Monday, April 28, 2008
30. Apocalypse Now v 2. The Royal Tennenbaums
How the hell do you choose between these movies? The hard part about the choice is that both movies leave you with exactly the same feeling after you finish watching them, and they both seem to have the exact same message about life. Since they are basically the same movie, I guess you just have to choose between the parts that serve exactly the same function, and then weigh the result to see which movie did a better job accomplishing the exact same artistic vision. I came up with the following parallel elements: Robert Duvall vs. Gene Hackman (crazy but stable characters who make hellish situations seem funny by being strong and/or impassive, and by forcing younger characters to do crazy things like surf in war zones or shoot at each other with beebees), Martin Shean vs. Luke Wilson and Owen Wilson (unstable crazy characters who almost kill themselves when they go insane), Harrison Ford vs. Danny Glover (boring supporting actors who make the movie seem more important because we think of them as famous people), Cambodian Heads on Spikes vs. Gweneth Paltro getting her finger chopped off (gratuitous violence that makes you flinch and then laugh because it looks so fake), Dennis Hopper vs. Bill Murray (guys we enjoy watching because we remember liking them in other movies, but who don't really add too much to the movie), Marlin Brando vs. Angelica Huston (people who scare the shit out of us), Playboy Bunnies in Vietnam vs. Litte Kids at a dog fight (absurd, eye-of-the storm type moments), and The Doors vs. Nick Drake (band choices for slow-motion, movie definining shots). Actually, the only difference between these movies is that one involved flawless editing from some of the most haphazard filming of all time while the other was so excessively coordinated that it looked like an outfit parents would choose for their kids on the first day of elementary school.
I can't really choose between any of the parallel elements listed above because I like all of them the exact same. So I've decided that it comes down to the planning and editing, which for me is just a choice between personality types. And since I've always related better to people who fly by the seat of their pants and then whip together what they can from what is leftover, and since there is something about Wes Anderson that makes me think he would be really annoying to work with, I guess I choose Apocalypse Now.
I can't really choose between any of the parallel elements listed above because I like all of them the exact same. So I've decided that it comes down to the planning and editing, which for me is just a choice between personality types. And since I've always related better to people who fly by the seat of their pants and then whip together what they can from what is leftover, and since there is something about Wes Anderson that makes me think he would be really annoying to work with, I guess I choose Apocalypse Now.
Comments:
<< Home
Really well-explained. And fair to both sides: you split the cupcake exactly in half, and I bet according to your description 50% of the kids would choose the one half and 50% of the kids would choose the other, and so you've split it very fairly.
So my personality would work better with WA, I think. I like people who plan things out, even if it means a little anal-retentiveness. Because otherwise you get this feeling like any success is merely evolutionary selection: 1,000,000 tried to do a thing; 1,000 of those had enough money and talent and luck to make a decent attempt; and then 1 out of those got lucky. Like boy bands: Why is THIS crappy boy-band successful, when 999 that sound exactly the same failed? Well, SOMEONE had to succeed, and it just happened to be this one. I guess it's an unfair comparison, but I sometimes get the feeling that all the pieces fell together just right for Apocalypse Now, and it wasn't necessarily completely earned.
And just to complete the mirror image, I think I've always suspected that Coppola would be really annoying to work with. Ever since I saw that documentary Into the Heart of Darkness or whatever (about the making of Apocalypse Now). No real script. For the scene when Sheen is all emotional? Get Sheen drunk and high and hope he punches a mirror and bleeds. For Brando's brilliant nonsense? Coppola was just like, dude, say some weird shit, and if you say weird shit long enough hopefully it'll seem profound. If I were Brando I would be like, dude, wait, what exactly are YOU contributing to this film? And Coppola is all like full of himself and talking art like it's some mystical shroomed hippie bullshit. And he's all like, I'm gonna take my millions and go start some vineyards.
But seriously, that's just me with my personality. I really do like this analysis. And as good as the slow-motion stuff is in Royal Tennenbaums, I think really NOTHING compares to that rising-out-of-the-water shot in Apocalypse Now.
Post a Comment
So my personality would work better with WA, I think. I like people who plan things out, even if it means a little anal-retentiveness. Because otherwise you get this feeling like any success is merely evolutionary selection: 1,000,000 tried to do a thing; 1,000 of those had enough money and talent and luck to make a decent attempt; and then 1 out of those got lucky. Like boy bands: Why is THIS crappy boy-band successful, when 999 that sound exactly the same failed? Well, SOMEONE had to succeed, and it just happened to be this one. I guess it's an unfair comparison, but I sometimes get the feeling that all the pieces fell together just right for Apocalypse Now, and it wasn't necessarily completely earned.
And just to complete the mirror image, I think I've always suspected that Coppola would be really annoying to work with. Ever since I saw that documentary Into the Heart of Darkness or whatever (about the making of Apocalypse Now). No real script. For the scene when Sheen is all emotional? Get Sheen drunk and high and hope he punches a mirror and bleeds. For Brando's brilliant nonsense? Coppola was just like, dude, say some weird shit, and if you say weird shit long enough hopefully it'll seem profound. If I were Brando I would be like, dude, wait, what exactly are YOU contributing to this film? And Coppola is all like full of himself and talking art like it's some mystical shroomed hippie bullshit. And he's all like, I'm gonna take my millions and go start some vineyards.
But seriously, that's just me with my personality. I really do like this analysis. And as good as the slow-motion stuff is in Royal Tennenbaums, I think really NOTHING compares to that rising-out-of-the-water shot in Apocalypse Now.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
