RiffTrax Forum

General Discussion => Movie Talk => Topic started by: Dr.Impossible on November 01, 2006, 01:04:42 PM

Title: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 01, 2006, 01:04:42 PM
http://www.cracked.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1215 (http://www.cracked.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1215)

Aww.... I liked Rushmore and Being John Malkovich. Haven't seen most of the others, though I agree with his assessment of Annie Hall.

I've always found criticism of comedies to be a strange thing. You either laugh or you don't, and it seems like Mike has taken some comedies people actually laugh at and said "You're faking it!"

I also disagree with the idea that strangeness isn't in and of itself funny. I'm a big fan of absurdity. Mike proved that absurdity is inherently funny with his reference to "the guy in the pajamas who stands on the corner near my house beating on an empty paint can with a stick and screaming 'The sonova bitchin? donkeys stole my whistle!'" That's pretty much just strange and quite funny. That's why I laughed so hard at Sam Elliot's character in Big Lebowski.

Oh well. Anyone else still think Rushmore was a good movie?
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Shinigami on November 01, 2006, 01:16:58 PM
Actually, Mike's assesment was pretty spot on.  While several of those movies are entertaining, NONE of them are funny.  Rushmore is a terrible movie.  It's only real appeal is its campy absurdity, which does not a movie make.  In fact, I would like to personally thank Mike for finally saying the Rushmore sucks.  I felt like I was alone in the world.  You sir have vindicated me.

Dr. Strangelove is a good movie, but I have never considered it a comedy.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: SmilinJackRoss on November 01, 2006, 01:23:53 PM
Rushmore is a great movie, and it is not because it is singularily strange.  It is strange, but it is also very funny, in a wry, off-center way.  The main character's persona is developed to fine point, and then we get to see him squirm within a system meant to cage him when he just cannot be caged.  And that uncomfortable predicament, watching teachers, students, and parents wrestle with him, trying to push this square peg into their round hole, can be a very funny thing.

Strange does not equal funny.  But if you have a good movie buried in a strange one, it's still a good movie.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Shinigami on November 01, 2006, 01:26:15 PM
Rushmore is a great movie, and it is not because it is singularily strange.  It is strange, but it is also very funny, in a wry, off-center way.  The main character's persona is developed to fine point, and then we get to see him squirm within a system meant to cage him when he just cannot be caged.  And that uncomfortable predicament, watching teachers, students, and parents wrestle with him, trying to push this square peg into their round hole, can be a very funny thing.

Strange does not equal funny.  But if you have a good movie buried in a strange one, it's still a good movie.

Isn't that precisely the snobbiness Mike was talking about?
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 01, 2006, 01:30:00 PM
Rushmore is a great movie, and it is not because it is singularily strange.  It is strange, but it is also very funny, in a wry, off-center way.  The main character's persona is developed to fine point, and then we get to see him squirm within a system meant to cage him when he just cannot be caged.  And that uncomfortable predicament, watching teachers, students, and parents wrestle with him, trying to push this square peg into their round hole, can be a very funny thing.

Strange does not equal funny.  But if you have a good movie buried in a strange one, it's still a good movie.

Isn't that precisely the snobbiness Mike was talking about?

No, this is: "Pffft, you just don't GET it. I get it though and that makes me better."
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: SmilinJackRoss on November 01, 2006, 01:31:20 PM

Isn't that precisely the snobbiness Mike was talking about?

I think if you try to "define" comedy, and have two categories of "FUNNY" and "NOT FUNNY", you are already missing the point.

It's not snobbiness to think that something is funny.  The comedy in Rushmore I find more insightful and thoughtful than, lets say Ace Ventura (A movie I also love).  Those two movies are both funny to me, but in completely different ways.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Cibernético II on November 01, 2006, 01:35:15 PM
Sam Elliot's character in the Big Lebowski wasn't strange. He was just the narrator, he was the least strange  character in the movie.

Right on , Mike.  I agree with him 100% on his article. I think all of Woody Allen's movies are self-stroking and completely unfunny. I liked Rushmore, I think ita movie worth watching, but I didn't think it was very funny. But I HATE Bill Murray's other dry comedy movies that are kinda in the same vein. The Life Aquatic made me want to drown myself. It was like some kind of wierd unhumor from outer space
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 01, 2006, 01:40:13 PM
Sam Elliot's character in the Big Lebowski wasn't strange. He was just the narrator, he was the least strange  character in the movie.

He was strange (or absurd, if you will) because he was out of time and out of place. He was an old west cowboy in 1990's california. Also he had kind of a wholesome tone, which contrasted amusingly to the other characters in the movie.

Maybe it's more ironic than absurd? But still absurd.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Shinigami on November 01, 2006, 01:42:13 PM
Sam Elliot's character in the Big Lebowski wasn't strange. He was just the narrator, he was the least strange  character in the movie.

He was strange (or absurd, if you will) because he was out of time and out of place. He was an old west cowboy in 1990's california. Also he had kind of a wholesome tone, which contrasted to the movie.

Maybe it's more ironic than absurd? But still absurd.

He just wanted to sell some BEEF
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: BBQ Platypus on November 01, 2006, 01:50:14 PM
Sam Elliot's character in the Big Lebowski wasn't strange. He was just the narrator, he was the least strange  character in the movie.

Right on , Mike.  I agree with him 100% on his article. I think all of Woody Allen's movies are self-stroking and completely unfunny. I liked Rushmore, I think ita movie worth watching, but I didn't think it was very funny. But I HATE Bill Murray's other dry comedy movies that are kinda in the same vein. The Life Aquatic made me want to drown myself. It was like some kind of wierd unhumor from outer space

I felt the same way about "I Heart Huckabees."  More like "I FART SUCK-abees!" (hehe - get it?)  Or "I Heart Myself so Much That I Masturbate in Front of a Mirror - A Humorless Tribute to Whiny Solipsism."
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Joe Don Faker on November 01, 2006, 01:55:35 PM
While I do like a couple of these movies, Mike's criticisms are pretty well-founded, I thought.

1.  Diner.  No opinion from me -- but Mike continues the vendetta against Ruth Gordon, equating her with an orangutan as he did in Megacheese, presumably because he was once forced to imagine the aged Gordon consummating her relationship with the cherubic Bud Cort.  Though some readers might not like Gordon either and think "Huge slam on orangutans, out of nowhere!"

2.  Being John Malkovich  Found this one to rely too much on its gimmicky premise, and just seems overly-pleased with itself.  Some critic called it "creativity for dummies."  Huge slam on the Dummies series of books, out of nowhere.

3.  Dr. Strangelove  Agree that this is a well-acted, landmark movie that does in fact have some boring bomber sequences.  Great movie, though.

4.  Annie Hall  A very funny movie, that Mike criticizes not for its lack of laughs but for its Woody creep factor.  As someone who also married his ex-girlfriend's adopted daughter, I do not find that so unsettling, I'm sorry.

5.  Rushmore  Mike finds this more 'weird' than funny.  The word I would have used is 'precious.'  There is probably only one 'joke' in the movie, the one about O.R. scrubs (oh, are they?")  However I did find the movie engaging, though I was also grateful that the main kid Max Fisher is provided with some checks on his personality (bullies, teachers, friends), because he does make you want to punch him in the nose sometimes.

