Jump to content

Hlao-roo

Recommended Posts

To be fair, I think Soderbergh has made some great films, even if his trademark style is often absent. He's a bit like Clint Eastwood that way -- fine filmmaker, but not with the most clearcut visual style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My initial description of him as bland wasn't even meant to specifically refer to his style, or lack of one.  I just find his films mostly un-engaging on every level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Thor said:

To be fair, I think Soderbergh has made some great films, even if his trademark style is often absent

 

How is it absent? His movies are easily spotted a mile off due to how sterile and robotic they are. I saw one on TV with Catherine Zeta Jones, she wore porn glasses and was playing an uber bitch, I forget the name of it, and it was one of the most bland movies I've ever seen, the visuals and the performances... eerily vapid. I remember saying at the time, I bet this is Steven Soderbergh! 

 

The Limey is a decent movie though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Quintus said:

I saw one on TV with Catherine Zeta Jones, she wore porn glasses and was playing an uber bitch, I forget the name of it, and it was one of the most bland movies I've ever seen, the visuals and the performances... eerily vapid. I remember saying at the time, I bet this is Steven Soderbergh! 

 

Must have been Side Effects

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Side_Effects_(2013_film)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soderbergh is more overrated than the reigning king of director mediocrities, Ron Howard. And that's saying something.

 

Let's put it this way, there's no movie that Soderbergh has ever done that's better than an average episode of Deep Space Nine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's an age-old theme in sci-fi, Steef, going all the way back to Shelley's Frankenstein. BTW, the replicants in the movie are searching for their maker so that he can extend their lives, not to find their "identity".

 

 

Alex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, why Star Trek: TMP is about "Geez Louise, what's my identity?!", Blade Runner is about what makes us human. Know what I'm saying?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Alexcremers said:

It is forbidden to hiTrek this thread!

 

He, he....indeed. It seems that everywhere I go, all discussions turn to STAR TREK at some point. It's the film music equivalent of Godwin's Law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Alexcremers said:

It is forbidden to hiTrek this thread!

 

 

 

I won't mention Trek again in this thread if you can tell me a single Soderbergh movie that's better than the average episode of Deep Space Nine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard Soderbergh begged to direct one episode of the new Trek series and they shut him down. Even the Axanar guys wouldn't take his call. Word is now he's heading to Kickstarter to finance his own fan fic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Richard said:

Geez, Alex, there's loads:

OUT OF SIGHT

SOLARIS

ERIN BROCKOVITCH

OCEAN'S 11, 12, and 13

TRAFFIC

CONTAGION

SEX, LIES, AND VIDEOTAPE

KAFKA

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Koray Savas said:

Guess I'm the only one here that loves Soderbergh. One of my favorite filmmakers, he'a never made a movie that I didn't enjoy watching. 

 

Not the only one, Kor! See above, ffi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Discussing Soderbergh while waiting for more BLADE RUNNER 2 news.... :)

 

I've been meaning to check out THE KNICK series, which everyone raves about. It seems to be yet another exploration for Soderbergh. I've been playing the soundtrack(s) repeatedly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soderbergh probably doesn't even like Blade Runner. However, Chris Nolan does! And I know many BR fans wanted BR 2 to be made by Nolan. So, here's a question: Would Nolan have been a better choice than Villeneuve? If so, why? Discuss! (or not).

 

 

 

Alex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The better choice would have been to not make this at all. Some mythologies are enriched when expanded upon (e.g. Star Trek) and some are diminished (e.g. The Matrix).  

 

Has there ever been a sequel to a high concept sci film that worked? The closest I'd say was Aliens...and Cameron wisely took Aliens in a completely different direction. But Aliens was the exception, the result usually ends up looking more like 2010 or the Matrix sequels. Even Ridley Scott couldn't pull it off in Prometheus and he was building on his own material. 

