Reply With Quote
Yeah I was thinking more of American born filmmakers. Or at least American raised - someone that grew up in this country and is influenced by that.
Movies are stories. They're supposed to have a storytelling narrative. You're supposed to believe in the characters and feel like your part of the environment.
Lucas does that and then some.
I don't think many people "get" the prequels because they desperatley want them to be exactly like the original trilogy. Take away everything else, and you still have a pure story of innocence perverted by fear.
Yeah I was thinking more of American born filmmakers. Or at least American raised - someone that grew up in this country and is influenced by that.
lucas does have an incredible way of coaxing incredibly wooden performances from his actors. i think you may take me for a star wars basher, but i'm not - i loved the movie, but that doesn't mean it's a great film or that lucas is a great director. lucas gave us THX, ILM, and a host of other great stuff but i don't think you can say he's done stellar work as a director. do you think e lee could make ewan macgregor look so bad?
Lucas and Coppola are the Godfathers (pardon the pun) of independent filmaking.
Lucas himself didn't "get" the prequels either as they're full of holes in plot, logic, and basic human behavior.
I don't think Lucas "gets" humanity anymore either as you could have easily replaced Anakin with a droid and gotten the same result.
John Cassavetes might disagree with that (if he was still alive of course)
And outside of the US, Truffaut and Godard were true independent filmmakers well before Lucas and Coppola.
actually, the best thing lucas, spielberg, and coppola ever did was get Ran and kagemusha the budgets and exposure they deserved.
But they're also a visual art form, so that has to account for something as well.
The core of this argument, of course, is that both directors are so completely opposite in style as to make it almost impossible to compare. Star Wars directed by e Lee would be horrible. So would Do The Right Thing directed by Geroge Lucas.
THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO ACT THAT WAY!!!!!
Remember that the characters were from a very proper society. They were supposed to hide their emotions and put on a different face to others. That's why Anakin was always confused with his emotions. Do you think Palpatine put on a wooden performance?? No, that's because he gave in to his emotions, which was a Jedi no-no.
I said it once and I'll say it again, most people just don't get what the prequels were all about.
You have to understand the world that Lucas created in order to understand the way his characters interacted.
I'm a child of two actors and have practically grown up in the theater -- no one, ever, is supposed to act that way. For any reason.
acting can be understated and subtle without being wooden. See Gwyneth Paltrow in The Royal Tenenbaums. Actually everyone in The Royal Tenenbaums.
First of all, we're talking about American directors.
Secondly, they were the ones that changed everything on Hollywood because they refused to play by their rules.
They put American Independent films on the map, something that has been lost in the past few years.
Agreed.
Yes they are, if they're supposed to be Jedi's who are void of any emotions whatsoever.
i assume you can also not begin to comprehend shakespeare without a full knowledge of Victorian society, Mr. Eliot.
Apples and oranges my friend.
Cassavetes was American.
Scorsese and Coppola did far more to further the craft than Lucas ever did. Lucas made it possible for Michael Bay and Roland Emmerich to bukkake us all with stupid.
not really
you say the "culture" of the Star Wars world is to suppress emotion and not show it outwardly.
The Royal Tenenbaums has nothing but characters who hide and suppress their emotions as much as possible.
Wes Anderson got good performances out of his actors, George Lucas did not. End of story.
That's acutally a very good statement.
I taught in public school for years and the kids always complained that they just "didn't get Shakespeare". If you fully understand Shakespeare's society, it definitely helps in understanding his works.
Not to say that it's necessary, of course.
I don't know how to respond to that.
But, I get where you're going with Cassavettes.
Yes it is.
Anderson's characters have problems understanding their emotions.
Lucas' Jedi, are not supposed to have emotions.
Apples and oranges.
But... it doesn't come across as void of emotions. It comes across as a crappy performance.
Part of the "better story teller than filmmaker" thing -- Lucas' goal is presenting the story, and the toys. The camera work, editing and performances are secondary, and it shows. And it IS the director's job to direct the performances.
It's one of the things that sets Scorsese so far apart from the pack. , even Sharon Stone got (and deserved!) an Oscar nomination when she worked with him. e Lee's not quite on that level, few are, but he's also managed to coax a few amazing performances.
just sounds like a quick write-in on the script so that Lucas could just tell his actors "just be as dull as possible, i don't give a crap" while he went and played with all his cool little gadgets instead of doing some real directing work.
Denzel's performance in Malcolm X is my favorite of all time, especially if you read the biography of Malcolm X and see any old footage of him. Denzel had him down perfect, and it wasn't just some Jamie Foxx-like imitation, he had the heart and soul of Malcolm X in that performance.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions