[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: moulin rouge
Sorry, I going to reply from this address because theey are deleting my
school one.
well doesn't that just sum up what's wrong with moview reviewers.
maybe that's why no one gives a crap what they say...
Well, you certainly have that ability to ignore what reviewers say. First of
all, I should point out the difference between a reviewer and a true critic.
Most reviewers from papers, magazines, and TV have no formal training in
film, aesthetics, etc. This must be taken into account when one terms
someone writing about film as a critic or a reviewer.
I am a critic. (Feel free to ignore what I say, I know most do)
> woah, geez! mayhaps we're jumping a little harshly on a film that actually
has the
guts to have a strong artistic aesthetic different from what we're generally
used to?
Actually, since Tarantino and films lik "El Mariachi" This sort of story
telling has been catching on. Furthermore, since R&J it has been an industry
standard for teen/young adult films. So I would hardly call his aesthetic
different per se. Different from the Hollywood aka action film, romantic
comedy, sure, but a new aesthetic style, I kinda doubt it. This sort of
perspectival and fast paced editing has actually been employed since Fellini
in the 60s, but that is neither here nor there.
> luhrman may have a fondness for unhappy endings, but it's a little unfair
> to say that the movie is unpredictable because he directed it. of his two
> most popular films up until now, one had a quite happy ending, complete
with a
> generally optimistic outlook on life. i mean, the entire stadium full of
> people, including the 'bad guys', get up and dance to 'love is in the air'
> at the end of strictly ballroom. so i think that's a little unfair to say
> that it's predictable because it's luhrman.
>
> and not only that, but r&j is by default depressing, and orpheus, which
> moulin is based on, is also a bit of unhappy mythology. i don't
understand
> how you can blame this on luhrman, unless perhaps i've misunderstood you.
> (which i hope i have.
No, I think you understood me correctly, but I can link this sort of ending
to Luhrman because from the three pieces that he has made, two of them have
had a very strong downward bent to them. This would not be such an issue of
him as the "author" of the piece if he hadn't also written and produced
"Moulin Rouge" and "R&J" These are the topics that he chooses to work on.
Therefore, one can begin to attribute certain trends with his work. Francis
Ford Coppola also made "Jack", but i would say that that film holds as much
of him as a director as the "Godfather"s or "Apocalypse Now" It seems to me,
yes it is my opinion, that he likes these stories of a more melancholy
nature. "Strictly Ballroom" was the exception of his work at least so far.
> how about a little open-mindedness here? granted, i did just see knight's
> tale, which was horribly awful. but in that case there was no strong
theme
> whatsoever, but to have a general medieaval aesthetic blended with a
general
> modern glam-rock cool. it was overall uneducated and vague. because of
> that, when the modern music was thrown in, it felt just that- 'thrown in.'
> and it was included in it's original entirety. on the other hand, luhrman
> and his team are practically defined by their strong artistic ideas. they
> spend years in the creative process for one film, and think through all
the
> details well before hand. it's a little juvenile to say it's bad because
it
> includes modern music. it's different. why not trust a little to
artistic
> integrity, and see what comes out of it.
You have a point, but you can spend years on the artistic process and come up
with myriads of prior examples and reference points, but like my friend's BFA
show in which he tried to use rearrangements of living room furniture as a
performance art piece, it is what comes out that is important. Also in
reference to the process of adding modern popular music to period pieces, I
will alter my general opinion when I see one that is done well. I've seen a
few that have tried including Branaugh's "Love's Labour Lost," but have never
seen a film that took a specific time period and succesfully integrated
modern pop music into, especially not to the degree with which "Moulin Rouge"
relies on such an integrate for its artistic message.
>
it isn't as though the period -outside of the music- is defined. it is
set
> at the moulin rouge during the turn of the century, but that's where it
> ends. costumes, sets, choreography- nothing is dead set on paris 1899.
> instead, luhrman has made use of his same 'red curtain' style in moulin
> rouge as he used in strictly ballroom and romeo + juliet.
You are right, but I am saying that regardless of his intent that it does not
integrate.
> he's going for ambience, not accuracy- and anyone who knew shakespeare at
all >and saw r&j would know that. it might have been bad shakespeare, but
it was a >great film.