 

And as I said previously, Scott's groundbreaking vision for Blade Runner has been emulated a million times, and any sequel is going to suffer from the same derivativeness. And they're certainly going to have to sacrifice the other things that made BR special...the pacing, the existential angst...in favour of more action to justify the budget and profile of the pic. And the ideas in Blade Runner have been explored probably more often in science fiction than any other concept, so it's hard for me to imagine them breaking any new ground here. Maybe it would have been better as an HBO series, where the themes would have room to breathe and the ideas time to explore. But HBO is already doing that now, aren't they?

 

Actually now that I think about it Aliens is in fact probably the model for this. Go in different direction with the material. Even a Blade Runner going around retiring replicants like Wesley Snipes offing vampires would at least be a departure from what came before. But in that case I'd have chosen a different director. Anyway I think it's going to suck. Some things are better left alone.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

Has there ever been a sequel to a high concept sci film that worked?

 

TERMINATOR 2? 

 

Nothing against exploring a fictional universe beyond just one film, especially if it's a universe as rich as BR and if the creative people invovled are talented enough. Doesn't matter how 'iconic' the original film is. In the end, the film will be judged as it is.

 

As for Nolan, I'm sure he would have delivered the goods too, but it would have been a wholly different film. I think what Villeneuve has, is the ability to create deeper characters, and with -- arguably -- an even more identifiable visual style than Nolan (the blueish/black aura of PRISONERS, the sortof film noir-like, smokey/golden look of ENEMY). In a way, his style is "smoother" than that of Nolan (who has more visual grit), so I think he would fit the BLADE RUNNER universe particularly well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good points, Nick1138! Though I do have to say,  by turning an elusive creature into a stupid target practice bug, Aliens too felt like a dumbed-down action movie version when compared to the first one.  The thing that they built up in A L I E N got completely destroyed in the sequel.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Thor said:

 

TERMINATOR 2? 

 

Nothing against exploring a fictional universe beyond just one film, especially if it's a universe as rich as BR and if the creative people invovled are talented enough. Doesn't matter how 'iconic' the original film is. In the end, the film will be judged as it is.

 

Terminator 2 is a decent example and it's unforgivable that I forgot it. And Cameron, again (though building on his own material this time).

 

Though I disagree that the film will be judged as it is. It's certainly going to be judged against the original. And if it tries to emulate it too much, it will look derivative. If looks nothing like the original people will be disappointed. It's not an easy needle to thread.  High concept sci-fi is very, very difficult to pull off even once, because many times the concepts don't bear close scrutiny. And this is especially true when it comes to androids exploring their humanity, which has been done more than anything. I just think the film's necessity to be a blockbuster is going to work against it.  

 

19 minutes ago, Alexcremers said:

Good points, Nick1138!

 

Who is that?

 

15 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

 

It probably wouldn't be worthwhile at all if it hadn't been directed by Cameron.

 

Yep.  

 

Don't get me wrong, the film is excellent. Not quite as good or timeless as the original (IMO), but trend setting in its own way and wisely a complete departure from what Scott did.  But in the hands of almost any other director working at the time it likely would have been awful. Which is sort of my point about the BR sequel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

Though I disagree that the film will be judged as it is. It's certainly going to be judged against the original. And if it tries to emulate it too much, it will look derivative. If looks nothing like the original people will be disappointed. It's not an easy needle to thread.

 

Yes, but that's not what I meant. People -- including myself -- will no doubt compare it to the original in some way. My point was that I see no reason to damn a project from the get-go; the "proof is always in the pudding", as it were. Sometimes, good sequels DO happen. And even if it the sequel is nowhere near the original, it might still be a worthwhile addition to the rich tapestry of story and universe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

 

Who is that?

 

 

 

 

Well, given the topic of our discussion, I thought it would be nice to sci-fi up your name a bit. There are playful messages in all of my posts but no one ever notices them. I thought today would be different, but alas, it isn't meant to be.

 

 

Alex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.