Entertainment For Lively Minds

Word RSS FeedsWord Magazine on YouTubeWord Magazine on Last FMWord Magazine on FacebookWord Magazine on Twitter

Your truisms: The Movie!

Theo Zoffrok's picture

With thanks to nicktf for his great thread on the Massive's own music truisms, how about we do a film-based one. I'm sure you all have plenty of pearls of wisdom to impart. Here are some to kick it off:

Anthony Hopkins is a Great Big Ham - who is nevertheless capable of some stunning performances, the best being The Remains Of The Day.

The most enjoyable Robert De Niro film is Midnight Run.

Andie Macdowell has given one truly great performance (Sex Lies & Videotape); this is one more than many actors manage in their careers.

The Godfather Part II is not as good as part I.

Speaking of which, Sofia Coppola wasn't the worst actor in part III - that honour goes to Al Pacino, who after all was supposed to know what he was doing.

Crash will soon be regarded as easily the worst film ever to win the Best Film Oscar.

Quite a lot of Titanic was actually pretty good - but the film was really sunk by those silly special effects.

Every Tom Cruise film has at least one steadicam shot of him sprinting down a road or corridor.

One of the funniest lines in recent film is Tom Cruise in Valkyrie intoning solemnly "We have to kill Hitler" -honestly, it's enough to make a dog laugh.

Amanda Donohoe is the Great Lost Superstar.

Tough guys being tender can be truly touching - see Michael Madsen in Thelma and Louise and Harvey Keitel in Smoke.

I'm sure there's more, but I have to go shopping now. Let's hear yours...

0

Chick Flicks

Won't hurt you

1
latenitetellyvision | 3 February 2010 - 11:09am

A few

True Romance is the best thing that Tarantino has been involved in and....

Tarantino should stay behind the camera.

Chevy Chase was a great comedy actor. the Fletch films are genius.

I'll try and think of more...

1
David Sutherland | 3 February 2010 - 11:17am

Saboteurs

Will access enclosed mainframe IT systems almost immediatley on laptops with boot-up times of less than a second (yet they must be crammed full of supercool sabotage software?) and will run a set of scripts to decode the password which will only be handful of characters long. Like 'KRONOS' - all in uppercase, or the name of the mad professors son, JOSHUA. When they should be things like t*23_)webnhY_)9 involving long finger stretches, mistakes and swearing...

0
Beezer | 3 February 2010 - 11:20am

or 8 years olds will look at a terminal and go

"oooh look, Unix", and get straight in.

Or the hero (Tom Cruise) will be on the run from his super-secure facility, yet they won't revoke his access clearance so he can rock up any time he likes to the eyeball scanner and walk in.

0
Harold Holt | 3 February 2010 - 11:50am

And the computer screen will

And the computer screen will have really big cool graphics with pictures on that swish when they are clicked - often incredibly large cool font with 'downloading' flashing as baddie returns to office

0
tim tunes | 3 February 2010 - 4:03pm

Stephen King

Short story adaptations are good - Stand by Me, Shawshank

Novel adaptations are rubbish - everything else

0
latenitetellyvision | 3 February 2010 - 11:21am

Novel adaptations!

mmmm

Godfather?

One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest?

To Kill a Mockingbird?

Schindler's List?

Lord of the Rings?

Silence of the Lambs?

I could go on.

0
doctor.nacko | 3 February 2010 - 1:42pm

Stephen King..

was more prolific than I thought

1
Charlie Gordon | 3 February 2010 - 1:50pm

The movie version of High Fidelity

was far better than Nick Hornby's book.

The movie version of Hornby's Fever Pitch was far worse than, well probably pretty much anything!

1
Retro Man | 3 February 2010 - 11:26am

which one?

I believe there are UK and USA versions. However as a LFC fan Fever Pitch climaxes with a personal heartbreaker so I can't watch it. Probably different if you are a Gooner.

0
paulwright | 3 February 2010 - 11:31am

I didn't know there was a US

version...I have only seen the one with Colin Firth.

0
Retro Man | 3 February 2010 - 12:17pm

The US one

is about baseball and it's radioactively bad

0
On The Fence | 3 February 2010 - 5:47pm

So changing the location

and changing the sport too...why not just do a completely new movie!

Anyone else agree that the movie version of High Fidelity - even though they moved it to America - really worked?