Well, first off, people should take a lot of time before they term anything a
"great film". It was a good movie, and I am acquainted with both Shakespeare
and Luhrman's version. What made thhat integrate well was his fusion of the
lines straight from the play with his over-the-top imagery. This is not
accomplished in "Moulin Rouge." Part of it might be that the background
material is not as accessible or that maybe it gets lost in the dance numbers.
ambience conveyed what a lot of modern folks don't want to spend
the time to gather from dialogue.
Ambiance can do this, but if the imagery is tooo complicated and too hectic,
then the intent gets lost in the details, and the audience is left with
confusion. Now, if confusion alternated with Ewan and Nicole's relationship
is what Luhrman intended, then he succeeded, but i doubt this would allow it
to be labeled as a great film.
moulin might be bad history,
I'm not even trying to get into it's history whatsoever.
but it certainly looks like a fantastic new world of fiction. luhrman's
using a
storytelling device with this method of over the top eye-candy and twisted
modern
music.so what if it sounds weird, give it a chance, mister.
I gave it a chance. I went and saw it last night. You are right. It is eye
candy. It is not entering new worlds of fiction as it both relies on
Orpheus, although I saw markedly little resemblence, and already popular
modern music. I think that Luhrman can be a supremely talented director. I
think that in this film he has lifted whole sections of editing from R&J and
reused it. I will have to wait to get a copy before i can tell for sure, but
this does not strike me as a real cutting edge type of filmmaking. Luhrman
is basically a collage artist who uses film as his medium, and he knows how
to attract his audience. If you like Luhrman, you might like the film.
However if you are looking for the depth of character and chemistry that he
brings out in Strictly Ballroom, then forget it. I like MacGregor and Kidman
on their own, but for me, it just didn't work.
> >In this case, added
> >to the fact that neither Ewan nor Nicole actually sing,
>
> (hoping you mean that they aren't professional singers- because they do
> actually do their own singing in this film.) again, just give them a
chance.
> from what i'm told, they do pretty well.
Ok, you might be right. i was talking about a rumor that they had to retape
a great quantity of Kidman's vocals in post-production. I never heard
confirmation. Also, the sound in my theater might have been a bit out of
sync or the sound editors should be shot because they are WAY off a few of
the times that I saw it.
> i guess i'm just appalled that a film reviewer would say this. i haven's
> seen the film, either, but i know better than to trash luhrman before
> giving him a chance. i also know that the only people i know who dislike
>luhrman films are the same people who love films of the 'big momma's
house' ilk
and who literally don't know what subtitles are. (sorry if i'm
offending,
> here.)
Well, that was a hugely generalized statement. Bigger than even many of
mine. I didn't like Big Momma's House although at least it didn't pretend
that it was more than it was. I would not put Luhrman on the cutting edge of
modern filmmaking. He is not a Hitchcock or Preminger or Scorsese or Coppola
or Fellini or Kurosawa (see I know what subtitles are)
at any rate, luhrman is staying true to a genuine artistic impulse, and
anyone who can do that and still get publicity might be worth a chance.
He does have an artistic impulse, but I'm afraid that he doesn't always use
it to the best effect rather than the effect that most pleases the
publicists. This film shows a steady movement of Luhrman away from interest
in the characters themselves and the truth of the plot and more and more
interest in the process.
> what kind of ego can you have to tromp on art so?
Well, it's not really my ego speaking. Film is my job. It is what I study
and what I write about. I was merely offering my opinion. I do not mean it
to be some omniscient end all and be all of film, but I feel that many people
today are thrilled to praise every new crazed film that uses fast editing and
slick effects, etc.
> i might not care for warhol's aesthetic, but i'm willing to recognize that
he's a >fantastic artist, and i'm sure as heck not going to tell people to
avoid him at all
> costs.
I understand what you are saying, and you have a good point. However as much
as you might respect Warhol, you might tell someone to avoid praising him as
THE artistic genius of the latter twentieth century, although he might be
that, and you might tell them not to spend $10 to go to an exhibit when they
might see something else. However, you are right. My "avoid at all costs"
statement was much too strong, having seen the film. If you want to see two
hours of MTV video-type film with little real literary conflict of character
or motivation, then you will enjoy this film. I must admit, having seen it
now, that it looks good. It is impressive, but once you peel off the veneer,
I just don't see that you are left with more than particleboard.
Steve Swanson
Follow-Ups: