Go Back   Movie Fan Central Discussion Forums > Movie Talk! > Upcoming Movie Talk
MOVIE FAN CENTRAL FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #121  
Old 06-10-2011, 09:11 AM
Can Michael K. Williams change his accent? The fact that he sounded exactly the same on Boardwalk Empire as he did on The Wire I found quite jarring.
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 06-10-2011, 09:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trilljoy View Post
Can Michael K. Williams change his accent? The fact that he sounded exactly the same on Boardwalk Empire as he did on The Wire I found quite jarring.
.....except....y'know....he didn't.

Also, he specifically took on a B-more accent for The Wire, though he's really from Brooklyn.
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 06-10-2011, 09:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smiert Spionam View Post
.....except....y'know....he didn't.

Also, he specifically took on a B-more accent for The Wire, though he's really from Brooklyn.
No. He puts on a slight twang in The Wire, but his vocal mannerisms are so similar in both that it doesn't really matter. I like the guy, but do I really want to watch Omar Unchained?
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 06-10-2011, 10:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trilljoy View Post
No. He puts on a slight twang in The Wire, but his vocal mannerisms are so similar in both that it doesn't really matter. I like the guy, but do I really want to watch Omar Unchained?
...I'd love to see Omar Unchained
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 06-10-2011, 10:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trilljoy View Post
No. He puts on a slight twang in The Wire, but his vocal mannerisms are so similar in both that it doesn't really matter. I like the guy, but do I really want to watch Omar Unchained?
Yeah, I hate good acting too.
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 06-10-2011, 11:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trilljoy View Post
No. He puts on a slight twang in The Wire, but his vocal mannerisms are so similar in both that it doesn't really matter. I like the guy, but do I really want to watch Omar Unchained?
Omar Little

Chalky White

You're absolutely entitled to your opinion, but I don't see how you can't tell a distinct difference between these two voices. Sure, you can tell it's the same guy, but there are definitely two different accents.
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 06-11-2011, 01:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smiert Spionam View Post
Omar Little

Chalky White

You're absolutely entitled to your opinion, but I don't see how you can't tell a distinct difference between these two voices. Sure, you can tell it's the same guy, but there are definitely two different accents.
I can tell a difference between the accents, but the voice in both is very recognizably his, with the accents being only slight embellishments to his style of utterance. It's nothing like the difference between, say, Gary Oldman's speaking in True Romance and The Dark Knight. Don't misunderstand me: I think he's a very good actor, but I have some reservations about his voice acting specifically.
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 06-11-2011, 10:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemovies View Post
BTW, it appears a lot of you have read the script. Can somebody point me in the right direction? I'd love to read the thing.
I'm co-signing this. I'd love to read it too.
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 06-11-2011, 10:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trilljoy View Post
Why don't other filmmakers step it up so that Tarantino at least feels contemporary competition? (And no, I don't consider PTA's work at all comparable, as I much prefer Boogie Nights to TWBB, and think Tarantino both more gifted and more consistently great.)
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, of course, but
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 06-11-2011, 10:38 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trilljoy View Post
I can tell a difference between the accents, but the voice in both is very recognizably his, with the accents being only slight embellishments to his style of utterance. It's nothing like the difference between, say, Gary Oldman's speaking in True Romance and The Dark Knight. Don't misunderstand me: I think he's a very good actor, but I have some reservations about his voice acting specifically.
I feel where you're coming from, but c'mon, Gary Oldman is a master of his craft, one of the greatest character actors to ever live. There are plenty of other well respected actors who, despite putting on an accent for a role, never really change the sound of their voice much. I understand that if, personally, you don't think Williams is a strong enough actor for the role, but if it's mostly because he doesn't change the sound of his voice much, that seems a bit arbitrary.

