Well, I was going to continue the Ralph Bakshi discussion - which has erupted into the lengthiest and perhaps most contentious comment section in the year-plus history of the Rambler, but now I'm thoroughly exhausted by the topic. The story so far: I was wrong to make fun of Fire and Ice because it's just a misfire by a great American filmmaker, but not a great enough filmmaker to treat his misfires as if they're worth commenting on as if he were a real filmmaker on the order of Michael Cimino. Plus, Grindhouse sucked, except perhaps it rocked instead. Also, if you happen to like any film that anyone else ever disliked, you've lost the authority to declaim on the merits of any other film.
I think that roughly sums it up.
Now I know why Pauline Kael was so famously cranky. Thank God the poor woman didn't live to see the era of the comments thread.
D.
10 comments:
Hey man, it's your blog... don't feel bad...
Well, yes - that's my point...
You were not wrong to make fun of it. It was your scorched-earth, leave-no-survivor's, decontextualized approach that irritated me, because Ralph Bakshi is an important guy to me.
I do not consider him a great american filmmaker. I consider him an animator guy who made some cool films in the 70s.
I thought it was a good debate we had. You know, I actually do read your blog everyday. And you got a reaction out of me with that post.
So, to your "point," I'm a little confused. You have a right to say what you say, but you don't really feel like dealing with anyone who questions or challenges you on what you say?
You misunderstand - I'm not bothered or offended or even put out. There's just a point where it became silly to me - a bunch of white geeks arguing over the semantics of just why a lousy film was lousy.
Honestly? I had nothing more to say on the subject, so the new entry was about having nothing more to say. Hopefully, in a humorous way, but I'm guessing no-one is picking up on the humor.
For the record, I don't edit, moderate or delete comments, and any and all are free to post whatever they want. Post away - just don't expect me to remain in the conversation once it gets past a point where I don't think I have anything to contribute. That's how I behave on every message board - my absence just seems more noticeable when it's on my own blog.
Maybe at some point I should clarify my own self-imposed rules regarding this blog, because that may be where the disconnect is happening for you. In the meantime, here's a somewhat nascent version, from last May.
http://copper-man.net/2007/05/echo-chamber.html
D.
I'm glad you're not put out. It _was_ silly. It was a silly post to begin with... and I took exception to it, which was a bored office worker thing to do, I'll admit... worse things happen in this world... certainly in the blogosphere...
I agree with what John said about writing today, how Tarantino who's heralded as one of the premier writers out there, to me is just BARELY above evin Smith amateur hour horse puckey.
To add my 2 cents on Bakshi... always horrible. I remember going to see LOTR in the theater and having to endure my father's grimace of pain throughout the entire film... I didn't blame him, it was horrible.. Although, the songs weren't half bad.
There was just something so half assed about the rotoscope...
Fritz the Cat is a mess, although mildly interesting even if it's merely as some sort of 70s time capsule... American pop is an overwrought pile of muddy excrement. Why did that even need to be a cartoon?
Frazeta.. The guy's obviously a genius in what he was able to do, just physically... After his stroke, to switch hands and actually create art. That alone is pretty impressive.
I didn't see American Pop until I was in my late 20's, and I did like it - I remember it was pretty legendary for you in our teens.
I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that as films, the Rankin/Bass "Return of the King" may actually have a leg up on Bakshi's LOTR - although it's been a long time since I've seen either.
Where there's a whip... there's a way.
D.
I liked the Rankin and Bass version of the Hobbit..
chiming in late, but since you mentioned grindhouse...
"I keep hearing alternate reviews of Grindhouse. Some say Planet Terror is genius and Death Proof sucks."
yes, that sounds accurate to me - "death proof" was 90 minutes of incessant meaningless chatter with VERY little violent payoff. "planet terror" had lots of bloody fake violence, retardedly bad zingers, cheesy catchphrases, terrible prosthetics, a completely implausable and overly dramatic ending... just such cheesetastic brilliance. THIS is what you go to see "grindhouse" for. and the fake trailers alone were almost worth the cost of admission. but "death proof" actually was one of two films i've ever seen in my life that made me truly say, "i want those hours of my life back."
i should bring planet terror to our next rehearsal for you to borrow - you should take it home and watch it - late, and drunk.
I haven't seen a Rodriguez film that I've yet liked - I may be immune to him, although I certainly respect him.
D.
Post a Comment