Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
What the Hell is going on
Joined
·
5,153 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The first time I tried to watch this movie the projector broke and the theater gave me a free pass to use at any other time. In hindsight that was a good foreshadowing of what kind of [email protected] movie this turned out to be. Seriously, I was disappointed. Even the soundtrack sucked. It sucked because they were trying to copy Elmer Bernstein's magnificent score (see what I did there) but didn't want to pay any copyright royalties so they changed it up a little bit to make it sound just a little off but recognizable. And that's the best way to describe this movie: it's a little bit off but recognizable. The producers even had the gall to use the musical theme of "Patton" too (a little bit off but recognizable nonetheless).

The movie was promising with dutiful homages to Sergio Leone and succinct setup of the plot. What was absent was the characters motivation and conviction. Instead of the classic western theme of underdogs with hopeless righteousness we have a bunch of Trump like wanna-be's: arrogant idiots with a blood lust to kill.

Sam Peckinpah is rolling in his grave.
 

·
Get me to In&Out
Joined
·
4,775 Posts
So now watch the seven samurai. You can see where the idea from the first movie was stolen. Akira Kurwasawa made the first one, and it is considered a historically classic book.
 

·
a real member's member
Joined
·
3,880 Posts
"stealing" from kurosawa is like stealing from shakespeare: the bard can handle it.

seven samurai gets an 8.7 on imdb. what's better than that? 2001? casablanca? apparently not.

godfather and godfather ii? yes from imdb. no from me.
 

·
Not Banned
Joined
·
49,013 Posts
Kurosawa on a bad day is better than most directors on a good day. Watch "The Last Emperor" about him by Alex Cox and listen to the worlds best directors say they aren't fit to shine his shoes.
7 Samurai was also great because of the cast. Mifune was brilliant (his characters were always more 3D than Eastwood's copies) Shimura was brilliant as the leader, Kimura was great as the kid, Chiaki as the woodcutter provided the humor and Miyaguchi was phenom as the pure samurai
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,074 Posts
Kurosawa on a bad day is better than most directors on a good day. Watch "The Last Emperor" about him by Alex Cox and listen to the worlds best directors say they aren't fit to shine his shoes.
7 Samurai was also great because of the cast. Mifune was brilliant (his characters were always more 3D than Eastwood's copies) Shimura was brilliant as the leader, Kimura was great as the kid, Chiaki as the woodcutter provided the humor and Miyaguchi was phenom as the pure samurai
True dat!

I was curious about what they were going to do with this movie, but alas it looks like they just did a poor re-hash of the bro-hero Hollywoood happy ending flick that was the first "Magnificant Seven" in 1960.

A lot of people don't even realize the first "Magnificent Seven" was based off of "The Seven Samurai" I think. The general plot may be similar, but they were very different movies. Mifune's character as the wannabe Samurai that has a hidden past as a peasant farmer is perhaps the most important character in the film. In the "Magnificent Seven" that character really doesn't exist in the same way, and is much less important. The original "Seven Samurai" is so much about the struggles between different classes in society, and contains a lot of heartache and hard-earned respect between people of different classes. The "Magnificent Seven" is typically American cowboy individualism winning the day, and in a lot of ways the movie has more in common with "Ocean's Eleven" than "The Seven Samurai".

Oh, and someone commented about stealing from Shakespeare, which is a bit ironic because Kurosawa "stole" from Shakespeare, so to speak, in a couple of his finest films. Like another great filmmaker, Stanley Kubrick, Kurosawa would not be afraid to change a classic story to truly make a better movie, as he very much did with "Throne of Blood" (i.e. "MacBeth") and "Ran" (i.e. "King Lear").
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,471 Posts
Kurosawa on a bad day is better than most directors on a good day. Watch "The Last Emperor" about him by Alex Cox and listen to the worlds best directors say they aren't fit to shine his shoes.
+1 for "The Last Emperor", one of my favorite movies of all time!
 

·
Proud luddite
Joined
·
7,236 Posts
Seems like the last decade or so has seen WAY TOO MANY remakes of movies...some of them classic movies but many of them movies that pretty much sucked the first time. I'd like to see a remake of "Walking Tall", but this version featuring Joe Don Baker smashing the crap out of Hollywood execs who insist on making remakes of movies. I'd pay $9 to see that.
 

·
Not Banned
Joined
·
49,013 Posts
+1 for "The Last Emperor", one of my favorite movies of all time!
"So I get this date with a girl and she's ..uh, how you say? 'supposedly easy' ? So I plan to take her to a movie. I find the longest one playing because I figure it betters my chances and its the 7 Samurai 3hrs! So I take the girl to the movie and the film starts. The girl, well I didn't pay much attention to her, didn't get lucky, but I knew what I wanted to be when I grew up"
paraphrased from memory


"One thing that distinguishes [him] is that he didn't make one masterpiece or two masterpieces. He made, you know, eight masterpieces." Francis Ford Coppola
 

·
Not Banned
Joined
·
49,013 Posts
True dat!