Last edited by Smiert Spionam; 06-12-2011 at 01:08 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 06-11-2011, 05:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by xseanymacx View Post
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, of course, but
I really didn't think I said anything too controversial there. I know some people also prefer Boogie Nights to TWBB (which to me had pacing and narrative focus issues hampering its dramatic storytelling), and while PTA's filmography is impressive, I think Magnolia much worse than any QT film, and Pulp Fiction much better than any PTA film.
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 06-11-2011, 05:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smiert Spionam View Post
I feel where you're coming from, but c'mon, Gary Oldman is a master of his craft, one of the greatest character actors to ever live. There are plenty of other well respect actors who, despite putting on an accent for a role, never really change the sound of their voice much. I understand that if, personally, you don't think Williams is a strong enough actor for the role, but if it's mostly because he doesn't change the sound of his voice much, that seems a bit arbitrary.
Who knows, maybe he could do a good job. I'll certainly not be upset if he's cast.
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 06-11-2011, 11:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trilljoy View Post
I really didn't think I said anything too controversial there. I know some people also prefer Boogie Nights to TWBB (which to me had pacing and narrative focus issues hampering its dramatic storytelling), and while PTA's filmography is impressive, I think Magnolia much worse than any QT film, and Pulp Fiction much better than any PTA film.
IMO, Magnolia is PTA's best movie. And except for Pulp Fiction, I would also rank it a head of any other Tarantino movie.

Besides, you really think Death Proof is better than Magnolia?
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 06-12-2011, 01:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemovies View Post
IMO, Magnolia is PTA's best movie. And except for Pulp Fiction, I would also rank it a head of any other Tarantino movie.

Besides, you really think Death Proof is better than Magnolia?
Yes. I thought Magnolia a mess and PTA's worst film. Death Proof is a bauble of a film, but Tarantino's craftsmanship is everywhere evident in it; I'm really not sure why some people dislike it, as I think it like Punch-Drunk Love: a small, excellent film of minor ambition.
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 06-12-2011, 01:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trilljoy View Post
Yes. I thought Magnolia a mess and PTA's worst film. Death Proof is a bauble of a film, but Tarantino's craftsmanship is everywhere evident in it; I'm really not sure why some people dislike it, as I think it like Punch-Drunk Love: a small, excellent film of minor ambition.
Yeah, but this is what bothers me about Tarantino. Tarantino's minor ambition is making an imitation of a bad exploitation movie where a guy gets off crashing cars. PTA's minor ambition is making a movie that completely encapsulates the feeling of falling in love.

Last edited by Gordon; 06-12-2011 at 01:41 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 06-12-2011, 02:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon View Post
Yeah, but this is what bothers me about Tarantino. Tarantino's minor ambition is making an imitation of a bad exploitation movie where a guy gets off crashing cars. PTA's minor ambition is making a movie that completely encapsulates the feeling of falling in love.
Which is a fair criticism. Yet by any aesthetic appreciation content cannot be wholly divorced from form, and Death Proof is just well-made.
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 06-12-2011, 03:59 AM
Speaking of Paul Thomas Anderson, there is a rumor going around that Will Smith's potential departure from Django Unchained (depending on how secure he was to it in the first place) is due in part to the Weinstein's distributing Paul's latest The Master, which is currently filming. Smith's ties to Scientology (and their ruthless history of "Fair Game", a term Hubbord used to describe the groups treatment of those who criticize the religion by means of all sorts of harassment) leads many in Hollywood to think he is backing out of QT's movie as a sort of protest.
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 06-12-2011, 06:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by APzombie View Post
Speaking of Paul Thomas Anderson, there is a rumor going around that Will Smith's potential departure from Django Unchained (depending on how secure he was to it in the first place) is due in part to the Weinstein's distributing Paul's latest The Master, which is currently filming. Smith's ties to Scientology (and their ruthless history of "Fair Game", a term Hubbord used to describe the groups treatment of those who criticize the religion by means of all sorts of harassment) leads many in Hollywood to think he is backing out of QT's movie as a sort of protest.
And I'm sure that is complete bullshit. Just like the scientology controversy of South Park involving Tom Cruise was bullshit.
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 06-12-2011, 09:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trilljoy View Post
Yes. I thought Magnolia a mess and PTA's worst film. Death Proof is a bauble of a film, but Tarantino's craftsmanship is everywhere evident in it; I'm really not sure why some people dislike it, as I think it like Punch-Drunk Love: a small, excellent film of minor ambition.
Personally, loved Magnolia and thought Death Proof was showcased all of the bad that Tarantino has to offer (the 20 minute long coffee shop scene really soured the film for me). And personally, as much as I enjoy Reservoir Dogs & Pulp Fiction, I like There Will Be Blood more than any Tarantino film.
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 06-12-2011, 11:24 AM
.

