the "God bless America" gave me a boner.

oh man, i feel ashamed that this is one of my fantasies.

quote:

Originally posted by BTG the "God bless America" gave me a boner. oh man, i feel ashamed that this is one of my fantasies.

hahha a Bobcat Goldthwait film

___________________

insignificant cor member alliance

quote:

Originally posted by GoSpeedGo! Yeah, I think you're kind of rationalizing your own personal preference here.

Yeah...you got me here.

I still stand by my point (though perhaps not as adamantly as before). We tie language to place, just as we tie a social climate to place. I suppose the two of us disagree on which of those are more fundamental in this particular instance. Personally, I am not totally abreast of Swedish culture currently, so much of what I think you're driving at might have been lost on me during the film.

As for the Nazi issue (if that is the main point here)--a filmmaker could substitute in any such creation there, or even keep 'Nazi', and achieve the same thing. At least, I'd posit that a vast majority of the target audience would find no problem with it. That leads back to my initial hypothesis, however crudely formed, that the decision to film an otherwise Swedish movie in the English language was based on the perception of the American audience as Europhiles and little more than that. Many would rather see some strange, foreign word on a package in a store than see english words because it gives them some sort of unconscious pleasure.

And now, regarding Coriolanus: you are right (as usual) that Shakespeare's plays are typically timeless and this one isn't any different, but what drew me into the film most, from the onset, was how effortlessly setting was established. In adaptations it typically takes more time to get acclimated, and especially considering how Fiennes opted to stick with the traditional Shakespearean language it was an amazing feat to see guns and modern attire then hear them speak so eloquently without it seeming out of place. It was done thusly: "In a place called Rome". I suppose it sounds...trite, but in the context of the film I thought it was excellent.

For me, Fincher failed to properly connect what I was hearing and what I was seeing. The only reason this wasn't more of an issue (as I said before, it was really just a minor gripe of mine) was because of the edge-of-your-seat feel to it all. I couldn't imagine the disconnect between place and language working in anything but a thriller or action movie. Consider A Separation for instance: a movie which is much more heavily tied to a certain social climate. Would you care for a hollywood remake, shot to take place in Iran but totally spoken in English? I would find it appalling. [Just as I found Fincher's need to remake such a fresh movie to be appalling, and just as I found the very existence of Let Me In to be appalling, and so on and so forth -------- maybe this is the key point and the rest is just me rationalizing my own personal preference, as you noted, but I have a point, no??]

quote:

Originally posted by LAdazeNYnights As for the Nazi issue (if that is the main point here)--a filmmaker could substitute in any such creation there, or even keep 'Nazi', and achieve the same thing.

See, I don't think this would work at all. The US has a completely different relationship to Nazism and to potray it as a cause of all evil in that country would seem ridiculous. I honestly don't know how you can think it would work in such a completely different setting, but you can elaborate on that and try to prove me otherwise. It's not like the Wanger family are some random people who were in Hitlerjugend or whatever; in this case, the Wangers are Sweden.

quote:

At least, I'd posit that a vast majority of the target audience would find no problem with it. That leads back to my initial hypothesis, however crudely formed, that the decision to film an otherwise Swedish movie in the English language was based on the perception of the American audience as Europhiles and little more than that. Many would rather see some strange, foreign word on a package in a store than see english words because it gives them some sort of unconscious pleasure.

I don't understand this part - it was filmed in English because Americans are europhiles?

quote:

And now, regarding Coriolanus: you are right (as usual) that Shakespeare's plays are typically timeless and this one isn't any different, but what drew me into the film most, from the onset, was how effortlessly setting was established. In adaptations it typically takes more time to get acclimated, and especially considering how Fiennes opted to stick with the traditional Shakespearean language it was an amazing feat to see guns and modern attire then hear them speak so eloquently without it seeming out of place. It was done thusly: "In a place called Rome". I suppose it sounds...trite, but in the context of the film I thought it was excellent.

Yeah, I was just trying to point out the difference between the two movies and why I think they aren't comparable in this case. Adapting Shakespeare inherently means there's going to be a lot of creative freedom - partly because it's been already established by previous modern adaptations and partly because of the nature of the text itself.

quote:

For me, Fincher failed to properly connect what I was hearing and what I was seeing.