2
Retro Man | 4 February 2010 - 11:50am

A naysayer writes

If I may be pardoned for repeating myself from a previous thread), I don't rate the film of Hi Fi, one of the reasons being the casting:

My objection isn't along the lines of "it's not how I imagined that character" - it's where the source material takes the trouble to describe a character's appearance, size and so on, and indeed where some of the action proceeds directly from those characteristics - and yet the filmmakers choose to ignore all that. And this is doubly so when plotlines or dialogue are left in even if they no longer make sense. A great example of this is in the spectacular miscasting of Lisa Bonet in Hi Fidelity, playing Marie LaSalle, described in the novel as looking like Susan Dey in The Partridge Family. Well, Lisa Bonet doesn't fit that description, to put it mildly. Never mind, you just change the line, right? Wrong. They left the line in, adding the words "...only black." I swear I could see a note of embarrassment in Todd Louiso's face as he delivered the line!

The script also botched the scene where he first sees Marie play. In the book, he realises it's the terminably uncool Peter Frampton's song Baby I Love Your Way she's playing - then bursts into tears. In the film, he just nods and says "Cool!" Lame! Then there's the scene where he might be about to have sex with his ex. In the book there's a very awkward conversation about condoms, and it doesn't happen. In the film, they just make lurve, and it's great.

0
Theo Zoffrok | 4 February 2010 - 2:43pm

It's a good point...

but I did find Hornby's writing in the book about the relationship between the main character and the musician just didn't ring true. It was the weakest part of the movie too, you're right, but overall I still found the film an excellent version.

I think the biggest problem with movies made from books is when you have such a fixed image in your mind about the characters and locations that when you do get to see them on the big screen, it rarely matches your imagination.

But I think High Fidelity worked for me as at first I was sceptical about having it set in America but I just decided to try and take it on face value and not get too worried about the book.

0
Retro Man | 4 February 2010 - 3:11pm

In all seriousness

I think it's one of the best literary adaptations, because it understands that to be faithful to a book doesn't mean replicating every interminable page (certain Harry Potter films); but somehow capturing its spirit and yet being a film in its own right too. See also what David Lean managed to do with Charles Dickens.

0
Lucas Hare | 4 February 2010 - 9:00pm

Agree with your premise but not your conclusion

I don't want to see page-for-page transcriptions either. My beef with that film is that in certain key ways it really betrayed the spirit and emotional heart of the book.

0
Theo Zoffrok | 4 February 2010 - 9:09pm

More filmic claptrap...

Directors:
Ridley Scott is close to ruining a once great CV
Tony Scott is only slightly more acceptable than Michael Bay.
Michael Mann is also on a downwards spiral.
Kenneth Branagh is a crap director but a very good actor

Actors:
Gene Hackman never gave a bad performance
Kate Winslet is overrated
So is Nicole Kidman.
Warren Oates was the greatest character actor of all.

Films:
There are no hard men anymore.

0
Charlie Gordon | 3 February 2010 - 11:30am

Americans

can't do English characters very well at all, they either speak like Terry Thomas on one hand or Danny Dyer on the other and think that Dick Van Dyke had it down to a tee.
Even when they get an English actor/actress to play an English character they get it wrong...e.g. Daphne in Frasier, Aidan Gillen in The Wire (Dominic West is the exception).

0
Retro Man | 3 February 2010 - 11:32am

Aidan Gillen

is NOT an English actor

1
Pat Carty | 3 February 2010 - 3:01pm

Hum Hum, quick google...

Ah I see, well I knew he couldn't have been American!

0
Retro Man | 3 February 2010 - 4:00pm

Aidan gillen does a great

Aidan gillen does a great American accent - being Irish makes it easier I think. Even American friends didn't realise he wasn't American. It wasn't, of course, a Baltimore accent.

0
silverjaime | 4 February 2010 - 9:17am

And neither Gillen nor West were playing 'English' characters!

...or am I missing something incredibly subtle here...?

0
Paul Waring | 3 February 2010 - 5:15pm

No you're not...

I just need someone far more talented than me to put my thoughts into writing, that, or Archie to proof-read everything before I post!

Of course Aidan Gillen and West should be under the section English actors playing Americans but then as I found out Gillen's not even English, he's Irish (still think his accent sucked...) so that's all gone to cock hasn't it...

Apologies chaps, I shall engage brain and check google before posting!

0
Retro Man | 4 February 2010 - 11:56am

Ten more incontrovertible truths

1. Anything with Powers Boothe in it is worth giving a shot.

2. Anything with Lou Diamond Philips in it is worth giving a miss.

3. When the dialogue features the line "What the fuck...?", you know you're within ten minutes of a slo-mo helicopter explosion.

4. George Lucas is the luckiest man alive.

5. A blonde female character on the run will (a) have to be shown how to use the gun, and (b) break a heel and twist her ankle.