Last edited by Gordon; 06-12-2011 at 11:38 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #141  
Old 06-12-2011, 11:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon View Post
This is just silly and nonsensical. This is just ambiguously muddling around your definitions terms.

a = b
a^2 = a*b
a^2-b^2 = a*b-b^2
(a+b)(a-b) = b(a-b)
(a+b) = b
a+a = a
2a = a
2 = 1
So you think Death Proof is not a well-made film? All I was saying is...reducing films to some impression of thematic subject material is a mistake and doesn't at all consider the ways in which the filmmaker goes about constructing and shaping the ideas, which is part of what we call "artistry". How little is conveyed of NCFOM's fine storytelling and cinematic qualities by referring to No Country For Old Men as "that film where a psycho killer chases people and kills them".
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 06-12-2011, 11:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trilljoy View Post
Which is a fair criticism. Yet by any aesthetic appreciation content cannot be wholly divorced from form, and Death Proof is just well-made.
Sorry but I gotta side with pretty much everyone else here, and most probably the majority of film fans across the globe, in saying that it boggles the mind that you think Death Proof was a better made film than Magnolia.

In my view, There Will Be Blood is better than anything in Tarantino's filmmography and films like Boogie Nights and Magnolia rival Tarantino's best in Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown.

Tarantino's movies are fun and harmless, great homages to the director's favorite genres, some sizzling dialogue and nicely utilized filming and storytelling techniques. Anderson's movies penetrate much deeper, not to mention that his writing and directing skills are put to better use than Tarantino. The two just work on different levels and shouldn't even be compared.

All that to say, I am looking forward to "The Master" more than "Django Unchained" but still can't wait for both since I love watching both of their work.
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 06-12-2011, 11:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon View Post
Your argument is Film is a holistic process where form cannot be divorced from content and you like Death Proof because look at it's form!

Same line of reasoning gets me to: Content is not divorced from form. PTA goes for better content. Therefore, even Tarantino's form - even if it were better - cannot outdo PTAs content.
No, I'm saying that even your idea of what Death Proof's content (or film content in general) consists of is erroneous, as genuine film appreciation is not the harebrained thesis-hunting that thrives on a spurious presentation of literary motifs in films. You're essentially upholding mere poses of gravitas and the unformed desire to manifest the cognitive and intellectual reverberations of great literature that so many filmmakers attempt and fail to achieve in their films. There are filmmakers more profound than Tarantino (Lynch, Malick in The New World, etc.) but even they don't make his fidelity to the craft shrink in comparison, despite whatever puerility we may ascribe to Tarantino

Last edited by Trilljoy; 06-12-2011 at 11:51 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 06-12-2011, 11:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trilljoy View Post
So you think Death Proof is not a well-made film? All I was saying is...reducing films to some impression of thematic subject material is a mistake and doesn't at all consider the ways in which the filmmaker goes about constructing and shaping the ideas, which is part of what we call "artistry". How little is conveyed of NCFOM's fine storytelling and cinematic qualities by referring to No Country For Old Men as "that film where a psycho killer chases people and kills them".
I changed up my numbers thing because I just woke up and figured it was too vague, but you caught it before I edited myself. What I was getting at is that, by ambiguously muddling your criteria in various arguments in an attempt to get to the solution you want you have created these silly nonsensical arguments. For example going from your pedantic argument where content meets form, to the second vernacular one where suddenly content seems unimportant. Comparing Death Proof favorably to Magnolia requires just what the proof is: Twisting your terms enough times until you can show that 1=2. You can maybe convince yourself but it is just obviously intuitively untrue.

