Well, here I go with another tangent, but since you bright up Cinema Paradiso...
My all time favorite films are (for me) "the four C's"...Casablanca, Citizen Kane, City Lights and Cinema Paradiso. I will never forget seeing Cinema Paradiso in Washington DC, at the AFI. It was a couple years after the release and I hadn't seen it since the original run so I jumped at the chance to see the AFI screening. I sat next to my wife (at the time) and, about 15 minutes before the end of the movie, I began sobbing like a baby. I had just remembered that the scene withe the kisses was coming up and it shattered me. What a wonderful, wonderful moment in film. I honestly don't know if there is a better moment in film then the kissing reel in Cinema Paradiso. Probably many equal, but maybe none better. Regards, Doug Taylor Sent via mobile device ________________________________ From: Toochis Morin<mailto:fly...@pacbell.net> Sent: 3/2/2013 6:32 PM To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU<mailto:MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU> Subject: Re: [MOPO] OT - Why Steven Spielberg Is A Loser In Hollywood. Hi David Great post! I would also like to add to Billy Wilder WILLIAM WYLER. What a career and so much variety! BEN HUR is amazing as is ROMAN HOLIDAY and THE COLLECTOR and so many more. They are remaking BEN HUR. Toochis Sent from my iPhone On Mar 2, 2013, at 1:31 PM, David Kusumoto <davidmkusum...@hotmail.com> wrote: > * Wow! A lot of well-written posts on this thread. > > * I was talking to my wife about "Lincoln" last night and she pointedly > reminded me that some of her friends thought "Lincoln" was dull-dull-dull - > and I was forced to confess that my intense interest in "Lincoln" was related > to my background in intl. political science and journalism. No, she insists, > not everyone will like "Lincoln" because it's a talky picture lacking a > strong emotional pull for general audiences. It has no action scenes except > during its very flawed beginning. Hence many viewers, she said, will > strongly disagree with my view that it's a "classic." Well, it was > emotionally engaging to me even though I concede that what you bring to the > table matters and I'm clearly biased. And Doug rightly says, "to each his > own." > > * Meanwhile, I think Phil's comment about "Shakespeare in Love" winning Best > Picture (1998) - as being equivalent to "Argo's" win over "Lincoln" - is > funny because I thought the same, but I wasn't going to go "there" because > since 1998, I have been defending "Private Ryan" to a large group of mostly > international movie fans who continue to hate this film with a passion > because of its American-centric story-line and its "teary and manipulative" > bookends - despite "Ryan's" cinematic breakthroughs, i.e., the spectacular > staging of the brutal D-Day landing on Omaha Beach, the slower shutter speeds > of the battle scenes and the desaturated colors of the entire picture. I > don't think "Argo's" win was the same kind of "robbery" nor will generate the > hue and cry that "Shakespeare in Love" did when Weinstein campaigned heavily > to snare the Best Picture award from "Ryan," the latter a film that critics > in both the U.K. and the U.S. asserted - at the time - represented a > milestone in the art of film. > > * As far as Spielberg himself - Adrian and I have had a friendly debate going > on about him for more than 12 years I think. We're never going to change > each other's minds and I agree Spielberg has a tendency to > over-sentimentalize his pictures and to manipulate his audiences with his > brand of storytelling. But while I concede that he is not a perfect director > and has turned out a large share of duds, I will also argue that Spielberg > has enough sterling accomplishments on his resume, more than 1 or 2 films I > would argue - to earn a glorified place in the history of cinema. The fact > that I even have to defend the man after more than 40 years is a testament to > the polarizing figure he remains to movie fans - and to people working in the > industry. No, he is not Martin Scorsese (but have you seen the quality of > Scorsese's output lately?) - but Spielberg is still, despite his faults, > constitutionally incapable of turning out a technically inept film. It was > Orson Welles who told Peter Bogdanovich that you don't need a lot of > masterpieces to be canonized in film history, that "you only need one." And > yet "Citizen Kane" clearly isn't for anyone nor does it tug at everyone's > heart strings. Spielberg's body of work, in my view, has surpassed a lot of > other directors by a country mile. > > * Finally, there's a third "still living" director who is an all-time fave of > mine - who I forgot to mention - who I feel has been treated MORE EGREGIOUSLY > than Spielberg. And that's Brit director Ridley Scott. Yes, he's churned > out a few duds, but so has every legendary director like Billy Wilder. > Ridley Scott has had a wonderful career spanning multiple genres! He's the > "old man" of group and still Oscar eludes him. Any man, like Spielberg, who > can produce even 2-3 "greats" amid a long list of duds - can be forgiven, in > my book, for those duds. And Scott is a dynamic director who is LONG > OVERDUE. Yes, the Oscars are frivolous and "irrelevant," but if you win one, > it's always in the first line in EVERY obituary you read about the passing of > someone in the industry. -d. > > From: douglasbtay...@hotmail.com > To: davidmkusum...