6. A Hispanic female character on the run will (a) be an Uzi-packing badass, (b) wear a sweat-stained boobie-clinging khaki vest, (c) smoke cigars, and (d) die.

7. Pedro Almodóvar is to crafting a narrative structure as Lars van Trier is to nuking an asteroid.

8. The entrance to the Extreme Sex Club That's Like Totally Secret, besides being bathed in red light, is marshalled by a Siouxsie-Sioux-with-implants greeter, with backup from a seven-foot-tall black bouncer. With a shaved head. In a tuxedo. Who's gay.

9. Any film flagged on the poster as "a film by" will be far inferior to anything by the same director with only a "directed by" credit in small letters.

10. If Steve Buscemi smokes, he'll die.

0
Archie Valparaiso | 3 February 2010 - 12:06pm

When Harry Met Sally is the best film ever

When Harry Met Sally is the best film ever.
It just is.
It's funny and it's romantic; and that's all that really matters.

0
Richard Lowe | 3 February 2010 - 12:08pm

Right...

Pulp Fiction is hollow nonsense: a better example of style over substance you will not find.
Speaking of which, True Romance is terrible.

None of the Star Wars films is actually that good.

Robert DeNiro's greatest performance is in The King Of Comedy.

The most depressing performances in The Godfather Part III come from those who have bags of talent, but are inexplicably awful in the film: Diane Keaton, Joe Mantegna and Eli Wallach.

Martin Scorsese's most emotionally potent film is The Age Of Innocence.

Woody Allen's best film is Crimes And Misdemeanors.

Russell Crowe is sometimes really good.

Love Actually is indefensible on every single level.

1
Lucas Hare | 3 February 2010 - 12:51pm

May i use the Valparaiso rule

and say you are Wrongity wrong. True Romance is a great film. Agree about Star Wars though.

0
Sour Crout | 3 February 2010 - 1:38pm

Number nine

I will never find anyone who agrees with me about True Romance.

0
Lucas Hare | 3 February 2010 - 1:45pm

I'm here Lucas and ready to serve..

True Romance is indeed Tarantino at his show-off worst and is rather dated.

But on the other hand, The Age of Innocence is emotionally inert..it even makes Daniel Day Lewis boring.

0
Charlie Gordon | 3 February 2010 - 1:55pm

He wrote it

He didn't direct it.

0
Sour Crout | 4 February 2010 - 2:57pm

True...

it was that deluxe hack Tony Scott but Lucas's original charge of style over substance remains and is arguably down Tarantino's script - his first.

0
Charlie Gordon | 4 February 2010 - 3:31pm

Love Actually defence

1. Pretty music

2. Its Christmassy

0
tim tunes | 3 February 2010 - 4:54pm

Love Actually prosecution

Look, be careful. Its sheer mastery of emotional manipulation is the most dangerous thing about it.

0
Lucas Hare | 3 February 2010 - 5:06pm

Love Actually is...

Rom-com-porn. No plot, no feeling, just straight to the gooey bit.
Sin City is action-movie-porn and is magnificent.

0
fedoraboy | 3 February 2010 - 9:56pm

Another hater here

I came out of that film wanting to drown some puppies. It was just ghasty, an illustration of Richard Curtis's self-confessed inability to construct a proper narrative. The few good bits were lost in a sea of schmaltz, and if you saw the trailer you'd already heard the funniest lines. And the section with Kris Marshall propelled him straight to the top of my all-time cinematic shit list.

As for The Boat That Rocked, I know it's crap even though I didn't see it. I saw the trailers. *shudder*

0
Theo Zoffrok | 3 February 2010 - 11:35pm

The Empire Strikes Back

is the only good SW film, and not directed by G Lucas.

0
Adman | 7 February 2010 - 8:21pm

The Age Of Innocence

"Martin Scorsese's most emotionally potent film is The Age Of Innocence."

- not only that its also his best film.

As for truisms

- there is no such thing as a bad Jimmy Stewart movie
- Jim Carrey is not funny
- neither is Ricky Gervais
- most theatre actors (eg Kenneth Brannagh) always over act in movies. This can lead to some fantastic comedy performances (Gilderoy Lockhart)

0
Gramsci | 9 February 2010 - 9:29am

They don't

make them like they used to do they?

0
simon kumar | 3 February 2010 - 12:44pm

Oh goody

The best cinema mixes art and commerce. The moment you lean too far towards one or the other interest fades.

75% of Westerns have the same story. Man wonders into town. Man meets trouble and girl. Man sorts out trouble and leaves girl because a man’s gotta do, etc. (This is a good thing.)