And Smilin Jack, your defense of Rushmore was well-said.  Comedy snobs, unite!  ;)
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: PlayMSTie on November 01, 2006, 01:59:55 PM
Hee! What a great article! I KNEW I loved you, Mr. Nelson.  ;D
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: MontyServo on November 01, 2006, 02:13:06 PM
The question I have about that article is, why no Rifftrax mention in Mike's bio at the end of the article???

Seems like that is something that should be plugged whenever Mike does extra-curricular activity oustide Rifftrax.

Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: SmilinJackRoss on November 01, 2006, 02:22:50 PM
The question I have about that article is, why no Rifftrax mention in Mike's bio at the end of the article???

Seems like that is something that should be plugged whenever Mike does extra-curricular activity oustide Rifftrax.



He's a regular contributor to their magazine, so I'm sure his bio was written before rifftrax, and doubt it's something they really care about updating.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: MontyServo on November 01, 2006, 02:32:00 PM
The question I have about that article is, why no Rifftrax mention in Mike's bio at the end of the article???

Seems like that is something that should be plugged whenever Mike does extra-curricular activity oustide Rifftrax.



He's a regular contributor to their magazine, so I'm sure his bio was written before rifftrax, and doubt it's something they really care about updating.

It's only issue number 2, so I doubt his bio was written too far ahead of the Rifftrax project.  I'm sure they could rewrite it for him for upcoming issues.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on November 01, 2006, 02:50:52 PM
Wow, I hope he wasn't being serious about the quality of those movies. I wouldn't want to think that Mike was a pretentious jackass in real life.

Bar none, if you don't like Dr. Strangelove, you have absolutely no sense of humor. Being John Malkovich is one of the best films of recent years (it's actually not really a comedy. It's funny, but if you're in the mood some nice huge laughs every five seconds, it's not the film for you) as was Rushmore, and Annie Hall is brilliant, as is Woody Allen (and Soon-Yi was Keaton's adopted daughter, not Woody's).

This piece was simply not funny. I don't know if Mike was trying some kind of reverse-psychology thing, but it didn't work. Sorry. It's sad that Mike would turn in this kind of shoddy work trashing some of the great films (and a movie that I've never seen--Diner). Did Mike really need money that badly? There's nothing snobbish about liking any of these films (except for Diner, which I have no idea about).

Let's mock some real snobs -- how about the nerds who think that the Lord of the Rings trilogy is the three greatest movies of all time? Or people who think that Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory is actually good?
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Joe Don Faker on November 01, 2006, 03:16:36 PM
See, I thought Mike's piece worked, because his criticisms aren't a wholesale condemnation of the movies, but rather (humorous) attacks on selected aspects of them (Strangelove's interminable bomber scenes, Allen's latter-day creepiness, to some).  He actually calls Strangelove's performances "fine" and admits that Annie Hall is one of Woody's "best" comedies.  I'm guessing that, as in the case of Diner, Mike does have some affection or admiration for a few of these movies, and he is just ripping on choice aspects of them to deflate the reverence that some movie buffs have, and also to have some fun.  I enjoyed it.

If it's any consolation, I think people will keep watching the likes of Annie Hall years after the Cracked article is yellowed with age.  (How the yellowing takes place online is another topic altogether.)
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Cibernético II on November 01, 2006, 03:19:14 PM
hmm looks like there be a few snobs in the midst *adjusts imaginary tie*
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: JonnyFrag on November 01, 2006, 03:28:22 PM
Mike does indeed say Annie Hall is Woody Allen's best comedy. And that it is not funny.
Woody Allen has never been funny.
He never will...
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Bob M. on November 01, 2006, 03:31:46 PM
Wow, I thought it was a fairly typical amusing essay from our own Capt. Mike of the SS Rifftrax. Nothing to get riled up about, or so venomously defensive about. Some good points, but it's all in good fun; you did notice where the column appears, didn't you? Hmmm...

Great essay Mike. All in good fun, as always.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Joe Don Faker on November 01, 2006, 03:35:10 PM
Quote
Mike does indeed say Annie Hall is Woody Allen's best comedy. And that it is not funny.

Er, ah, technically, er -- Mike doesn't say Annie Hall is unfunny.  Rather, he er, ah, (adjusts glasses) says the more recent Woody real-life antics have colored the viewing of his past work, rendering it unappealing.

Ideally at this point in the post, I would find Michael J. Nelson standing conveniently nearby, wearing a jacket with patched elbows and drinking an aged single malt, and he would confirm for you that the above is true.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 01, 2006, 04:05:57 PM
hmm looks like there be a few snobs in the midst *adjusts imaginary tie*

Oh your god, where?!? Hold on, let me get my pitchfork and torch!
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on November 01, 2006, 04:11:16 PM
Mike does indeed say Annie Hall is Woody Allen's best comedy. And that it is not funny.
Woody Allen has never been funny.
He never will...

Well, that's simply not true.

I'll admit that Annie Hall isn't my personal favorite of Allen's work, but he has been extremely funny on many occasions. My favorite film of his is Bananas.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: LadyKenobi on November 01, 2006, 04:34:31 PM
Quote
Bar none, if you don't like Dr. Strangelove, you have absolutely no sense of humor.

Wow, really?  I didn't know that about myself.  Thanks for the headsup.

Me and the non-sense-of-humor-having Mike Nelson will just be standing over here, blowing a little air through the nose and nodding the head knowingly.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbasehart on November 01, 2006, 04:34:45 PM
I gotta admit, I like or love every single one of the movies Mike mentions in his article.  But then, I think I'm probably a movie snob.   ;D
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: starfighter on November 01, 2006, 04:37:12 PM
  Annie Hall wasn't the right film of Woody's for Mike to use for his criticism. He should have picked Manhattan where Woody is living with a 17-year-old Mariel Hemingway. That's a much closer fit to the tone of creepiness Mike expressed.
   I'm going to assume that a few of you did not see Mike's column in the first issue of the new Cracked where he wrote of "five awful comedies you need to avoid."  So don't look for any Rifftraxs on Junior, The Master of Disguise, Little Nicky, It's Pat: The Movie, or Chairman of the Board.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 01, 2006, 04:53:42 PM
  Annie Hall wasn't the right film of Woody's for Mike to use for his criticism. He should have picked Manhattan where Woody is living with a 17-year-old Mariel Hemingway. That's a much closer fit to the tone of creepiness Mike expressed.
   I'm going to assume that a few of you did not see Mike's column in the first issue of the new Cracked where he wrote of "five awful comedies you need to avoid."  So don't look for any Rifftraxs on Junior, The Master of Disguise, Little Nicky, It's Pat: The Movie, or Chairman of the Board.

Isn't "Rifftrax" already plural? I don't think you need to add an S.

(http://morningglory2.wordpress.com/files/2006/04/grammarpolice.jpg)
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: LadyKenobi on November 01, 2006, 04:56:44 PM
Quote
Annie Hall wasn't the right film of Woody's for Mike to use for his criticism. He should have picked Manhattan where Woody is living with a 17-year-old Mariel Hemingway.

