Requiem For A Dream

[Chasing Lamely]

Aronofsky, if the same thing were to happen, would have to say "Wow, I hardly produced a fucking thing."

Pi? The Fountain? The subject of this topic, Requiem For A Dream? Those are all pretty well regarded films and I'd say they qualify as "a fucking thing" whether or not you like them.

[Pepsi]

Aronofsky, if the same thing were to happen, would have to say "Wow, I hardly produced a fucking thing."

Pi? The Fountain? The subject of this topic, Requiem For A Dream? Those are all pretty well regarded films and I'd say they qualify as "a fucking thing" whether or not you like them.

[ROC]

Seeing that the aforementioned Terrence Malick has never produced a film that broke more than $40 million at the box office and many highly regarded names in the independent industry have never broke past the $20 million mark, that really isn't shit to go by.

[MalaCloudy Black]

Aronofsky, if the same thing were to happen, would have to say "Wow, I hardly produced a fucking thing."

Pi? The Fountain? The subject of this topic, Requiem For A Dream? Those are all pretty well regarded films and I'd say they qualify as "a fucking thing" whether or not you like them.

Well regarded, maybe. Show me box office numbers. Did any of them break 20 mil?

Since when does Box Office warrent a good movie? :blink:

Since never. It's just like arguing that one musician or artist is better than another because they sold more records. Sales =/= quality just as box office numbers =/= quality. You Got Served grossed 40 mil. Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo grossed 22 mil overall. See where I'm going? Box office numbers mean very little.

Edited December 20, 2006 by Cloudy - A Broadway Show

[Chasing Lamely]

You measue achievement as an auteur by your box office. Name one big name director who hasn't broken 20 mil? Fuck, even Christopher Nolan broke 20 mil, and Batman Begins is the only movie he#'s ever made that made any sense.

[The Sultan of Swank]

Loved the film, bought the DVD, love the soundtrack, look to all of its features from score to editing almost as reference for my film making class.

[ROC]

You measue achievement as an auteur by your box office. Name one big name director who hasn't broken 20 mil? Fuck, even Christopher Nolan broke 20 mil, and Batman Begins is the only movie he#'s ever made that made any sense.

Edited December 21, 2006 by COR

[Pepsi]

You measue achievement as an auteur by your box office. Name one big name director who hasn't broken 20 mil? Fuck, even Christopher Nolan broke 20 mil, and Batman Begins is the only movie he#'s ever made that made any sense.

Edited December 21, 2006 by Pepsi

[9 to 5]

Alright film at best, nowt to write home about.

[Scruffy The Janitor]

What the hell is it actually about? I borrowed it from a friend about a month ago, and haven't managed to watch it yet. Had to take a copy because he wanted the disk back. But I still just haven't managed to get the inclination to watch it (I go through certain moods when it comes to watching movies/listening to music), or had the time. Should I just sit down or watch it, or just add it to the list?

[Gongsun Zan]

What the hell is it actually about? I borrowed it from a friend about a month ago, and haven't managed to watch it yet. Had to take a copy because he wanted the disk back. But I still just haven't managed to get the inclination to watch it (I go through certain moods when it comes to watching movies/listening to music), or had the time. Should I just sit down or watch it, or just add it to the list?

[Chasing Lamely]

You measue achievement as an auteur by your box office. Name one big name director who hasn't broken 20 mil? Fuck, even Christopher Nolan broke 20 mil, and Batman Begins is the only movie he#'s ever made that made any sense.

He isn't a big name director in that context, though, but just because he isn't a big name doesn't change the fact that he is an auteur. Even non big names have beloved films...

And by your definition of auteur, then that means Chris Stokes (You Got Served), Pitof (Catwoman), and William Brent Bell (Stay Alive) must be fucking auteurs while John Waters (who I'll admit isn't the best example here, but Serial Mom is a pretty damn great film), Pedro Almondovar, and Alejandro Innaritu (though, I'm uncertain is Babel has not broken $20 million) are not.

However, all auteur even means is that the personal vision of a director comes out in their work, and in the case of Aronofsky, it most certainly does.