The Pixar films represent the most consistent run of filmmaking in the history of cinema.

The Disney Princesses branding is at once the greatest and most cynical piece of marketing in the history of just about anything.

Actors never have anything interesting to say about their films.

Independent movies are often every bit as bad as anything churned out by Hollywood.

Clint Eastwood is the last of the Hollywood greats.

99% of the time CGI is just laziness.

David Lean in black and white is better than David Lean in colour.

Michael Powell in any colour is better than David Lean in black and white.

2
Madrid | 3 February 2010 - 12:54pm

Only 1% of the use of

Only 1% of the use of Computer Generated Imagery is not just being lazy, really?

0
tim tunes | 3 February 2010 - 4:24pm

David Lean

Absolutely. Brief Encounter over Lawrence Of Arabia; Great Expectations over Dr. Zhivago.

0
Lucas Hare | 3 February 2010 - 1:00pm

David Lean rule

ahem...so..applying the David Lean trusim I would choose The Passionate Friends (1949), plot described by imdb as

" In postwar London Mary Justin runs into university lecturer Steve Stratton, the true love of her life from when they were young. She is now married to a Treasury financier having opted for a safe, secure and affectionate relationship, but the meeting rekindles the past for a while. Mary and Steve part again, but a further brief encounter on holiday in Switzerland brings matters to a head "

Over

0
tim tunes | 3 February 2010 - 5:13pm

At time of writing, avoid films starring any of these actors:

Nicholas Cage
Nicole Kidman
Anyone from Friends (except maybe Courtney Cox)
Cuba Gooding Jr
Sadie Frost
MacKenzie Crook

0
Brookster | 3 February 2010 - 1:21pm

Leave off Nic

This looks to be a work of genius. Try not to laugh to much at La Cage's first appearance 48s in

0
tim tunes | 3 February 2010 - 4:27pm

Wot, no Adam Sandler ?

A record run of the crappiest films on the planet. Who watches that stuff ?

0
Harold Holt | 3 February 2010 - 9:14pm

Michael Mann is a

humourless man and all of his films are boring. Heat is the exception but it's overrated and could have been a lot more entertaining. His original 90 minute TV movie version LA Takedown is better. All of his films would be better if directed by someone else.

The Boat That Rocks is a weirder film than anything David Lynch or Bunel ever even imagined filming. It is the work of a madman. I'm not kidding. Curtis is living in an insane world if he thinks that film reflects real life in anyway.

Tim Burton is a pretty poor director and most of his films are plodding insubstantial messes. Just because he has a Goth sensibility doesn't mean he's good.

The first Star Wars out Kubrick's Stanley Kubrick and out Scott's Ridley Scott's abilities to imagine another world.

Chinatown is the best directed movie ever. "Meticulous but unfussy", I believe critic David Thompson said about it.

Nicole Kidman is incapable of playing anyone on the lower rungs of the social ladder.

2
LOUDspeaker | 3 February 2010 - 2:04pm

I am beginning to agree with you

on Tim Burton. As you grow up you notice that he hasn´t.

0
On The Fence | 3 February 2010 - 5:51pm

Sorry, 'LA Takedown' is

Sorry, 'LA Takedown' is the...incorrect response. It's a good made-for-tv movie, but "Heat" is better written, better acted/cast, better lit. Just...better.

Now...."Red Dragon" is better than "Silence of the Lambs". Discuss.

0
sitheref2409 | 5 February 2010 - 3:52am

LA Takedown is

to the point and short. I prefer it even though it doesn't have as good a bank robbery scene and the cast isn't as showboaty. I no longer own a copy of it so I haven't seen it in years. Heat is good but it's overlong and a bit drab.

Manhunter is a rubbish movie. Horrible 80's stylism and an obscure feeling to the plot. The second half is particularly aimless. Really pretty terrible film. The remake Red Dragon by hack Brett Ratner is better as it has more obvious conventional thrills.

I think I just don't connect with Mann's style. I find his stuff to be cold with too much emphasis on a surface stylism that doesn't look half as good as he, and everyone else, thinks it does. A cold humourless director and not in a good way. He also brings an existentialism to his films that I don't like.

0
LOUDspeaker | 5 February 2010 - 10:40am

Regarding Charlie Gordon's comment

that there are no hard men anymore. Ethan Hawke said something along the lines of...

'It makes me laugh whenever an actor is described as a man's man. Whatever he's doing on screen, he just got up out of a make-up chair.'

1
DavidC | 3 February 2010 - 2:13pm

You can never get enough...

...Basil Rathbone Sherlock Holmes films

...Terry-Thomas

...1960s kitchen sink dramas set in the north.