I see where you're coming from, but comedy snobs tend to cite Annie Hall over Manhattan.  I think that's why he picked it.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: ScottotD on November 01, 2006, 04:58:00 PM
from the replies on this thread I probably won't read the column, I like Mike and this sounds like the sort of thing that might sour that.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: PlayMSTie on November 01, 2006, 05:28:54 PM
Wow, I hope he wasn't being serious about the quality of those movies. I wouldn't want to think that Mike was a pretentious jackass in real life.


What's pretentious about mocking pretentiousness?  :D I loved every word of the article, because with Mike, I'm repulsed by any movie or TV show that thinks it's just too, too clever and cute -- Aaron Sorkin, call your office -- and let's face it, these movies (those I'm familiar with, anyway) all have at least something of that in them. A movie about a group of people running an actor's life from inside his head? How precious can you get?
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Justin on November 01, 2006, 05:35:10 PM
Joel, Mike and the Bots quoted Woody Allen films constantly.  I think a few Rifftrax had some too.

"Wwwheat.  Vast fields of rippling wheat."

I never liked Diner.  The rest I like but will admit are all overrated.  Annie Hall isn't my favorite either, but it probably is the quintessential Woody film.

And I would like to second BBQPlatypus on the I HEART HUCKABEES thing.  Snooze.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Joe Don Faker on November 01, 2006, 05:36:27 PM
Regarding Woody, I think it's understandable that his real-life issues affect how someone might view his old stuff.

Take J.D. Salinger.  Well, not literally -- even if you could find him, he wouldn't like it.  Catcher in the Rye would probably read differently today had it not become requisite reading for high-profile killers with three names, and had not Salinger decide to withdraw from greater society, occasionally tottering out to his mailbox to send off long love letters to pretty young tv and literary personalities.

Back to Woody, Love and Death is gold... Like Justin just pointed out, Mike & Kevin even reference it (I think) in the Matrix rifftrax when one of them wistfully says "fields of wheat."  Then, they could be referencing the Bergman thing Woody was referencing.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 01, 2006, 05:52:33 PM
Wow, I hope he wasn't being serious about the quality of those movies. I wouldn't want to think that Mike was a pretentious jackass in real life.


What's pretentious about mocking pretentiousness?  :D I loved every word of the article, because with Mike, I'm repulsed by any movie or TV show that thinks it's just too, too clever and cute -- Aaron Sorkin, call your office -- and let's face it, these movies (those I'm familiar with, anyway) all have at least something of that in them. A movie about a group of people running an actor's life from inside his head? How precious can you get?

Have you even seen Being John Malkovich?
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: davo on November 01, 2006, 07:27:13 PM
i think it's as much about the viewers as it is the movie.

dr strangelove is a great movie,but defending it's brilliance or the brilliance of any Wes Anderson film is just a waste of time.  picking that hill to die on is silly.

for the record i liked rushmore a lot, thought malkovich was OK (i like strange movies sometimes), agree 111% with mike about woody allen, and thought willy wonka was a good movie  :)
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Joe Don Faker on November 01, 2006, 07:47:47 PM
defending it's brilliance or the brilliance of any Wes Anderson film is just a waste of time.  picking that hill to die on is silly.

If you pick Rushmore, you get to die on a mountain.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbakasan on November 01, 2006, 07:50:36 PM
Bar none, if you don't like Dr. Strangelove, you have absolutely no sense of humor.

Hahaha...looks like someone struck a nerve.  Its just a movie.  Seriously.  No really.  Fact is that if you go to any college campus film class just about everyone will talk about how great Dr. Strangelove is.  When I was getting my BS I took a few film courses and that was one of those movies where everyone will talk about how its soo amazing, yet usually can't really say why.  If you ask them they will just say, "It's such an amazing political satire...and Peter Sellers was soooo brilliant."  I thought Mike's article was hilarious and spot on.  There is nothing I dislike more than pretentious jackassery from filmmakers or "movie connoisseurs".  Give me John Carpenter over Stanley Kubrick any day.

I really hated Rushmore.  I feel like its the king of snobbish anti-comedies (Lost in Translation is pretty far up there though).
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Joe Don Faker on November 01, 2006, 08:12:33 PM
Dr. Strangelove is great, but it also was able to make James Earl Jones flying around somehow be boring.  Lucas couldn't do that.  :)

One reason I think it's great satire:  compare George C. Scott's general with the one Rod Steiger plays in Mars Attacks!   One's a dangerous goofball that we can't help liking, even as he's describing with great relish the chances of his men evading missiles and starting WWIII; the other a unlikable cardboard cutout barking orders.  Strangelove serves it up to humanity, proper -- but with affection.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbakasan on November 01, 2006, 08:25:11 PM
Dr. Strangelove is great, but it also was able to make James Earl Jones flying around somehow be boring.  Lucas couldn't do that.  :)

One reason I think it's great satire:  compare George C. Scott's general with the one Rod Steiger plays in Mars Attacks!   One's a dangerous goofball that we can't help liking, even as he's describing with great relish the chances of his men evading missiles and starting WWIII; the other a unlikable cardboard cutout barking orders.  Strangelove serves it up to humanity, proper -- but with affection.

Fair enough, but I think that it is undeniable (in my experience at least) that there are a huge number of people that "like" this movie because they think anyone who knows film is supposed too.  I certainly won't deny that we all have different tastes in film, but overly defensive, pretentious bs makes my head hurt (I hope you know that this is not directed at your post Joe Don). 
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbasehart on November 01, 2006, 09:00:22 PM
The thing I don't like about Strangelove is Peter Sellers.  I've never found him funny, except perhaps in Being There.  Alec Guinness did the multiple role thing much better in Kind Hearts and Coronets.

Now how's that for film snobbery?  ;)
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Joe Don Faker on November 01, 2006, 09:15:15 PM
I think that it is undeniable (in my experience at least) that there are a huge number of people that "like" this movie because they think anyone who knows film is supposed too.  I certainly won't deny that we all have different tastes in film, but overly defensive, pretentious bs makes my head hurt (I hope you know that this is not directed at your post Joe Don). 

No, I hear ya Mr. Bakasan.  There can be a thoughtless over-reverence for things just because the viewpoint is perceived as the 'right' thing to think...  And Mike was mocking that tendency.

Like the recent indie movie "Little Miss Sunshine,"  which I thought was cute and had some good performances.  But when someone on imdb said, "This is just National Lampoon's Vacation, for people that think they're too smart for National Lampoon's Vacation,"  I had to laugh, because it took the piss out of that kind of thinking.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: starfighter on November 01, 2006, 10:01:13 PM
   A person could easily be capable of appreciating both NatLamp's Vacation and Little Miss Sunshine. There's even the similarity of grandparents kicking off during both road trips.  Sunshine completely sold itself to me by having little Olive dance to "Super Freak" as a metaphor for the whole creepy sexualization of the pagaent girls, but to Olive it's just a completely innocent expression of her relationship with her grandfather.
    I'm also a big fan of Dr. Strangelove, having watched it several times, but I do agree that I don't care if I ever see Diner or Rushmore again.  Different strokes for different folks, I guess.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 01, 2006, 10:13:12 PM
The only thing that's more pretentious than someone pretending to like a movie in order to look intelligent is someone trying to look cool by pretending they can tell whether or not you're pretending.