As you said before, I think this is a problem of suspension of disbelief. I get that it might turn someone off, but this has become such a common practice that I can't imagine someone would still see it as an issue. Actors in TGWTDT even try to speak with a European accent and they greet themselves in Swedish. At least there's the effort to make it seem a bit plausible and I think it's done tastefully. It's not like there are Americans running around, talking like cowboys.

quote:

Consider A Separation for instance: a movie which is much more heavily tied to a certain social climate. Would you care for a hollywood remake, shot to take place in Iran but totally spoken in English?

That would definitely sound awful. But again, just like Shakespeare is not Larsson, Iran is not Sweden - English in Europe is much more common and even culturally the two continents more or less belong to the same paradigm. Middle East is just so much different that it would seem out of place. This has to be considered on a case by case basis - one may be a lot more acceptable than the other.

quote:

[Just as I found Fincher's need to remake such a fresh movie to be appalling

Fincher's film was not a remake of the original Swedish movie, it was a new adaptation of the book. This distinction is important.

quote:

Originally posted by Julz Highly recommend Take Shelter!! Amazing movie

I just watched it!

What a freaking incredible movie!!!!

___________________
http://soundcloud.com/georgerimore

quote:

Originally posted by Ted Promo DADS AT DISCOUNTS, TRYING AISLES OF DEALS IN EACH DEPARTMENT. DADS WITH WRISTS LIKE TREE TRUNKS AND A HEART OF POLISHED ONYX. UNFORGIVING GROINS AND LOINS, COTTONELLE TOUCH. INFINIDADS KNOW THAT I DON'T ONLY WANT LEGOS, I WANT INSTRUCTIONS. DADS OF ALL CALIBERS.

for the horror movie lovers out there ...

Rec 3 is coming out in a theater near you in a couple of weeks.



I saw it the other day. If you liked the first 2, you'll like part 3. It has a nice twist compared to the 1st 2.

___________________

not a recommendation, but i like the trailer itself

___________________

Last week was kind of slow again.

Martha Marcy May Marlene (2011) / ****
Georgica (1998) / ***
Once Upon a Time in Anatolia (2011) / ***** (masterpiece)
The Limey (1999) / ****
Hadewijch (2009) / ***½

quote:

Originally posted by GoSpeedGo! Last week was kind of slow again. Martha Marcy May Marlene (2011) / **** Georgica (1998) / *** Once Upon a Time in Anatolia (2011) / ***** (masterpiece) The Limey (1999) / **** Hadewijch (2009) / ***½

You watch a lot of films. Are you unemployed like me?

Terri(2011)***1/2
Apollo 18(2011)*
Quarantine 2(2011)***
An Invisible Sign(2010)**
Fair Game(2010)**
OSS 117(2006)***

quote:

Originally posted by GoSpeedGo! ...

I seriously respect your opinion on film so I've naturally come around to seeing it more your way. The one point to clarify - when I said it was a Swedish movie filmed in English I meant that everything about the movie was Swedish except for the language and some of the actors.

Moving on to stuff I've seen recently:

I regret having seen John Carter in theaters this weekend. The movie played so fast and loose with the audience's emotions that almost nothing worked on me: none of the punchy one-line jokes elicited a single laugh from me (or even from anyone else in the theater at times), none of the sad scenes made me feel anything, etc. I really didn't like how the people of mars were at times portrayed as being so very different from humans, and yet they observed our same traditions as well.

Also, last night I caught this flick from New Zealand: Boy. It's been well received thus far but it didn't do much of anything for me either. It reminded me of Son of Rambow in quite a few ways, but I liked that one more. After the film was shown, the director/lead actor and some of the producers got up to field questions about it. I thought to myself "oh this will be insightful" but the guy, Taiki Waititi, was a complete imbecile with nothing meaningful to say. Many people in the audience seemed to be film buffs or even involved in the industry so they were asking some questions of a technical nature--how he directed the children for instance. All he could muster up was some joke about keeping them in cages. Eventually the audience tired of him and the session ended abruptly. I had a few questions in mind but didn't bother asking after I heard him speak.