Topic: American Graffiti

Teague Chrystie

I have a tendency to fix your typos.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: American Graffiti

"We need a movie like this about the 80s'."

Does 200 Cigarettes count?

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: American Graffiti

We need a movie like this about the 80s'.

Donnie Darko would qualify (sort of). Set in 1988, made in 2001.

So honor the valiant who die 'neath your sword
But pity the warrior who slays all his foes...

Thumbs up +1 Thumbs down

Re: American Graffiti

American Graffiti is SUCH a good movie. I own the DVD for a long time before finally sitting down with it and was really amazed at how it hit the right tropes without feeling cliche. I never expected that from Lucas.

Warning: I'm probably rewriting this post as you read it.

Zarban's House of Commentaries

Re: American Graffiti

I think Lucas honestly DID try and do other things after Star Wars. They just were flops. Look at the films he produced: Labyrinth, Tucker, Radioland Murders, Willow. If they do better, we don't get the prequels (or, more likely, they are just produced by Lucas).

I write stories! With words!
http://www.asstr.org/~Invid_Fan/

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: American Graffiti

The timeline of 50-60's nostalgia is interesting. You had Sha-na-na at Woodstock in 1969, the musical Grease in 1971, then American Graffiti in 1973.

I write stories! With words!
http://www.asstr.org/~Invid_Fan/

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: American Graffiti

Invid wrote:

I think Lucas honestly DID try and do other things after Star Wars. They just were flops. Look at the films he produced: Labyrinth, Tucker, Radioland Murders, Willow. If they do better, we don't get the prequels (or, more likely, they are just produced by Lucas).

The sad thing is, I don't have a problem with any of those movies. I think they each have something unique and worthwhile to offer. My stance has always been that George Lucas suffers from what I like to call Stephen Sommers Syndrome: The more money you give the guy, the worse the film ends up being. Convoluted, bloated, wall-to-wall CGI, misguided and self-indulgent.

Robert Rodriguez also suffers from this but in a different way. He likes to be cost effective but he's more like a contractor who's set out to build a house: "I'll just get rid of my expensive and time-consuming crew and just do everything myself! That way, I can put big, stone gargoyles EVERYWHERE and no one will be there to even suggest that's not a good idea! Screw film as a collaborative medium! It's all about MEEEE!!!"

So, yeah, the film may be under budget and even turned in early but the "fast, cheap and out of control" aspects are now negative markers that hurt the results of the finished product. Think of a kid in an arts and crafts class:
"I'm done!"
"Uh, you still have an hour left on time. I gave the class that amount of time for a reason."
"Yeah but I finished way early. See?"
"Hmmm. What is this? The assignment was to make a pirate ship. You failed to use all of the materials I gave you, you left out the crow's nest and are those rocket boosters on the bottom?"
"Yeah, isn't it awesome?"
"No, it's a pirate ship, I-- Okay, whatever. Points for imagination, I guess. What about the other kids in your group? Where are they in all this?
"Oh, I told them to go play."
"You--"
"Yeah, they were only slowing me down. What do I need them for when I can just do it all by myself?"
"IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A TEAM BUILDING EXERCISE!"

There are also filmmakers who make better producers and idea men, rather than Directors: McG, for example. His work in television (The OC, Chuck, Supernatural) is far more nuanced, interesting and creative than any of the films he's made. I think part of that is because he's forced to work within the boundaries of weekly, network television, so his decisions are more restrained while also more carefully considered. Working in a more long-form narrative is also helpful for people like him, since he's not trying to cram everything in the space of a feature film.

I think Sam Raimi had the right idea when he made Drag Me To Hell. Go back to your small-scale roots, to remind you why you started making movies in the first place. Look at Robert Zemeckis. He got away from the motion-capture cartoons he kept trying to force feed us and got back to his character-driven, human dramas with Flight.

They say the best way to critique a film is to make another one. The problem is, George Lucas just kept making more Star Wars or messing with the Star Wars that was already there. Not only was that not the work he'd started with, it was pre-existing material that could only allow him to go so far, creatively. What he needs to do is go back to the smaller, more micro-cosmic stories that challenged him as a creative storyteller, like American Graffiti.

However, the man is a billionaire at this point and therefore, doesn't actually need to do a damn thing for the rest of his life. Clearly, he wants for nothing. What stories does a guy like that have passion for, anymore?

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: American Graffiti

Invid wrote:

I think Lucas honestly DID try and do other things after Star Wars. They just were flops. Look at the films he produced: Labyrinth, Tucker, Radioland Murders, Willow. If they do better, we don't get the prequels (or, more likely, they are just produced by Lucas).

He did produce "Land before Time" with Spielberg, and that has spawned an incredible franchise. Not sure about the particulars of the money or time frame, but it always weirds me out when my kids watch and I see Lucas' name attached to it.

God loves you!

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: American Graffiti

fireproof78 wrote:
Invid wrote:

I think Lucas honestly DID try and do other things after Star Wars. They just were flops. Look at the films he produced: Labyrinth, Tucker, Radioland Murders, Willow. If they do better, we don't get the prequels (or, more likely, they are just produced by Lucas).

He did produce "Land before Time" with Spielberg, and that has spawned an incredible franchise. Not sure about the particulars of the money or time frame, but it always weirds me out when my kids watch and I see Lucas' name attached to it.

Land Before Time was '88, and the franchise played out through the 90s and into the 00s I think. The first one was very dark, slow, and honestly quite depressing. It had an outstanding score, which carried the movie. After that they became simple children's sing-alongs. Kid's like me loved them but I don't know how much money they raked in compared to a serious theatrical franchise.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: American Graffiti

haven't been on here in quite awhile.  How's everyone been?  I saw this movie back in college and liked it.  I remember liking the cutting of this movie moving between four different stories.  It kept the pace moving and didn't feel long to me at all.

Glad to hear Michael is doing so well!

Also, how do I find out when you guys will be doing live shows now?

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: American Graffiti

In case anybody cares, that little blue blue car that Dreyfus had was French, 1967 Citroën 2CV AZA...

Thumbs up +1 Thumbs down

Re: American Graffiti

I CARE.


I CARE.

Teague Chrystie

I have a tendency to fix your typos.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

Re: American Graffiti

http://www.friendsinyourhead.com/images/me.jpg

Teague Chrystie

I have a tendency to fix your typos.

Thumbs up +4 Thumbs down

Re: American Graffiti

Wow, Teague, that may be your best hand-lettering yet.

Thumbs up +1 Thumbs down

Re: American Graffiti

mkeithddc wrote:

In case anybody cares, that little blue blue car that Dreyfus had was French, 1967 Citroën 2CV AZA...

Oh don't me started on the car porn.... There's a Studebaker President in this movie!

http://www.imcdb.org/movie.php?resultsS … id=0069704

Warning: I'm probably rewriting this post as you read it.

Zarban's House of Commentaries