Calling people or things "pretentious" is, in itself, pretentious.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbakasan on November 01, 2006, 10:31:59 PM
The only thing that's more pretentious than someone pretending to like a movie in order to look intelligent is someone trying to look cool by pretending they can tell whether or not you're pretending.

Calling people or things "pretentious" is, in itself, pretentious.

Your logic is utter nonsense.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 01, 2006, 10:33:51 PM
The only thing that's more pretentious than someone pretending to like a movie in order to look intelligent is someone trying to look cool by pretending they can tell whether or not you're pretending.

Calling people or things "pretentious" is, in itself, pretentious.

You logic is utter nonsense.

Not at all. By "pretending" you know whether or not someone really likes something (when there's no way you really can) you're being pretentious in order to make yourself look more genuine in comparison. Quite simple really.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbakasan on November 01, 2006, 10:36:25 PM
The only thing that's more pretentious than someone pretending to like a movie in order to look intelligent is someone trying to look cool by pretending they can tell whether or not you're pretending.

Calling people or things "pretentious" is, in itself, pretentious.

You logic is utter nonsense.

Not at all. By "pretending" you know whether or not someone really likes something (when there's no way you really can) you're being pretentious in order to make yourself look more genuine in comparison. Quite simple really.

No, trying to defend you self-esteem by making nonsense statements is just that, nonsense.  We could argue about what the word pretentious means and how it can be used all day, but your argument doesn't work.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 01, 2006, 10:40:06 PM
The only thing that's more pretentious than someone pretending to like a movie in order to look intelligent is someone trying to look cool by pretending they can tell whether or not you're pretending.

Calling people or things "pretentious" is, in itself, pretentious.

You logic is utter nonsense.

Not at all. By "pretending" you know whether or not someone really likes something (when there's no way you really can) you're being pretentious in order to make yourself look more genuine in comparison. Quite simple really.

No, trying to defend you self-esteem by making nonsense statements is just that, nonsense.  We could argue about what the word pretentious means and how it can be used all day, but your argument doesn't work.
I think I just illustrated that it does.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbakasan on November 01, 2006, 10:44:26 PM
I think I just illustrated that it does.

Actually you didn't, but if silly vague statements make you feel that you've made a point, go for it.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 01, 2006, 10:50:16 PM
I think I just illustrated that it does.

Actually you didn't, but if silly vague statements make you feel that you've made a point, go for it.
....says the man who refuses to back up his own argument, merely stating "your logic is utter nonsense." If you ever feel like expounding on your own vague statments be my guest.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbakasan on November 01, 2006, 10:54:42 PM
I think I just illustrated that it does.

Actually you didn't, but if silly vague statements make you feel that you've made a point, go for it.
....says the man who refuses to back up his own argument, merely stating "your logic is utter nonsense." If you ever feel like expounding on your own vague statments be my guest.

Okay, this following quote is pretty illogical, although I'm sure it sounded cool at the time.

[/quote]
Calling people or things "pretentious" is, in itself, pretentious.

Illogical = nonsense

Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 01, 2006, 10:55:47 PM
I think I just illustrated that it does.

Actually you didn't, but if silly vague statements make you feel that you've made a point, go for it.
....says the man who refuses to back up his own argument, merely stating "your logic is utter nonsense." If you ever feel like expounding on your own vague statments be my guest.

Okay, this following quote is pretty illogical, although I'm sure it sounded cool at the time.

Calling people or things "pretentious" is, in itself, pretentious.

Illogical = nonsense



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petitio_principii (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petitio_principii)
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbakasan on November 01, 2006, 11:10:42 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petitio_principii (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petitio_principii)

I bet this link is really awesome and profound to your argument, but I'm not going to bother reading it becaue this is getting pointless.  I'm going to bed, but make sure and tell all your friends that the word pretentious is really a paradox.  Wow.
Title: I accept your surrender
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 01, 2006, 11:13:43 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petitio_principii (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petitio_principii)

I bet this link is really awesome and profound to your argument, but I'm not going to bother reading it becaue this is getting pointless.  I'm going to bed, but make sure and tell all your friends that the word pretentious is really a paradox.  Wow.

The above link explains the logical fallacy of "begging the question," AKA "Circular logic." You should educate yourself a little.

P.S.

(http://img397.imageshack.us/img397/3139/uppercut2kf.gif)
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Sharktopus on November 02, 2006, 04:40:32 AM
I'm going to avoid the numerous pitfalls of commenting on any of these movies and rather just mention that the new Cracked magazine is damn good, especially the first issue's "You might be a douchebag" quiz. Do you wear your polo shirt collar up? Do you make prolonged eye contact with yourself in the mirror? Do you call guys who aren't you brothers "bro"? Do you wear you cellphone on your belt? You might be a douchebag.

Also, Dr. Impossible has the best userpic ever. overcompensating.com (http://overcompensating.com)
(http://topatoco.com/artwork/itson-big.jpg)
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 02, 2006, 05:23:02 AM
I'm going to avoid the numerous pitfalls of commenting on any of these movies and rather just mention that the new Cracked magazine is damn good, especially the first issue's "You might be a douchebag" quiz. Do you wear your polo shirt collar up? Do you make prolonged eye contact with yourself in the mirror? Do you call guys who aren't you brothers "bro"? Do you wear you cellphone on your belt? You might be a douchebag.

Also, Dr. Impossible has the best userpic ever. overcompensating.com (http://overcompensating.com)
(http://topatoco.com/artwork/itson-big.jpg)

Shucks!

Yeah, I was thinking the new Cracked looked pretty good. Haven't run across it at any stores yet though.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Joe Don Faker on November 02, 2006, 05:25:26 AM
A person could easily be capable of appreciating both NatLamp's Vacation and Little Miss Sunshine.

Hey, I liked both too; I just thought the guy's comment was funny and deflated the "indie is definitively better than big studio" attitude that can exist.

Also I didn't think Mike was trying to argue that everyone who likes the movies in his article is faking it.  Just that there is a tendency among some folks to bump up the level of esteem, for hipness sake.  

Now if you'll excuse me I'm off to praise Krzysztof Kieslowski's wonderful landmark 10-part series The Decalogue, despite having seen only 3 of them.  2.  Okay, to be honest, 1.  Half of 1.  I've seen the adverts.
Title: All criticism is a form of masturbation...
Post by: a pretty girl is like on November 02, 2006, 04:33:39 PM
Ergo we are all snobs.

I shall make no attempt to back this statement with any further arguments because it is the truth. 

Therefore, it is not pretentious. 

Consequently, I'm going to heaven. 

Where ice cream and ponies and other pleasurable things await.

So there.
Title: Re: All criticism is a form of masturbation...
Post by: ScottotD on November 02, 2006, 05:47:47 PM
Ergo we are all snobs.

No, we just all have opinions.  The list of movies is like any list of best or worst anything, nobody is going to agree on 90% of it.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: waffen on November 03, 2006, 10:16:21 AM
 I loved rushmore. I got it when it came out on dvd. I try to keep in mind that it's only a movie and the only question that matters to me is "did I like it?" not "do other people like it?".

