MDMD: Print the legend but don't mention Coppola!

[John Lundy]

Paul,

The real question surely is "Why are Oliver Stone's films not worth seeing 
once?"

I have a clue on the Eastwood thing:  I saw a documentary recently on the 
spaghetti western king Sergio Leonne.  Its thesis was that far from being 
derivative and pastiche, his works essentially redefined and reinvigorated 
the Western genre.  It featured an interview with Eastwood who said that 
working with Leonne taught him about about the art of subtlety and nuance 
in film.  While he clearly wasn't able to transfer this to nay of his, as 
you call them, "now" films, his mastery of the Western is beyond dispute.

Coppolla is the De Niro of directing:  Hasn't done anything meaningful in 
30 years but still gets a gig.

It's a dark and mysterious world indeed.

Oh, and maybe only one or two nutters.

Apologies to the overwhelming majority of fine, balanced minds on the list 
that may have felt gratuitously slurred by my thoughtless comments.

Keep cool, but care.

John

Shit, I'm due in court in 10 minutes, this list is going to cost me my job!


On Tuesday, 9 October 2001 09:26, Paul Nightingale 
[SMTP:paulngale at supanet.com] wrote:
> John,
>
> I agree with what you say about Eastwood's films. The westerns are so 
much
> better. It's certainly curious that his 'now' films - the Harrys, Misty 
as
> well - are somewhat distasteful, authoritarian; whereas the westerns are, 
to
> my mind anyway, radical critiques, both of the genre and of 
authoritarianism
> (Clint himself usually sounds a nice chap, and he does like jazz, but he 
is
> a Republican, after all). It points to genre-based criticism being more
> important, more fruitful, than a one-dimensional auteur theory (the 
films,
> like Pynchon's - or anyone else's - novels are produced by society). High
> Plains Drifter and Pale Rider (my personal favourite, perhaps, although
> Unforgiven might be 'better') have a degree of magical realism that, it
> seems, would've been impossible in one of the Harry films.
>
> There is conflict in any text: a lot of machismo in Springsteen's songs,
> even while they express (some of) the pains of blue-collar life ("working
> hard all day, trying to get my hands clean"). Pat Garrett and Billy the 
Kid
> is the one with a Dylan soundtrack - I'm not sure, but I think the first
> version released had a longer version (for commercial reasons, clearly) 
of
> Knocking on Heaven's Door; the subsequent director's cut is better.
>
> Why is Coppola overrated? Who would remember The Godfather if it weren't 
for
> Brando's hamming and Pacino? Why is Oliver Stone incapable of making a 
film
> worth seeing twice? These are key questions for faceless committees to 
deal
> with. But I can't allow myself to send this post without, finally, asking 
if
> you really think there are nutters on this list - surely not!