[Pepsi]

Memento made plenty of sense to me, but it's not as great a film as people make out, and it's well executed, even if I found the premise of the movie a little weak. And I didn't say him not being big time didn't mean he didn't make movies, that's going way out of context. You measure success by box office, not talent. Aronofsky hasn't had any real success, just arty movies liked by a large minority. But he's seriously not the talent people make him out to be. Give me a passable script, an average indy budget and a competent crew and I'll take the Pepsi challenge with Requiem any day.

And searching the internet won't find you the interview. As I said before, I saw it on E! - as far as I know they aren't in the practice of putting their shows online for free.

Edited December 22, 2006 by Pepsi

[The Sultan of Swank]

What the hell is it actually about? I borrowed it from a friend about a month ago, and haven't managed to watch it yet. Had to take a copy because he wanted the disk back. But I still just haven't managed to get the inclination to watch it (I go through certain moods when it comes to watching movies/listening to music), or had the time. Should I just sit down or watch it, or just add it to the list?

Old woman takes drugs, becomes retarded, son takes drugs, loses arm, girlfriend takes drugs, becomes a whore.

That's the gist of it, I guess.

[Liam]

I just don't understand your arguement and it's obvious, looking at your comment about Schindler's List, that you seem to dislike a lot of very good movies so I really can't respect your opinion on this matter very much. Anyways, unless anyone else has anything to add about the movie I'm done trying to make and sense of your arguement.

I don't seem to get this. I haven't followed the argument, but to say that you won't listen to someone or respect thier opinion because they don't like the same films as you is a little...meh. Whether his argument stands up outside of that, I don't really care. It's subjective, and at least he gave a reason as to why he didn't like it. I also can understand why he (and the other people I know who don't like it) doesn't like Requiem For A Dream, and it does indeed seem to have a huge fan boy base.

Also, unless I've read something totally wrong, some of you seem to miss the concept of auteurship. Actually...re-reading it...I don't get what the point was at all >_>

Edited December 23, 2006 by Liam Byrne

[Pepsi]

I just don't understand your arguement and it's obvious, looking at your comment about Schindler's List, that you seem to dislike a lot of very good movies so I really can't respect your opinion on this matter very much. Anyways, unless anyone else has anything to add about the movie I'm done trying to make and sense of your arguement.

I don't seem to get this. I haven't followed the argument, but to say that you won't listen to someone or respect thier opinion because they don't like the same films as you is a little...meh. Whether his argument stands up outside of that, I don't really care. It's subjective, and at least he gave a reason as to why he didn't like it. I also can understand why he (and the other people I know who don't like it) doesn't like Requiem For A Dream, and it does indeed seem to have a huge fan boy base.

Also, unless I've read something totally wrong, some of you seem to miss the concept of auteurship. Actually...re-reading it...I don't get what the point was at all >_>

[Chasing Lamely]

I just don't understand your arguement and it's obvious, looking at your comment about Schindler's List, that you seem to dislike a lot of very good movies so I really can't respect your opinion on this matter very much. Anyways, unless anyone else has anything to add about the movie I'm done trying to make and sense of your arguement.

I don't seem to get this. I haven't followed the argument, but to say that you won't listen to someone or respect thier opinion because they don't like the same films as you is a little...meh. Whether his argument stands up outside of that, I don't really care. It's subjective, and at least he gave a reason as to why he didn't like it. I also can understand why he (and the other people I know who don't like it) doesn't like Requiem For A Dream, and it does indeed seem to have a huge fan boy base.

Also, unless I've read something totally wrong, some of you seem to miss the concept of auteurship. Actually...re-reading it...I don't get what the point was at all >_>

Edited December 23, 2006 by Chasing Lamely

[Liam]

His reason for not liking Schindler's List wasn't simply that he found it over-rated (though naturally he does), but he said that with Schindler's List also, the premise was let down by the actual films themselves. Nice ideas that could have been executed a lot better....which is fair enough.

As for the arguments about the directors, I said I don't care, because frankly I don't care enough about films, so yeah. The films making money = good quality argument thrown about was retarded, I agree.

My point of the huge fanboy base for Requiem For A Dream is that sometimes it pushes a film way above what it actually is, and I think (even though I like it) RFAD is a good example of this.

And with some of this, you need to see where hyperbole starts and actual proper arguments end (his likening RFAD to American Pie 4)

Edited December 23, 2006 by Liam Byrne