...Last Orders

And I reckon:

The Railway Children is the biggest weepie

Robin Williams should never cry in films

Memento has the most original plot

You can't go wrong with a Coen Brothers film (apart from The Ladykillers and Intolerable Cruelty)

The award for 'Luvviest' Actor In A Scary Role goes to Richard Attenborough in 10 Rillington Place and/or Brighton Rock

1
Olthwaite | 3 February 2010 - 3:08pm

Oh yes, the most frightening sentence in the English language is

without doubt...

"A heart-warming film starring Robin Williams."

0
Cookieboy | 3 February 2010 - 4:07pm

And the second most?

"A heart-warming film starring Steve Martin."

0
Paul Waring | 3 February 2010 - 5:18pm

No, the scariest phrase in the English language is

....Ricky Gervais.

0
count jim moriarty | 7 February 2010 - 4:49pm

Tarantino

doesn't direct films, he directs scenes.
Jim Carrey is even more annoying than Ricky Gervais.
Will Smith is even more irritating than the aforementioned.
Carry on films virtually ended the British film industry.
Stanley Kubrick is hugely overrated.
Citizen Kane is not the greatest film ever made.

0
Pencilsqueezer | 3 February 2010 - 3:21pm

Citizen Kane

I think - probably is the greatest single movie of all time. The other contenders in my view are "Ran" by Akira Kurosawa and Sergio Leone's "Once Upon a Time in America"

1
simon kumar | 4 February 2010 - 2:04pm

Brian Dennehy

is a great actor who deserves to have been in better movies.

2
Retro Man | 3 February 2010 - 4:02pm

An exploding helicopter rarely ruins a film.

Unless it's CGI.

Many films I have loved now seem all the poorer since giving up herbal substances.

Quentin Tarantino, I suspect, really needs to give up herbal substances. It may do his critical faculties some good.

It is the fault of the movie industry that I have only seen one of this years Oscar nominations for best film, not me.

Viggo Mortenson is starting to look like one of the best actors of his generation. But boy is he annoying in interviews.

TV programmes like The Wire, Battlestar Galactica, Mad Men, The Sopranos etc should be worrying film execs more than they appear to be.

0
ganglesprocket | 3 February 2010 - 4:29pm

Any film that has a trailer

Any film that has a trailer that halfway through has voiceover guy saying '...but then things got better.." cue James brown yelp and then 'I feel good' should be avoided at all costs

Sorry but Denzel or Russell Crowe or Michael Douglas in the 80's = Good 'man' film

Battle of Algiers deserves its reputation and is unlike any other film

Stephen Spielberg has not directed a bad film

Every Star Wars film has something good in it

James Bond films are just not nearly as good as we would hope them to be - in most cases the plots are lazy dull and repetitive

I still get excited by the thought of a new James Bond film

Its worth putting up with bad CGI in order to have the benefit of good CGI

0
tim tunes | 3 February 2010 - 4:44pm

Spielberg

Always, 1941, Hook

0
Charlie Gordon | 3 February 2010 - 5:15pm

I stand my corner

None are bad (but Hook is teeteringly close I'll grant you)

0
tim tunes | 3 February 2010 - 5:21pm

Ahem

Minority Report - laughable
AI - close behind
Colour Purple - cop out

But 1941 and Hook are head and shoulders the worst. Haven't seen Always, and the Wiki description has ensured I won't.

0
Harold Holt | 4 February 2010 - 12:31am

Always

I liked it.

0
Lucas Hare | 4 February 2010 - 9:02pm

After seeing A prophet last night

Anything in film sounds more profound when said in French.

Any location - even a prison hell-hole - looks cooler in a French movie.

And American films set in London must contain one, or indeed all, of the following in an establishing shot:

Big Ben
Tower Bridge
Houses of Parliament
Mini
London Taxi
Bowler-hatted gents

Just to make sure we all know where we are.

Finally, if anything bad happens to an airliner in a Holllywood action film the airline will be a made up non-American one (cf Die Hard 2 for the best example of this).

The bigger the budget the less plausible the 'scientists' will be - think Kelly McGillis in Top Gun vs Colin Pillinger.

0
trevelyan wright | 3 February 2010 - 5:24pm

Robert De Niro

shouldn´t be allowed anywhere near a comedy

1
On The Fence | 3 February 2010 - 5:45pm

Sacrilege!!

Have you never seen Midnight Run?

For shame On The Fence!

0
goatboyuk69 | 3 February 2010 - 8:03pm

Am I alone?

I think DeNiro is very, very funny in Meet The Parents.