I have friends that don't "get" mst3k or rifftracks.  I didn't stop being their freinds because we don't find the same things funny. would they be "snobs" as well?


I'm sure that Mike loves some films that I detest. Life is like that.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on November 03, 2006, 10:51:53 AM
I'm going to assume that a few of you did not see Mike's column in the first issue of the new Cracked where he wrote of "five awful comedies you need to avoid."  So don't look for any Rifftraxs on Junior, The Master of Disguise, Little Nicky, It's Pat: The Movie, or Chairman of the Board.

I'm probably in the minority here, but I liked Little Nicky. It wasn't a masterpiece, it didn't change my life, it's probably not going to be well-remembered for generations to come, but it was funny. And apparently Quentin Tarantino thought so, too, as he agreed to play a small role in it. I think that the Mr. Deeds remake or Eight Crazy Nights would have made better choices for Mike's "avoid" list. I couldn't stand either of those.

Wow, I hope he wasn't being serious about the quality of those movies. I wouldn't want to think that Mike was a pretentious jackass in real life.


What's pretentious about mocking pretentiousness?

But none of the films Mike is mocking are pretentious. And they're all very good.

Give me John Carpenter over Stanley Kubrick any day.

The Shining is a better horror film than Halloween.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: dignan on November 03, 2006, 11:45:15 AM
I like pie.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbakasan on November 03, 2006, 11:49:43 AM

Stanley Kubrick is the greatest filmmaker of all time. He has succeeded in each of the genres he has attempted to make a film in. He hasn't made a single dud during his entire career. Every one of his films is a masterpiece. John Carpenter can't compare to Kubrick.

Zzzzzzzzzzz.....Next you are going to tell me how great Eyes Wide Shut was.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Cap'n UKRiffer on November 03, 2006, 11:52:10 AM
I like pie.

The first intelligent thing said so far  ;D
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbakasan on November 03, 2006, 11:56:35 AM
I like pie.

The first intelligent thing said so far  ;D

Can't really argue with that. :'(
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on November 03, 2006, 01:13:43 PM
Zzzzzzzzzzz.....Next you are going to tell me how great Eyes Wide Shut was.

Anything Kubrick touched turned to gold. He WAS the greatest director alive. If you don't like Kubrick's work, you don't like movies.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Justin on November 03, 2006, 01:21:16 PM
Zzzzzzzzzzz.....Next you are going to tell me how great Eyes Wide Shut was.

Anything Kubrick touched turned to gold. He WAS the greatest director alive. If you don't like Kubrick's work, you don't like movies.

Dr. Impossible would direct your attention to a little thing called Petitio Principii.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petitio_principii (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petitio_principii)

Right, Bakasan? *winking emoticon*
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: dignan on November 03, 2006, 01:21:43 PM
I like pie.

The first intelligent thing said so far  ;D

Watch, someone will come around and start denouncing pie in the name of cake.  
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Justin on November 03, 2006, 01:26:30 PM
I like pie.

The first intelligent thing said so far  ;D

Watch, someone will come around and start denouncing pie in the name of cake.  

Frankly, I've always found cake to be over-valued in our society.  I like pie and cake, but neither baked good can measure up to the genius and simplicity of the muffin.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on November 03, 2006, 01:30:54 PM
The Muffin Man is seated at the table
In the laboratory of the Utility Muffin Research Kitchen . . .
Reaching for an oversized chrome spoon
He gathers an intimate quantity of dried muffin remnants
And, brushing his scapular aside,
Proceeds to dump these inside of his shirt . . .
He turns to us and speaks:
"Some people like cupcakes better. I, for one,
Care LESS for them!"
Arrogantly twisting the sterile canvas snoot of a fully charged icing-anointment utensil,
He poots forth a quarter-ounce green rosetta
Near . . .
(Let's try that again . . . )
He poots forth a quarter-ounce green rosetta
Near the summit of a dense-but-radiant muffin of his own design
Later he says:
"Some people . . . some people like cupcakes exclusively,
While I myself say there is naught, nor ought there be,
Nothing so exalted on the face of God's grey earth
As that Prince of Foods . . . The Muffin!"
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Cap'n UKRiffer on November 03, 2006, 01:31:56 PM
I like pie.

The first intelligent thing said so far  ;D

Watch, someone will come around and start denouncing pie in the name of cake.  

Frankly, I've always found cake to be over-valued in our society.  I like pie and cake, but neither baked good can measure up to the genius and simplicity of the muffin.

Hey now, don't forget the doughnut... lord knows why you yanks had to put a hole in it but it was an ingenious idea
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Justin on November 03, 2006, 01:36:12 PM
That Zappa thing is crazy!  I was even going to write about how cupcakes suck by comparison but decided I was pushing the joke too far.

I am not Zappa, but only his messenger.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: dignan on November 03, 2006, 01:37:13 PM
I like pie.

The first intelligent thing said so far  ;D

Watch, someone will come around and start denouncing pie in the name of cake.  

Frankly, I've always found cake to be over-valued in our society.  I like pie and cake, but neither baked good can measure up to the genius and simplicity of the muffin.

Hey now, don't forget the doughnut... lord knows why you yanks had to put a hole in it but it was an ingenious idea

Speaking of ingenious ideas, I have to admit a fondness for the corn dog.  I don't know who came up with the idea, or how they came up with the idea, but the person who was one day eating a muffin and said, "This is pretty good, but you know what this needs in it?  More hot dog!"?  Truly a genius for the ages.  
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbakasan on November 03, 2006, 01:41:13 PM
Anything Kubrick touched turned to gold.

Not that I want to continue this argument, but check out what Kubrick thinks of one of his own "golden" movies.



Now back to the pie discussion.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on November 03, 2006, 01:46:40 PM
R. Lee Ermey was lying.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Justin on November 03, 2006, 01:49:06 PM
I like pie.

The first intelligent thing said so far  ;D

Watch, someone will come around and start denouncing pie in the name of cake.  

Frankly, I've always found cake to be over-valued in our society.  I like pie and cake, but neither baked good can measure up to the genius and simplicity of the muffin.

Hey now, don't forget the doughnut... lord knows why you yanks had to put a hole in it but it was an ingenious idea

Speaking of ingenious ideas, I have to admit a fondness for the corn dog.  I don't know who came up with the idea, or how they came up with the idea, but the person who was one day eating a muffin and said, "This is pretty good, but you know what this needs in it?  More hot dog!"?  Truly a genius for the ages.  

Then do I have news for you!

(http://graphics.samsclub.com/images/products/0007790033497_LG.jpg)
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: dignan on November 03, 2006, 01:50:42 PM
I like pie.

The first intelligent thing said so far  ;D

Watch, someone will come around and start denouncing pie in the name of cake.  

Frankly, I've always found cake to be over-valued in our society.  I like pie and cake, but neither baked good can measure up to the genius and simplicity of the muffin.

Hey now, don't forget the doughnut... lord knows why you yanks had to put a hole in it but it was an ingenious idea

Speaking of ingenious ideas, I have to admit a fondness for the corn dog.  I don't know who came up with the idea, or how they came up with the idea, but the person who was one day eating a muffin and said, "This is pretty good, but you know what this needs in it?  More hot dog!"?  Truly a genius for the ages.  

