I agree with JR on these. The opening to War of the Worlds was thrilling.
Also Dune is a visual feast of marvel and disgust. It got a rise out of me.
Toochis
________________________________
From: Dave Rosen <hah...@sympatico.ca>
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 12:48:03 PM
Subject: Re: [MOPO] FAVORITE FILM THAT YOU HAVE TO DEFEND
Never mind the son. The daughter has to have been one of the most annoying
child characters ever to have graced the screen...and I include Baby Leroy in
that.
Her whiny, high-pitched screaming was one of the many things that marred the
movie, along with Tim Robbins extended over-the-top nutbar performance.
I liked the first half of the film but found most parts of the second half
laughably bad. On the other hand, there were some remarkable set-pieces that
are almost worth re-watching the movie for: the car-jacking scene, the ferry
scene and the walk through the debris from the crashed airliner. Too bad they
weren't in a better movie.
Dave
----- Original Message ----- From: "James Richard" <jrl...@mediabearonline.com>
To: <MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU>
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 3:35 PM
Subject: Re: [MOPO] FAVORITE FILM THAT YOU HAVE TO DEFEND
> I agree that Spielberg's War of the Words and the original theatrical release
> of Dune are both worthy of defense. I still like the original release of Dune
> better than the subsequent "director's cuts". It was clean, it was direct, it
> flowed well and it let people who had never read the book understand what the
> heck was going on.
>
> As for War of the Worlds... sure, it's flawed in a lot of ways, but still one
> great ride and so very different from the 1953 film that they are two
> completely different things. By the way, the reason Tom Cruise's car was the
> only one that ran was because it was an older model that did not have any
> computer chips in the ignition system or motor -- the computer chips in all
> the other vehicles had been fried by the big electro-magnetic pulse the
> Martians put out. A nice way to get him a car when no one else had one, I
> thought, although Spielberg did a bad job of explaining it. Some people think
> it was because the garage guy had fixed the car (replaced the computer chip)
> after the pulse, but that doesn't fly because the replacement computer chip
> would have been fried when it was sitting on the garage shelf and so when the
> mechanic put in it still wouldn't have worked.
>
> I second the motion that Tom's idiot teenage son should have stayed toast at
> the end.
>
> -- JR
>
> aaroncba...@fuse.net wrote:
>> I am enjoying this discussion. I always feel the need to defend War of the
>> Worlds (Spielberg's). I think it is a better and more interesting film than
>> most people give it credit for. I firmly believe that the entire film is a
>> dream (e.g. Invaders from Mars)- Tom Cruise's dream. He falls asleep and
>> then everything starts happening. The entire film is an exaggerated
>> nightmare- his worst nightmare- his parental abilities are tested to the
>> extreme. The very beginning of the film lays out the fact that he is a
>> questionable parent at best. Then, throughout the nightmare, he is faced
>> with parents' worst fears realized (best e.g. is the scene where Cruise is
>> simultaneously dealing with strangers trying to take his daughter and his
>> son being pulled inexplicably towards the military- both primal parental
>> fears). By film's end he proves his parental prowess and in one of the most
>> maligned scenes in the film (the last scene) he hand delivers his
children back to his wife safe with his judgmental in-laws th!
> er!
>> e to lay witness. To me this was absolutely Spielberg's intent.
>> Throughout, the film works more in the realm of dream logic (e.g. Cruise's
>> car is the ONLY one that works). If you are still reading, I also find
>> myself defending Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut for one very specific and unique
>> reason: I firmly believe that the film is one big cosmic joke- a black
>> comedy -that even the critics, as far as I could tell, missed entirely. In
>> the simplest of terms it is a story of a husband who get's so jealous about
>> his wife having an imaginary tryst that he spends the rest of the film
>> trying to get laid and he CAN'T! Mr.Tom-universal-sex-symbol-Cruise cannot
>> get laid! And the most exaggerated case in point is that he ends up going
>> to a super deluxe orgy and he STILL can't get laid. I think Kubrick threw a
>> curve ball at us before he died. A very funny curve ball.
>>
>> Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
>> ___________________________________________________________________
>> How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
>> Send a message addressed to:
>> lists...@listserv.american.edu
>> In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
>> The author of this message is solely
>> responsible for its content.
>>
>>
>
> Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
> ___________________________________________________________________
> How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
> Send a message addressed to:
> lists...@listserv.american.edu
> In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
> The author of this message is solely
> responsible for its content.
>
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to:
lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely
responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