0
Lucas Hare | 3 February 2010 - 6:08pm

You're not alone

0
Sven Garlic | 3 February 2010 - 8:19pm

1. American Pie ruined film comedies.

2. Jodie Foster has the sexiest accent I've ever heard. (in Silence of the Lambs- not sure if's her actual one or not?)

3. Will Smith is a good actor.

4. A film that lasts longer than two and a half hours is not worth watching.

5. There has never been a film franchise (e.g Star Wars, Indiana Jones, The Godfather) that doesn't contain at least one terrible film.

6. 'My Girl' is the best thing Dan Akyroyd has been involved in.

0
Tom | 3 February 2010 - 8:22pm

It's wrong to fancy...

...Mrs Incredible from the Incredibles, but I can't help it. I think it's the accent.

Star Wars was great when I was 7, now it's a clunking pile of bad actors hamstrung by bad dialogue.

Sean Connery always plays Sean Connery and he's rubbish

Michael Caine always plays Michael Caine and he's ace.

Beware of any film advertised by a trailer dubbed by that deep-voiced guy.

Beware of any film whose trailer starts "Imagine a wuurrrld..."

Disney can no longer find the plot. They've lost it.

James Cameron's best movie was "The Abyss"

Sylvester Stallone should quit. His "Rocky" series is getting dangerously close to the parody poster in Airplane II

Tom and Jerry from the 40s are insanely violent.

You can't go wrong with a 60-70s war movie.

Shot for shot films based on comic books don't work. I'm looking at you Sin City and Watchmen.

The X-Men look pretty silly "in real life". Spiderman looked OK, though.

0
nicktf | 3 February 2010 - 8:47pm

Gotta disagree a bit.

Sin City is pretty damn good (Watchmen is crap though).
And Jessica Rabbit is sexier than Mrs Incredible.

0
Harold Holt | 4 February 2010 - 12:24am

The former milkman's

case for the defence.
A few films in the 1970s/1980s:

The Offence
The Man Who Would Be King
Robin and Marian
Outland
The Name of the Rose
The Russia House and...yes I love him in it even though there is the oft cited problem of Irish/Scottish accent switching...The Untouchables.

0
Charlie Gordon | 4 February 2010 - 8:13am

Mine

1. The small talk that peppers our lives must not be in a film.
2. Meetings with lawyers, businessmen etc will take about 30 seconds.
3. If a well-known actor appears briefly early on as, say, a mild-mannered librarian, then he/she will be deeply involved later.
4. Never say goodbye at the end of phone call - just hang up.
5. A cop following a sudden "hunch" will spontaneously leave and his hapless partner will lag behind saying "where are you going...?".
6. Monetary transactions with barmen, taxi drivers, hot dog sellers etc must be done without talking to them.
7. A knocked door must be broken down by a shoulder charge after waiting about one second.
8. Apartments in New York must not be well-lit.
9. No-one is to argue about whose round it is.

0
Austin | 3 February 2010 - 10:37pm

Biggest star/main character always survives to the end

or at least the last reel.

Honourable exception - 'Live And Die In LA'. (Spoiler alert if such a thing can happen on a 25 year old movie). When this came out I had no idea who any of the actors were (Willem Defoe, William Peterson), and just as I was getting used to the main good guy getting all the screen time and building the empathy, BAM, he gets topped. One of the most surprising, shocking and refreshing things I've ever seen strangely enough.

0
Harold Holt | 4 February 2010 - 12:36am

And a companion truism

The chief baddie will always be the last baddie standing in any shoot-out, leaving him to be killed (or, on very rare occasions, captured) by the chief goodie. In fact he may have inexplicably survived previous shoot-outs in order to preserve him for his comeuppance in the last reel.

0
Theo Zoffrok | 7 February 2010 - 6:31pm

And more...

Any women that is seen *really* enjoying sex in an American film will be killed off.

Any film advertised with the words, "In the tradition of..." will be crap. This goes double if the sentence ends with "Alfred Hitchcock."

Fathers are rarely evil in American films. Watch the step-fathers, though.

The expression "things aren't as good as they used to be" is rarely true. In films however, it's tragically accurate.

Star Wars is undoubtedly crap. But people who take it (and the mythos) seriously are the real concern.

Films based on TV shows should be avoided.
Modern remakes of classics should be avoided. Modern remakes of films that weren't that good in the first place should be incinerated.

Martin Scorsese is the best living American director. He's past his best but still always worth watching. This is depressing. (Caveat: Coen Brothers.)

Any crap actor that inexplicably puts in a good performance will be unlikely to follow it up with another.

The taste of the public in the first week of a film's release should not be trusted.