Then do I have news for you!

(http://graphics.samsclub.com/images/products/0007790033497_LG.jpg)

My God...it's full of stars!
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbakasan on November 03, 2006, 01:51:28 PM
R. Lee Ermey was lying.

Why would R. Lee Ermey lie about pie.  Now thats just wierd.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Justin on November 03, 2006, 01:52:13 PM
My God...it's full of stars!

WOW!  Funny and you brought us back to Kubrick!
Title: Corndogs are amateurish. Mere flotsam and jetsam compared to the Turducken.
Post by: a pretty girl is like on November 03, 2006, 04:07:59 PM
A stuffed chicken stuffed into a duck which is in turn stuffed into a turkey. And you have the option of deep frying the whole thing?!

A host of seraphim, cherubim and thrones could not be more heavenly than The Turducken.

Title: Re: Corndogs are amateurish. Mere flotsam and jetsam compared to the Turducken.
Post by: mrbakasan on November 03, 2006, 04:20:37 PM
A stuffed chicken stuffed into a duck which is in turn stuffed into a turkey. And you have the option of deep frying the whole thing?!

A host of seraphim, cherubim and thrones could not be more heavenly than The Turducken.



Is it a turd-ucken or tur-ducken?  It will always be one of the great mysteries of life.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Cibernético II on November 03, 2006, 05:10:35 PM
I thought he was quoting Space Ghost.

The only thing of Kubrick's I've seen in A Clockwork Orange. I agree with the author of the novel who basically said something like, Kubrick took an intriguing story with a good message and turned it into a tasteless piece of pronography. Kubrick can suck a corndog.
Title: Re: Corndogs are amateurish. Mere flotsam and jetsam compared to the Turducken.
Post by: Conor on November 03, 2006, 05:14:26 PM
Is it a turd-ucken or tur-ducken?  It will always be one of the great mysteries of life.

It's pronounced "delicious"
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on November 03, 2006, 06:42:36 PM
The only thing of Kubrick's I've seen in A Clockwork Orange. I agree with the author of the novel who basically said something like, Kubrick took an intriguing story with a good message and turned it into a tasteless piece of pronography. Kubrick can suck a corndog.

Well now, that simply isn't true. A Clockwork Orange is an excellent film. My favorite work of Kubrick's actually.

I must point out that the author praised the film adaptation (while expressing concern over the final chapter being omitted from the film, which he attributed to the fact that Kubrick might have adapted his version from an abridged printing of the book; publishers took out the final chapter because they felt that it might have been more popular this way, and then reinstated it at the insistence of the author) before public backlash against the film from groups who misinterpreted its meaning caused him to say otherwise.

The author of A Clockwork Orange clearly has no balls. The man is a slug, and since you have clearly misunderstanded the film, you are one as well.

(And Kubrick can't suck anything - he's dead.)
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: ScottotD on November 03, 2006, 06:54:29 PM
The only thing of Kubrick's I've seen in A Clockwork Orange. I agree with the author of the novel who basically said something like, Kubrick took an intriguing story with a good message and turned it into a tasteless piece of pronography. Kubrick can suck a corndog.

care to clarify 'pornography'?

I really don't want to get involved in this conversation but that just threw me a bit.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on November 03, 2006, 07:05:26 PM
I believe the use of the word "pornography" was in reference to the film's violent content, which was one of the things that earned it an X rating back in 1971.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: LadyKenobi on November 03, 2006, 07:31:20 PM
Quote
Kubrick can suck a corndog.

That's outstanding.  I should have used that as the thesis statement in one of my film class essays.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbasehart on November 03, 2006, 07:33:46 PM
Kubrick has made some amazing movies: 2001, Paths of Glory, Killer's Kiss, The Shining...  What I like about Kubrick is that even in his less successful films, he at least strives for excellence, which is really hard to find in most modern film-makers today.  
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: ScottotD on November 03, 2006, 07:39:26 PM
I'm sure nobody goes out to make a bad film if that's what you're suggesting.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbasehart on November 03, 2006, 07:40:22 PM
I'm sure nobody goes out to make a bad film if that's what you're suggesting.

I wasn't.   :)
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Justin on November 03, 2006, 09:32:38 PM
(And Kubrick can't suck anything - he's dead.)

Well, there was that brief period when A.I. was released and he was turning in his grave.  There's still a chance.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: starfighter on November 03, 2006, 10:23:12 PM
  Did somebody say something about pie??
               I'm fond of cheesecake myself.  New York-style.  Real baked cheesecake, made with eggs. Not that atrocity of soft pudding-like cream cheese.  But pie can be good, too.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 03, 2006, 11:11:34 PM
I thought he was quoting Space Ghost.

The only thing of Kubrick's I've seen in A Clockwork Orange. I agree with the author of the novel who basically said something like, Kubrick took an intriguing story with a good message and turned it into a tasteless piece of pronography. Kubrick can suck a corndog.
Stephen King similiarly resented him for what he did to "The Shining." It was a pretty personal story about his alcoholic father and Kubrick pretty much turned it into a meaningless mess. I never much liked him.

That article about Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise ruining his movie seems like Karma to me.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbakasan on November 03, 2006, 11:22:51 PM
I thought he was quoting Space Ghost.

The only thing of Kubrick's I've seen in A Clockwork Orange. I agree with the author of the novel who basically said something like, Kubrick took an intriguing story with a good message and turned it into a tasteless piece of pronography. Kubrick can suck a corndog.
Stephen King similiarly resented him for what he did to "The Shining." It was a pretty personal story about his alcoholic father and Kubrick pretty much turned it into a meaningless mess. I never much liked him.

That article about Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise ruining his movie seems like Karma to me.

Stephen King's view of the Shining was really one of the first things to turn me off of Kubrick personally.  I've never been a big fan of original works being changed around for the fancy of a filmmaker, especially when the entire message of the story is so utterly bastardized, such as the Shinging and A Clockwork Orange.  Say what you will about A Clockwork Orange being brilliant (for those of you who think it is), but the end of the film totally negates the meaning of the book (which I wasn't fond of either anyway), which to me makes the movie utterly meaningless. 

At least even Kubrick could admit what an awful piece of complete trash Eyes Wide Shut was.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: ScottotD on November 03, 2006, 11:55:06 PM
The fact this thread involves people praising Wes Anderson and dissing Kubrick makes little babies around the world cry.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 04, 2006, 12:59:06 AM
The fact this thread involves people praising Wes Anderson and dissing Kubrick makes little babies around the world cry.

Cause babies love Stanley Kubrick. (?)
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Bob M. on November 04, 2006, 05:15:34 AM
And real men love Wes Anderson... wait, no, that's not it. Damn!

Um, I like pie?

;)
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on November 04, 2006, 12:44:24 PM
The fact this thread involves people praising Wes Anderson and dissing Kubrick makes little babies around the world cry.

Come on, now. I like both filmmakers. They've both made good stuff. All right, so Kubrick may be better, but that's no reason to diss Wes Anderson. :)

Stephen King similiarly resented him for what he did to "The Shining." It was a pretty personal story about his alcoholic father and Kubrick pretty much turned it into a meaningless mess.

