Controversial Cinema-Related Opinions

[Ruined]

I'm a fan of the entire franchise and hate the theme song as much as anyone, but Star Trek: Enterprise is the best TV series of the bunch, imho.

Heh, isn't that theme sung by Rod Stewart? Forgot about that...

Oliver Stone is another director who left his best work in the 80's. Man, why make a sequel to Wall Street? Further, "Savages" was such crap. Wow.

Also, as a genre, "Period Pieces/Merchant Ivory fims" bore the hell out of me. I don't think I've successfully made it through any of those.

I dislike pretty much everything David Lynch has done. From miniature old people, to "The Wizard of Oz" metaphors: Another guy who seems like he merely wants to be weird for its own sake.

[Frozen Beach]

I dislike pretty much everything David Lynch has done. From miniature old people, to "The Wizard of Oz" metaphors: Another guy who seems like he merely wants to be weird for its own sake.

That's a pretty generic criticism. David Lynch pretty much makes moving paintings.

[Ruined]

That's a pretty generic criticism. David Lynch pretty much makes moving paintings.

Eh, couldn't all movies be described as "moving painting?" Talk about "generic criticism."

Also, just because someone's personality is "weird," doesn't make it good or equate to genius. More often, than not, people often defense Lynch by simply stating, "you don't get it." So what if he has a weird personality? It doesn't mean his "vision" is good or even "deep." Too many times, critics try to put meaning into something that simply has no meaning: Sometimes an odd lady holding a log is simply an odd lady holding a log. Nothing beyond that...

[Magtig]

Also, just because someone's personality is "weird," doesn't make it good or equate to genius.

Yes, but you implied it was disingenuous.

More often, than not, people often defense Lynch by simply stating, "you don't get it."

What are we some generalized mass to you? How about addressing the actual statements and people in this thread instead of whatever caricatures are in your head.

Too many times, critics try to put meaning into something that simply has no meaning: Sometimes an odd lady holding a log is simply an odd lady holding a log. Nothing beyond that...

Yeah, nothing beyond that except her late husband being a lumberjack who found the gateways to the white and black lodges in the woods where he was said to have "met the devil" and a deputy that said the wood in the forest was full of spirits.

Two simple stories in which his "personality" did not overshadow.

There you go again; why the fuck is personality in quotes? Your myopic assessment of legitimacy paints anything you don't like as fake or shallow.

[Ruined]

Yes, but you implied it was disingenuous.


What are we some generalized mass to you? How about addressing the actual statements and people in this thread instead of whatever caricatures are in your head.


Yeah, nothing beyond that except her late husband being a lumberjack who found the gateways to the white and black lodges in the woods where he was said to have "met the devil" and a deputy that said the wood in the forest was full of spirits.


There you go again; why the fuck is personality in quotes? Your myopic assessment of legitimacy paints anything you don't like as fake or shallow.

You noted earlier that Lynch was "being himself," which is one's "personality" right? You used those words, not me. So, I wasn't being condescending or trying insult you. I merely was pointing out that particular point. I don't need to provide an extensive dissertation, going line-by-line, countering all of your points. I'm not looking to convince or be convinced. I'm merely stating my opinion and will defend it however I might. Hell, some people merely state that they liked "x" movie and that was it. There was no demand to make them defend their opinion. By the way, how do you know whether or not Lynch is "being himself?" Do you know him personally? How do you know when it's genuine and when it's contrived? You can't really know; therefore, all you can do is opine. That is what I did: His movies, IN MY OPINION, seem contrived and trying too hard to be weird for its own sake. If you disagree, fine; no skin off my back. However, when you start getting into a Director's actual mind and actual intent, you begin to go off the reservation. Your post made a definitive statement as if it were fact; how the hell do you know? At most, a more accurate statement would be "I believe" or "Maybe." But to make statements about Lynch's state of mind, as fact, is a baseless argument.

[Corvus T. Cosmonaut]

...how do you know whether or not Lynch is "being himself?" Do you know him personally? How do you know when it's genuine and when it's contrived?

Not to get into an epistemological debate about it, but that he's been pretty consistently himself back through Eraserhead and his earlier short works, that (as Hulk above mentioned) he maintains a sort of consistent through-line that shows even in the more 'conventional' projects, and that the people who've worked with him in any capacity corroborate his essential weirdness, provides a pretty good basis.

However, when you start getting into a Director's actual mind and actual intent, you begin to go off the reservation.

That you're couching it in terms of "it seems" doesn't change that this is exactly what you've been doing.

[Corvus T. Cosmonaut]

I never got what everyone hated so much about that one versus liked about the others.

I think some people felt like it had defied some kind of inner consistency, and for a lot of people the aliens were a bridge too far. I don't know why people respond to aliens as being too far out while the supernatural religious stuff is fine (actually, I do know why, and it's silly), but that seems to be one of the dominant complaints. Aside from that, the jungle car action sequence was too blue-screened and ridiculous, even by Jones standards, and the blue-screen/CGI stuff throughout generally just gave it a sort of uneasy Vaseline quality that's hard to describe and even harder to swallow.

I enjoyed the original trilogy for mindless fun; nothing original, though.

Well, going back to them now they don't feel that way, but the Indiana Jones were pretty original and startling when they were released. The style was old, from the adventure serials of like the 1930s, but the way it was implemented and brought to screen was new. Between Spielberg with Jones and Jaws and Lucas with Star Wars the whole summer blockbuster thing and all the ramifications of that business model were created.