The Oscars are nothing but a marketing exercise and always have been.

No-one ever has acne in a Hollywood film.

This list was depressingly easy to put together.

0
Sam Fiddian | 4 February 2010 - 2:52am

The concept of the 'auteur' in cinema is somewhat ridiculous...

as by its very nature it is a collaborative business.

0
Patrick Crowther | 4 February 2010 - 9:30am

Is the one exception to this comedians?

In general I'd agree, but some comedians, such as Chaplin and Woody Allen,dominate their films as writer, director and star to such an extent that I think they could be called "auteurs". I'm not sure about any serious film makers - possibly Clint Eastwood up to a point, though I don't think he writes any of his films.

0
Melville | 4 February 2010 - 12:40pm

Rita Hayworth was the sexiest actress of all time

and Sophia Loren the most beautiful.

0
Steerpike | 4 February 2010 - 9:16pm

Laurel and Hardy

were funnier than Charlie Chaplin

0
Steerpike | 4 February 2010 - 9:18pm

Hale and Pace

were funnier than Charlie Chaplin

1
Paul Waring | 5 February 2010 - 1:52pm

Bill Forsyth makes films

Bill Forsyth makes films that you like - "Comfort and Joy", and especially "Gregory's Girl". I defy anyone with a soul to watch them and not at least generate a feeling of warmth.

"Local Hero" is quirky brilliance.

0
sitheref2409 | 5 February 2010 - 3:58am

Bill Forsyth makes films...

... but it doesn't mean to say I like them. Sorry, I've tried to like 'Gregory's Girl' and 'Local Hero', and they left me absolutely cold. I wish they didn't.

Okay, a couple of mine... there's no such thing as a really bad Michael Caine film. He can make a good film better, he can redeem truly awful films to the point where they're at least tolerable. Even 'Jaws the Revenge' and 'Austin Powers in Goldmember'. Ditto George Clooney, with the exception of 'Batman & Robin'.

Despite their good work in other areas, any Hollywood blockbuster featuring John Malkovich, Robert Carlyle or Christopher Eccleston should be avoided at all costs.

Be very wary of the first film in a potential franchise that already has a subtitle i.e. 'G.I. Joe: The Rise of COBRA', 'Pirates of the Carribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl' and so on.

0
Andrew F | 6 February 2010 - 11:19am

Spot-on about Malkovich et al

As a sidenote, it's an odd little quirk that there are at least two actors who have given wonderful performances playing themselves - not in the sense that some (wrongly) accuse Michael Caine of, but literally playing themselves: John Malkovich is obvious. I'd contend that Julia Roberts is pretty much playing Julia Roberts in Notting Hill, giving one of her best performances.

0
Theo Zoffrok | 7 February 2010 - 11:27am

Julia Roberts

In Oceans Twelve she plays a woman playing a pregnant Julia Roberts.

0
Kjell | 7 February 2010 - 4:23pm

Shane is the best, and other truisms

Shane is the greatest western of all time.

The Ladykillers is the best of the Ealing comedies.

Michael Powell was the greatest British Film director of the 20th century.

James Stewart was the best Hitchcock leading man.

John Wayne didn't really need to act, only to move in front of the camera.

There has never been a truly realistic sex scene in a movie.

Richard Gere was a bad actor.

When the plot involves catching a news item on TV, when the item has finished the actor or actress always switches off the TV. No one does that in real life.

Movie actresses were generally more beautiful in the 40s and 50s than they are now.

The novel is usually better than the movie version.

The 1970s was the golden age of cop and heist thrillers.

At some stage in their lives most men have hit the pause or slow play button during the leg crossing scene in Basic Instinct.

0
rocker43 | 6 February 2010 - 6:37pm

Re: your point

There has never been a truly realistic sex scene in a movie...

have you tried UK Amateurs Doggy Style?

0
Sheev | 7 February 2010 - 5:05pm

and if that doesn't work...

... Ben Dover's Anal Spunkfest.

0
Formbyman | 8 February 2010 - 12:47pm

It was runined for me..

I saw the end coming.

0
Doug B | 9 February 2010 - 1:46pm

People who rate

Akira Kurosawa/Orson Welles as the greatest film directors of all time have never, and will never have a girlfriend/boyfriend.

0
Randlepmcmurphy | 7 February 2010 - 10:25am

well,

I have a wife and two kids - and I think Welles and Kurosawa are pretty decent.

But then again I think Kurostami, Preston Sturges, Hitchcock, Wilder, Howard Hawks, George Cukor, Werner Herzog, the Coens and Tarkovsky - are probably as good - if not better - as presumably did all the girls who went to the BFI screenings I used to attend back in the day.