No, no, no. Kubrick IMPROVED on Stephen King's work. King is an okay writer, but he's nowhere near the caliber of Stanley Kubrick. The film adaptation of The Shining was much scarier and more interesting than the novel or the later miniseries, which were still pretty good, but not masterpieces to Kubrick's level.

And if you'll take a look at my avatar, you'll note another instance in which there was a disagreement between a filmmaker and the creator whose work was being adapted for the big screen. Like King and Burgess' disagreements with Kubrick, nothing ever came of this one, except for the original author making an ass out of himself (in the case of Fritz the Cat, Ralph Bakshi injected some political satire into the film adaptation that Robert Crumb never would have thought of, and made the character a less despicable feline, and so, since Crumb saw another person improve on elements from his own work, he ended the series by having an ice pick stabbed into the back of Fritz's head).
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Joe Don Faker on November 04, 2006, 03:47:28 PM
I like The Shining movie -- the kid, especially, is very good, and the mood is creepy.

But as is usually the case, the book provides a richer and more meaningful characterization of Jack -- a guy struggling to keep his family together in the face of slowly mounting pressures: his alcoholism, short temper, anxiety over creative limitations, lack of job security, and one seriously f-ed up isolated mountain resort hotel.

In contrast, Nicholson seems much more ready to pop from the get-go, and seems to require little provocation. Maybe partly because he's married to the weirdly fragile Shelly Duvall instead of Rebecca DeMornay as in the King mini-series (which had its own problems of course).

The Shining DVD has a great featurette shot by Kubrick's daughter on the set.  This was a time before all the Entertainment Tonight type shows, and the actors really seem unguarded and candid.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: PlayMSTie on November 04, 2006, 04:03:05 PM
I like The Shining movie -- the kid, especially, is very good, and the mood is creepy.

But as is usually the case, the book provides a richer and more meaningful characterization of Jack -- a guy struggling to keep his family together in the face of slowly mounting pressures: his alcoholism, short temper, anxiety over creative limitations, lack of job security, and one seriously f-ed up isolated mountain resort hotel.


Agreed. I had to watch the movie and read parts of the book for a film course (and spent weeks complaining about it: "They're making me watch a horror movie! Aaauggh!") Of course, the movie is well made. But I found the book much deeper and more moving. In the book you see that Jack is trying to be a good husband and father, you follow his slow deterioration, and you really feel for him. Especially in that one awful moment when he comes to himself for the last time and tells his son to run. Whereas Jack Nicholson seems pretty much crazy from the get-go -- I mean, hello, he's Jack Nicholson!  ;D -- and I never got the impression, except in one short scene with his son, that he felt anything but contempt for his family. Although it was an impressive performance, no way was this an improvement on the book's Jack Torrance. Nor was the movie an improvement on the book, at least not for this viewer, because with that difference in characterization, it was so much colder and harsher and lacked the humanity of the book.

I never heard that about King's alcoholic father, but it makes sense.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Zillax0rz on November 04, 2006, 04:20:52 PM
I wanted to post a long explanation on why Rushmore was funny to me, but then I started reading the existing replies and thought, "Jesus Christ, get a life, nerds!"

So instead, I'll just say what I'm feeling: "Fuck you, Wes Anderson movies are funny. So was Huckabees. SEEYA!"
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on November 04, 2006, 04:43:41 PM
So instead, I'll just say what I'm feeling: "Fuck you, Wes Anderson movies are funny. So was Huckabees. SEEYA!"

I [heart] Huckabees sucked, sucked, sucked, sucked, sucked. Sucked.

As for The Shining: I didn't see it the way King did. Jack Nicholson was absolutely perfect for the role. I didn't watch it going "okay, it's Nicholson, so he's crazy." The movie is terrifying. The book doesn't have a whole lot of depth. Stephen King would like to convince you that it does, but it really doesn't. There's far more depth in the film than King would ever come up with. The film is absolutely perfect. Kubrick did everything right and King didn't like that.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: PlayMSTie on November 04, 2006, 05:12:38 PM
Oh yeah, that must be it. Writers absolutely hate seeing justice done to their work.  ;)
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbakasan on November 04, 2006, 05:47:12 PM

I [heart] Huckabees sucked, sucked, sucked, sucked, sucked. Sucked.

As for The Shining: I didn't see it the way King did. Jack Nicholson was absolutely perfect for the role. I didn't watch it going "okay, it's Nicholson, so he's crazy." The movie is terrifying. The book doesn't have a whole lot of depth. Stephen King would like to convince you that it does, but it really doesn't. There's far more depth in the film than King would ever come up with. The film is absolutely perfect. Kubrick did everything right and King didn't like that.

You really need to learn to seperate yourself from your entertainment.  Just keep repeating...he's just a director.  You are honestly the most extreme person that I have ever seen rant on these message boards.  Tone it down man, because the more extreme you are, the less people will listen to you.  When you state your opinion as though it is fact, people are just going to ignore what you write after a while. 
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 04, 2006, 09:07:52 PM
So instead, I'll just say what I'm feeling: "Fuck you, Wes Anderson movies are funny. So was Huckabees. SEEYA!"

I [heart] Huckabees sucked, sucked, sucked, sucked, sucked. Sucked.

As for The Shining: I didn't see it the way King did. Jack Nicholson was absolutely perfect for the role. I didn't watch it going "okay, it's Nicholson, so he's crazy." The movie is terrifying. The book doesn't have a whole lot of depth. Stephen King would like to convince you that it does, but it really doesn't. There's far more depth in the film than King would ever come up with. The film is absolutely perfect. Kubrick did everything right and King didn't like that.
There's a lot of depth in the movie if you're one of those people who thinks ambiguity = depth.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on November 05, 2006, 12:57:37 AM
You are honestly the most extreme person that I have ever seen rant on these message boards.

Thank you. I try to stand out. ;D
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 05, 2006, 02:39:24 PM
You are honestly the most extreme person that I have ever seen rant on these message boards.

Thank you. I try to stand out. ;D
You must drink soooo much Surge.

SUUUUURRRRRRRRGEEEE!
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on November 05, 2006, 08:02:22 PM
You must drink soooo much Surge.

SUUUUURRRRRRRRGEEEE!

Uh, no, they don't produce that soda in the United States anymore.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Rufus T on November 05, 2006, 08:33:32 PM
Here's my opinion. King wrote the better story. Kubrick provided better entertainment. I know when someone adapts a book into a film they should have respect for it. And I'll agree that Kubrick did chop alot of things out. But he was making a movie. I think everyone involved in this discussion knows you can't put everything from the book into a movie. If you want to then make a mini-series. And they did make a mini-series of the Shining. And it was a great adaptation. The characters were strong. The story kept your attention. It was a beautiful thing to see King's book get such wonderful treatment. I still like Kubrick's film more. I like it because it creeped me out. I don't watch a movie in order to defend an author. I had actually read the Shining before I saw the Kubrick movie. Yeah the differences were glaring. But by the end I didn't care. I said to myself that it was a great movie and a horrible adaptation. I thought Kubrick was great for the vision he brought to the screen. And I thought King was great because his wonderful story was the ground work for something different. And I know King himself hated Kubrick's film. And he has a justifiable reason to do so. It's just too bad he doesn't see what his original idea allowed a great director to bring to a wider audience. Kubrick wouldn't have made the movie if King hadn't written the book.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Joe Don Faker on November 06, 2006, 07:21:10 AM
King wrote the better story. Kubrick provided better entertainment... I said to myself that it was a great movie and a horrible adaptation.

