tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211112229982829419.post221662799192007708..comments2022-03-24T16:11:50.124-04:00Comments on The Man From Porlock: The Faves of Fanboys: A Cinematic GuideCraighttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01450775188328918558noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211112229982829419.post-66183642604232002792008-08-03T21:39:00.000-04:002008-08-03T21:39:00.000-04:00I'm not necessarily dissing QT or Cronenberg. I'm ...I'm not necessarily dissing QT or Cronenberg. I'm just looking at it from the fanboys-(including-critics)-overlooking-the-flaws point of view. So QT's acting, or the fact that all his characters in all his movies essentially have the same kinds of conversations. And for Cronenberg, say the Harris/Hurt acting. I'm not here to argue whether it's crap (my take) or damned entertaining (yours). But I figure you'll agree with me that those performances are on the razor's edge of genius and camp. You can love 'em or hate 'em. Not much room in between.<BR/><BR/>On that note: With "HoV," I noticed that my less cinema-savvy friends, who wouldn't know Cronenberg from Lynch (another good pick, by the way), and wouldn't care, HATED that movie. Critics loved it. My hunch is that a lot of that came down to whether Cronenberg's reputation meant somthing to the viewer going in. If it didn't, I think many moviegoers felt no reason to give it the benefit of their doubt. But I digress.Jason Bellamyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18150199580478147196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211112229982829419.post-13600562364020757432008-08-03T20:28:00.000-04:002008-08-03T20:28:00.000-04:00Ok, you talked me into it. I updated the list to i...Ok, you talked me into it. I updated the list to include QT and the two Davids.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01450775188328918558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211112229982829419.post-17574787842347450982008-08-03T19:00:00.000-04:002008-08-03T19:00:00.000-04:00Thanks, I was hoping others would step up with the...Thanks, I was hoping others would step up with their own picks. (David Lynch is another possibility, but I didn't feel like delving into his work.) I actually love Tarantino, including his recent stuff, but he's certainly fair game, even though lately he seems to enjoy subverting and frustrating fan expectations more than playing into them. And I don't know if I'd call <I>History of Violence</I> art either, but I thought it was damned entertaining (thanks mainly to Ed Harris and William Hurt), and I normally have about as much use for Cronenberg as I do Lynch.<BR/><BR/>Slightly OT, but related to <I>History</I>: anybody notice how often Maria Bello's being mentioned on the IMDb news links lately? It's almost daily, with breathless reports that she's dating a waiter, got a tattoo with her dad, and calmed a hysterical passenger on an airplane. I've always liked her, and I realize she has a crappy new blockbuster out, but the publicity is reaching "Harrison Ford saves mountain climbers in his helicopter" territory. Very weird.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01450775188328918558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3211112229982829419.post-83925607857509264862008-08-03T17:26:00.000-04:002008-08-03T17:26:00.000-04:00Good list. But let me help you fill it out to 10. ...Good list. But let me help you fill it out to 10. Somewhere in there has got to be mention of Quentin Tarantino (anything post "Jackie Brown") and, even more, David Cronenberg (in my opinion you have to work pretty hard to call "A Hitory Of Violence" art, but, wow, lots of critics managed to do so).Jason Bellamyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18150199580478147196noreply@blogger.com