0
Sheev | 7 February 2010 - 7:46pm

I say ditto

apart from the two kids and I'm not familiar with Kurostami.

0
Carl Parker | 10 February 2010 - 10:11pm

no film longer than 3 hours

no film longer than 3 hours is worth watching
no 'method' actors are any good
any film school that needs a manifesto is hiding behind rhetoric
any books that are 'unfilmable' are unfilmable
guy ritchie is actually a good director
steven soderbergh isn't
the coen brothers best film was blood simple and its been downhill since
french films are not arty just because they don't make sense
the best film ever made is jaws
any british actor given a title isn't worth a fuck
ken loach is a lot more sneery than mike leigh
the last golden age of film was the 90s
apocalypse now is the most right wing film since birth of a nation
any film with flashback sequences are shite
gary oldman is possibly the worst actor ever but nil by mouth is the best british film of the past 25 years
robert carlyle has never made a good film
the first hour of stir crazy is the funniest hour of comedy in film history
the rest of stir crazy is about as funny as schindlers list
schindlers list would've been better as a musical
all musicals are shite

0
WythenshaweLinesman | 7 February 2010 - 6:15pm

robert carlyle has never

robert carlyle has never made a good film

Trainspotting?

0
nicktf | 8 February 2010 - 7:59pm

AndrewF wrote:

"... there's no such thing as a really bad Michael Caine film."

You've obviously never seen 'The Hand.'

0
Billybob Dylan | 7 February 2010 - 7:37pm

Or Blame It On Rio

My God that's terrible. Imagine Michael Caine phoning in his performance in a Rio-based sex comedy in which he's having it off with his best mate's teenaged daughter. See?

0
Theo Zoffrok | 8 February 2010 - 11:16pm

This could be its own thread...

or Bullseye
or Blue Ice
or the Sleuth and Get Carter remakes

0
Charlie Gordon | 9 February 2010 - 8:29am

I'll freely admit...

... I haven't seen 'The Hand', but I've seen all (or parts of) the rest, and I don't think any of them are irredeemable. Actually, I loved the 'Sleuth' remake.

0
Andrew F | 10 February 2010 - 8:38pm

There Will Be Blood

is terrible.

Any film with Jeff Bridges in it is worth a look.

Hollywood remakes of European films are always awful.

Baz Luhrmann hasn't made a good movie since 'Strictly Ballroom.'

Directors get too much credit.

Editors are the great unsung talents of the film world.

0
DavidC | 10 February 2010 - 8:42am

Excellent!

I haven't seen There Will Be Blood, but I have a very strong conviction that I'd hate it, given that Magnolia was sheer torture - in fact I don't know to this day how I managed to stay to the end. I agree about Jeff Bridges, for the most part. However, see your third truism: JB was the villain in the soul-suckingly abysmal Hollywood remake of The Vanishing, and went down with the ship, no one was saved.

Baz Luhrman? I enjoyed Romeo and Juliet too, though even then there were hints of the hubris and self-aggrandisement to come. Moulin Rouge was the first film I ever walked out of. And Australia looked too scary to go near.

Where would Martin Scorcese be without Thelma Shoonmaker? In fairness, he has always given her a lot of credit for the feel and snap of his films.

0
Theo Zoffrok | 10 February 2010 - 9:58am

Point taken

on The Vanishing.

0
DavidC | 10 February 2010 - 10:37am

The much maligned studio system

produced the best films ever made.

Yes, the era of independents of the early 70s - Coppola, Scorsese, Casavetes et al - made some iconic and powerful films - and, of course, sex and violence became intrinsic and explicit - but nothing that matched the sophistication, ingenuity and wit of a "Double Indemnity" or a "Gilda" or a "White Heat".

0
Sheev | 10 February 2010 - 9:31pm

Who maligns

the studio system of the 40's? When people dismiss the studios they are referring to the conglomerate owned studios of the 70's onwards, surely? Big difference.

0
LOUDspeaker | 11 February 2010 - 2:22pm

it was maligned

because it was seen as restrictive of talent, of the range of movies that were made and because it owned the means of distribution. Seven or eight major companies owned the stars, the directors, producers, writers and the movie theaters themselves.

It broke down, or rather imploded due to irresistible internal agitation by the talent, the advent of empowering technologies and changing economic circumstances.

Rather like the much maligned record companies. Yet one produced the best films ever made and the other the best records.

0
Sheev | 11 February 2010 - 10:09pm
Privacy Statement    ©  2006 - 2010 Development Hell Ltd