That's fair.  In book/movie debates I find it best to accept that the two are totally different animals, each having different strengths.  For instance books can lend themselves to richer psychological insights into the characters, and movies to more powerful visuals.

The changes Kubrick made to the Shining story make sense:  A hedge maze instead of the animal topiary, which would have been very difficult to film in 1980.   An axe instead of a roque mallet, which just isn't as menacing on film, and can't bust through a door.

And all this just makes me want to see a Shining rifftrax. 

That kid who played Danny didn't bother pursuing a movie career, and I believe he is a science teacher in the midwest.  Ironically his is the rare child performance that doesn't make me want to chase the kid with an axe.  (Joking, please no emails.)  Another good one is that Charlie & the Chocolate Factory kid, who also passed up acting further.  Maybe the trick is to get a kid who doesn't want to be a star and spend life in front of a camera...?
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 06, 2006, 08:30:22 AM
That kid who played Danny didn't bother pursuing a movie career, and I believe he is a science teacher in the midwest.  Ironically his is the rare child performance that doesn't make me want to chase the kid with an axe.  (Joking, please no emails.)  Another good one is that Charlie & the Chocolate Factory kid, who also passed up acting further.  Maybe the trick is to get a kid who doesn't want to be a star and spend life in front of a camera...?
Interesting theory. Maybe the career child-actors try too hard and end up hamming it up?
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: PlayMSTie on November 06, 2006, 02:10:26 PM
Here's my opinion. King wrote the better story. Kubrick provided better entertainment.

To my mind the better story is always the better entertainment, but that's 'cause I'm an English major.  ;D But I do think you make a very good point. There have been movies that were good or great movies IN THEMSELVES but, considered strictly as adaptations, would have to be called less than successful. A lot of times, when watching a movie like this, I find myself thinking I would like this SO much better if they had just changed the names and some of the details so that it wasn't recognizable any more as a version of the story I had liked in the book, and was just standing on its own.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: JonnyFrag on November 06, 2006, 02:35:17 PM
That kid who played Danny didn't bother pursuing a movie career, and I believe he is a science teacher in the midwest.  Ironically his is the rare child performance that doesn't make me want to chase the kid with an axe.  (Joking, please no emails.)  Another good one is that Charlie & the Chocolate Factory kid, who also passed up acting further.  Maybe the trick is to get a kid who doesn't want to be a star and spend life in front of a camera...?
Interesting theory. Maybe the career child-actors try too hard and end up hamming it up?

That theory may have merit. Was Shatner a child actor by chance?

All of this ties into my Shatner Unified Theory of Life, the Universe and Everything
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: BBQ Platypus on November 06, 2006, 04:54:39 PM
That kid who played Danny didn't bother pursuing a movie career, and I believe he is a science teacher in the midwest.  Ironically his is the rare child performance that doesn't make me want to chase the kid with an axe.  (Joking, please no emails.)  Another good one is that Charlie & the Chocolate Factory kid, who also passed up acting further.  Maybe the trick is to get a kid who doesn't want to be a star and spend life in front of a camera...?
Interesting theory. Maybe the career child-actors try too hard and end up hamming it up?

That theory may have merit. Was Shatner a child actor by chance?

All of this ties into my Shatner Unified Theory of Life, the Universe and Everything

Ah, the Guide.  Now THAT was a disappointing film adaptation.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Sharktopus on November 06, 2006, 06:01:23 PM
Ah, the Guide.  Now THAT was a disappointing film adaptation.

Dissapointing, yes, but not a terrible movie on its own. And let's face it, a true adaptation of Hitchhiker's Guide would be impossible. The book has virtually no plot. God forbid we get a movie with the great Douglas Adam's name on it that feels like one of those SNL sketches-turned-movies.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Pak-Man on November 06, 2006, 07:15:46 PM
Hitchhikers was exactly the same as every other adaptation: Completely different. :^)
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: BathTub on November 06, 2006, 10:46:57 PM
Ah, the Guide.  Now THAT was a disappointing film adaptation.

Meh, it was mostly harmless.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on November 06, 2006, 11:38:28 PM
Ah, the Guide.  Now THAT was a disappointing film adaptation.

It was good. Not as good as other versions of the series, but still good. My biggest disappointment though, was the abscene of this bit of dialogue:

Quote
Arthur: "What's so unpleasant about being drunk?"
Ford: "Ask a glass of water."


My favorite line - gone! Why wasn't that in the film?

Though, what I really hate, though, is seeing it on TV. I never watch it, even though they show it a million times, because I'd hate to see it with the sides cut off. I saw it in the theaters with a huge screen and all of the image, and they pan-and-scan it in order to show it on the tiny Idiot Box. That's annoying (it would have been different had the film been shot in open-matte, but 2.35:1 is another thing).
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Sharktopus on November 06, 2006, 11:44:07 PM
Most of my favorite lines didn't make it, but at least I can understand why. Most of DNA's wordplay works much better in written form (Yes, I know the Guide was a radio show first, blah blah blah...), and the filmmakers, for better or worse, didn't want the audience constantly going "Wait. What? Oh, I get it." The movie was intended for us slow on the uptake American audiences.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: mrbasehart on November 07, 2006, 05:43:20 AM
Loved the musical number at the beginning.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Sharktopus on November 07, 2006, 04:02:31 PM
Loved the musical number at the beginning.

Meh. I was at the theater opening night surrounded by an audience who were completely unfamiliar with the books, etc, and my biggest hope was that at least the movie wouldn't turn them off from checking out Douglas Adams' work. And then the movie starts with inexplicably singing dolphins. The theater immediately filled with the unmistakable murmurings of "What the f*ck?"
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Famous Mortimer on November 27, 2006, 10:30:05 AM
The criticism of Rushmore appeared to be just that he didn't like it. Fair enough, I suppose. I agree about Being John Malcovich being hugely overrated, but then I know people who think it's the best thing since sliced bread...which goes to show, apart from a very small few, we're never going to agree and no matter how much that article tries to make you think black is white, it ain't.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: Dr.Impossible on November 28, 2006, 01:24:03 AM
The criticism of Rushmore appeared to be just that he didn't like it. Fair enough, I suppose. I agree about Being John Malcovich being hugely overrated, but then I know people who think it's the best thing since sliced bread...which goes to show, apart from a very small few, we're never going to agree and no matter how much that article tries to make you think black is white, it ain't.

Best username EVER.
Title: Re: "Snob Classics" - Mike dumps on some comedies
Post by: LadyKenobi on November 28, 2006, 06:04:16 AM
Quote
no matter how much that article tries to make you think black is white, it ain't

I had another take on that.  I don't think this was Mike's goal in the essay; rather, he was mocking people who do try to change people's opinions in this manner.