I was curious about what they were going to do with this movie, but alas it looks like they just did a poor re-hash of the bro-hero Hollywoood happy ending flick that was the first "Magnificant Seven" in 1960.

A lot of people don't even realize the first "Magnificent Seven" was based off of "The Seven Samurai" I think. The general plot may be similar, but they were very different movies. Mifune's character as the wannabe Samurai that has a hidden past as a peasant farmer is perhaps the most important character in the film. In the "Magnificent Seven" that character really doesn't exist in the same way, and is much less important. The original "Seven Samurai" is so much about the struggles between different classes in society, and contains a lot of heartache and hard-earned respect between people of different classes. The "Magnificent Seven" is typically American cowboy individualism winning the day, and in a lot of ways the movie has more in common with "Ocean's Eleven" than "The Seven Samurai".

Oh, and someone commented about stealing from Shakespeare, which is a bit ironic because Kurosawa "stole" from Shakespeare, so to speak, in a couple of his finest films. Like another great filmmaker, Stanley Kubrick, Kurosawa would not be afraid to change a classic story to truly make a better movie, as he very much did with "Throne of Blood" (i.e. "MacBeth") and "Ran" (i.e. "King Lear").
That's why I always refer to Eastwood as a Round Eyed Mifune. Toshiro's characters were always so much more fleshed out, and conflicted. When the Samurai find out the peasants have been killing and robbing Ronin is also a pivotal scene. The conflict between the father and the daughter, the town and the Samurai. "Throne of Blood and "ran" were both brilliant, "Ran" I think was his Samurai Masterpiece, and such Eye Candy.
Akira could do so much more as well, "Stray Dog", "High and Low", "The Lower Depths" "The Bad Sleep Well" and " Dodesukaden" were all amzaing, non samurai Kurosawa films
 

·
What the Hell is going on
Joined
·
5,153 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Seems like the last decade or so has seen WAY TOO MANY remakes of movies...some of them classic movies but many of them movies that pretty much sucked the first time. I'd like to see a remake of "Walking Tall", but this version featuring Joe Don Baker smashing the crap out of Hollywood execs who insist on making remakes of movies. I'd pay $9 to see that.
They did a remake in 2004 staring Johnny Knoxville! It was pretty good.
 

·
a real member's member
Joined
·
3,880 Posts
Akira could do so much more as well, "Stray Dog", "High and Low", "The Lower Depths" "The Bad Sleep Well" and " Dodesukaden" were all amzaing, non samurai Kurosawa films
yeah, those are great.

i really haven't seen one of his i didn't find captivating.

about a year ago, tcm showed several of his films each week for a couple months. i was glued to them all.
 

·
What the Hell is going on
Joined
·
5,153 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
That's why I always refer to Eastwood as a Round Eyed Mifune. Toshiro's characters were always so much more fleshed out, and conflicted. When the Samurai find out the peasants have been killing and robbing Ronin is also a pivotal scene. The conflict between the father and the daughter, the town and the Samurai. "Throne of Blood and "ran" were both brilliant, "Ran" I think was his Samurai Masterpiece, and such Eye Candy.
Akira could do so much more as well, "Stray Dog", "High and Low", "The Lower Depths" "The Bad Sleep Well" and " Dodesukaden" were all amzaing, non samurai Kurosawa films
Aw, C'mon Apt. I think you're being a little to hard on Mr. Eastwood. Okay, he did have a conversation with an empty chair that one time. I'll give you that, but his output, especially in his later years, has been nothing short of stellar. I loved Clint Eastwood's "Unforgiven" for what it wasn't; a typical western film. Most western films easily lends itself to stories of damaged souls looking for a last chance at redemption in a Hobbesian world. And like most of these stories the protagonist winds up being heroic for a noble cause. Not so in "Unforgiven". Eastwood's character, William Munny, "the killer of women and children", was unrepentant and was not seeking any redemption whatsoever. Even Sam Peckinpah didn't tackle this theme. For me, this was quite shocking. I think Clint said "Unforgiven" will be the last western he'll ever do. To bad.
 