@hotmail.com; MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > Subject: RE: [MOPO] OT - Why Steven Spielberg Is A Loser In Hollywood. > Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2013 00:55:34 -0500 > > David, > > I always enjoy your comments and posts. > > I don’t think it was a great year for films, although it seems we rarely have > great years anymore, consequently our standards may have dropped a bit. > Having said that, the film quality this year may have actually been above the > recent average. > > Certainly it was a magnificent year for individual performances. Wow, what > choices! It was impossible to pick best actor or actress because there were > so many deserving nominees. > > For Director, I happen to think Ang Lee was the correct choice. What a > vision he had to have to make that film. > > Regarding Silver Linings, it reminded me of Goodbye Girl. Romantic comedies > will never really stand up against an “amazing” drama, but Linings and > Goodbye Girl both combined intelligent scripts with outstanding performances > that resulting in Best Picture nominations. Neither won, or probably > deserved to win, but both are at the highest and most intelligent levels of > the genre. > > Back to Lincoln, I left the film thinking it was very interesting to get a > view of what may have really been happening during that important time in our > history, but feeling the film was flat. Interesting, spectacular > cinematography, incredible performances by DDL and Spader, but surprisingly > little energy and little impact on me. > > Interestingly, I was in Manila a few weeks ago for meetings. One of our > employees, Boris, had flown from his home in Hungary to attend our meetings > in Manila. He was born and raised behind the iron curtain and was educated > in the Soviet system. Boris is decidedly socialist and skeptical of > everything American. I had him attend meetings with me in Orlando a year or > so ago and I took all our group to dinner at a Cuban/Spanish fusion > restaurant called “Colombia”. It was located at the idyllic, former Disney, > community called Celebration. Boris spent the entire evening asking to see > the “ghettos”. “I’ve read my whole life about the ghettos in the US and I > want to see them. Where are they?” > > Anyway, in Manila I asked Boris how his flight was coming over and he said “I > watched Lincoln.” I asked what he thought of it and he said he actually > hadn’t watched because when it began with the scene of Lincoln talking to the > two soldiers he found it so contrived that he couldn’t watch anymore. > > Of course, I did watch more but his comment resonated with me and was > actually something I had felt about the film but hadn’t been able to > articulate. For me, there were several moments that made me feel that way. > > To each his own, I guess. In the end, I feel fortunate to have so many hours > of enjoyment from movies at all…good or great. > > Regards > > DBT > Profile > > CC: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > From: fly...@pacbell.net > Subject: Re: [MOPO] OT - Why Steven Spielberg Is A Loser In Hollywood. > Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 21:32:42 -0800 > To: davidmkusum...@hotmail.com > > I'm with you David. One person who got robbed during the award season was > Michael Pena for END OF WATCH. > I was glad to see Matthew McConaughey (sp?!!!) win a Spirit Award for best > supporting actor in MAGIC MIKE. He was great!! > Toochis > > Sent from my iPhone > Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 19:37:20 -0800 > From: davidmkusum...@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: OT - Why Steven Spielberg Is A Loser In Hollywood. > To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > > Yes, I agree, Doug. In my first public post about "Lincoln" in late December > - I noted the picture does have a few "self consciously noble moments," and > that scene you mention is the most obvious. But after that, I really got > into the dialogue, the horse-trading, the political shrewdness of Lincoln > trying desperately to get the 13th Amendment passed before the end of the > Civil War. Lincoln the man (vs. the legend) - truly "came alive" in DDL's > perf, and I forgot about DDL after awhile. "Silver Linings Playbook" was > easily the most "crowd pleasing" of the nominees, as gales of laughter could > be heard from start-to-finish at the screening I attended. I would not have > been too disappointed if "Playbook" had won, but I really felt the "Ben > Affleck-George Clooney" factor, combined with Affleck being snubbed as best > director - were heavily responsible for "Argo's" win at the expense of all of > the other nominees for Best Picture. -d. > Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 22:07:09 -0500 > From: douglasbtay...@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: OT - Why Steven Spielberg Is A Loser In Hollywood. > To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > > I thought Silver Linings was Best Picture, followed by Argo. Lincoln would > have been 3-5 on my ballot. > > DDL and Spader were great, but I found the film uninspired and a bit > manipulative from the opening scene of the conversation between Lincoln and > the two soldiers. > > Regards > > DBT > > Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 20:57:29 -0600 > From: ki...@movieart.net > Subject: Re: OT - Why Steven Spielberg Is A Loser In Hollywood. > To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU > > I responded to David K., but I'll go ahead a post to the entire list. I > agree with David and Franc on this one entirely. I'm not what anyone would > characterize as a huge Spielberg fan, although I recognize his enormous > accomplishments in purveying popular films. In my book he has had several > particularly satisfying films - SCHINDLER'S LIST, E.T., and a few others. > But LINCOLN is an extraordinary film driven by an extraordinary script > adapted from an extraordinary book with extraordinary performances. Is that > enough "extraordinaries" fer ya? I enjoyed ARGO; it was entertaining. But > clearly Spielberg and company were robbed. I think the sorry decision to > have 9 best picture nominations is going to produce what I'll bet are > (regrettably) "plurality" decisions like this one. > > I thank Steven Spielberg for bringing together this great pool of talent and > leaving us with a picture that generations will enjoy again and again. > > Kirby McDaniel > www.movieart.n 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.