Last edited by Gordon; 06-12-2011 at 11:56 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 06-12-2011, 11:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon View Post
I changed up my numbers thing because I just woke up and figured it was too vague, but you caught it before I edited myself. What I was getting at is that, by ambiguously muddling your criteria in various arguments in an attempt to get to the solution you want you have created these silly nonsensical arguments. For example going from your pedantic argument where content meets form, to the second vernacular one where suddenly content seems unimportant. Comparing Death Proof favorably to Magnolia requires just what the proof is: Twisting your terms enough times until you can show that 1=2. You can maybe convince yourself but it is just obviously intuitively untrue.
No, that's not what I said.
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 06-12-2011, 12:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trilljoy View Post
No, that's not what I said.
Of course. In a Universe where 2=1 and nobody can nail down your arguments because they're all teleological, you've said just about everything.
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 06-12-2011, 01:07 PM
As much as I enjoy the Tarantino/Anderson debate (and I really do), can someone put me and ilovemovies in the direction of the script.
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 06-12-2011, 02:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon View Post
Of course. In a Universe where 2=1 and nobody can nail down your arguments because they're all teleological, you've said just about everything.
Or rather you have reading comprehension difficulties and are trying to simplistically refute me by completely misreading what I have written. Whatever man.
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 06-12-2011, 02:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemovies View Post
And I'm sure that is complete bullshit. Just like the scientology controversy of South Park involving Tom Cruise was bullshit.
I'm pretty sure it is bullshit also, but without turning this into a political thread or anything, Scientology has nobody to blame for these rumors but themselves. The "church" has a disturbing history of retaliation against any form of criticism, even recently.
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 06-12-2011, 02:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trilljoy View Post
Or rather you have reading comprehension difficulties and are trying to simplistically refute me by completely misreading what I have written. Whatever man.
Perhaps you have trouble expressing yourself.
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old 06-13-2011, 01:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by xseanymacx View Post
As much as I enjoy the Tarantino/Anderson debate (and I really do), can someone put me and ilovemovies in the direction of the script.
Quentin was kind of enough to email a copy of the script. Haven't started to read it yet but I'll definitely be getting on it very soon.

If you PM me your email address I can return the favor for you.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 06-13-2011, 12:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemovies View Post
Quentin was kind of enough to email a copy of the script. Haven't started to read it yet but I'll definitely be getting on it very soon.

If you PM me your email address I can return the favor for you.
Quentin sent it to me too but thank you
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 06-15-2011, 02:21 PM
Officially slated for release on December 25, 2012.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 06-15-2011, 06:19 PM
Well, there's no doubt about what I'll be doing on Christmas Day 2012.
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 06-15-2011, 09:02 PM
Foxx as the lead???
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 06-15-2011, 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by echo_bravo View Post
Foxx as the lead???
That's the current rumor. Sounds like Smith is pretty much out of the picture. That leaves Foxx, Elba and Tucker, with Foxx the likely one out of those possibilites. DiCaprio is pretty much confirmed to play the villain, and I'm pretty certain Waltz was confirmed a while ago to play the bounty hunter that helps Django. But I mean, any combo of these rumors is bound to be awesome. Tarantino has a gift for getting even the most mediocre of actors to give great performances.

Last edited by Bourne101; 06-15-2011 at 09:15 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 06-15-2011, 09:19 PM
Wow...and I thought Smith was a bad choice.

Yikes
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 06-15-2011, 09:31 PM
Nah man, I can totally see Foxx pulling off the role. His work in Collateral gives me quite a bit of confidence. That's his best performance by far and Tarantino can easily get him to reach that level and more.

And the role is pretty subdued. Foxx is better in roles like that.
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 06-15-2011, 09:37 PM
Agreed Foxx was pretty damn good in Ray and Collateral and I would definitly prefer him over Smith.
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 06-15-2011, 09:41 PM
He's a competant actor, but there's somethin' about his face that I don't like :/
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump