dealt in allegory. I misread it. I thought he said "would" where he said "wouldn't." That makes my whole They Live argument pointless now. Apparently he is saying that does count. I apologize for the confusion.
|
|