·
Not Banned
Joined
·
49,013 Posts
Aw, C'mon Apt. I think you're being a little to hard on Mr. Eastwood. Okay, he did have a conversation with an empty chair that one time. I'll give you that, but his output, especially in his later years, has been nothing short of stellar. I loved Clint Eastwood's "Unforgiven" for what it wasn't; a typical western film. Most western films easily lends itself to stories of damaged souls looking for a last chance at redemption in a Hobbesian world. And like most of these stories the protagonist winds up being heroic for a noble cause. Not so in "Unforgiven". Eastwood's character, William Munny, "the killer of women and children", was unrepentant and was not seeking any redemption whatsoever. Even Sam Peckinpah didn't tackle this theme. For me, this was quite shocking. I think Clint said "Unforgiven" will be the last western he'll ever do. To bad.
Look at Eastwood's characters in most of his early Westerns, or even Dirty Harry, they are pretty one dimensional. I like Eastwood, I love those movies and "High Plains Drifter" is on my "one of the greatest all time" list, but we have to admit the genre (Spaghetti Westerns) was pretty much lifted from Kurosawa so one most draw comparisons between the major players. IMO Mifune wins
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,074 Posts
Seems like the last decade or so has seen WAY TOO MANY remakes of movies...some of them classic movies but many of them movies that pretty much sucked the first time. I'd like to see a remake of "Walking Tall", but this version featuring Joe Don Baker smashing the crap out of Hollywood execs who insist on making remakes of movies. I'd pay $9 to see that.
Also true dat!

Hollywood did some particularly interesting and wonderful things in the 50s, 60s, and 70s. And then "Jaws" and "Star Wars" came along and neutered the creative process in American films.

I always think back to Robert Altman's "The Player", which backhandedly trashed the Hollywood system. The running joke was that every movie idea that was pitched had to be done in about 30 seconds, and it always described the idea for the movie as a melding of 2 previous successful movies (for example, "The Wizard of Oz meets Terminator", or something like that). Oh, and they had to get Bruce Willis and Julia Roberts to star in whatever movie they were promoting!
 

·
Not Banned
Joined
·
49,013 Posts
Hollywood is run by bean counters
pre branding is a safe bet and bean counters are risk averse

art is risky

Hollywood is pretty much dead
 

·
Jerkhard Sirdribbledick
Joined
·
27,036 Posts
Seems like the last decade or so has seen WAY TOO MANY remakes of movies...some of them classic movies but many of them movies that pretty much sucked the first time. I'd like to see a remake of "Walking Tall", but this version featuring Joe Don Baker smashing the crap out of Hollywood execs who insist on making remakes of movies. I'd pay $9 to see that.
A couple reasons, highly related: 1) They're out of ideas, and 2) They don't have the balls to produce new ideas
 

·
Not Banned
Joined
·
49,013 Posts
A couple reasons, highly related: 1) They're out of ideas, and 2) They don't have the balls to produce new ideas
Mostly 2. I'm sure there are plenty of new ideas that never get past the pitch
 

·
What the Hell is going on
Joined
·
5,153 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Personally I don't think there is any thing new under the sun. For me there are only three basic themes in all of storytelling, be it in literature or movies: Man vs. Man, Man vs. Nature and Love conquers all. And stop with the Hollywood bashing already. While I agree that Hollywood is responsible for the large amount of [email protected] movies out there I also know that I also know that they are responsible for some of the best loved movies as well. I still, and always will love, "It's a Wonderful Life". As for recent "cutting edge" Hollywood fare I point to Jake Gyllenhaal's "Nightcrawler". A truly creepy and disturbing film. Not that many people watched that one but a lot of people watched "12 Years a Slave" (a truly wonderful film). So there is no need to throw the baby out with the bath water.
 

·
Jerkhard Sirdribbledick
Joined
·
27,036 Posts
Personally I don't think there is any thing new under the sun. For me there are only three basic themes in all of storytelling, be it in literature or movies: Man vs. Man, Man vs. Nature and Love conquers all. And stop with the Hollywood bashing already. While I agree that Hollywood is responsible for the large amount of [email protected] movies out there I also know that I also know that they are responsible for some of the best loved movies as well. I still, and always will love, "It's a Wonderful Life". As for recent "cutting edge" Hollywood fare I point to Jake Gyllenhaal's "Nightcrawler". A truly creepy and disturbing film. Not that many people watched that one but a lot of people watched "12 Years a Slave" (a truly wonderful film). So there is no need to throw the baby out with the bath water.
Oh, there's plenty to bash about Hollywood (the studios, not the player). Spielberg and Lucas changed the landscape forever in the late '70s and now most studios are nothing but manufacturers: putting together proven formulas, focus-grouping them, reworking them if necessary and churning them out with only one thing in mind. Just about everything is crap, unless you look toward smaller, indy-type production companies. You know, the ones that still make excellent movies like Nightcrawler.

12 Years a Slave was a POS, IMO.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top