M. Night is Back...and BAD As Ever?!?

Originally posted by Vits Why do you insist one sayin'his carrer is ruined?If he wasn't the director of THE LAST AIRBENDER,that movie wouldn't have a forum,but it probably will,since you all hate him.His carrer isn't over just because of 3 bad movies.He has 2 on development:A sequel to UNBREAKABLE,one his hits,and DEVIL,in which he won't write the script,which is what all of you haters begged him to do.

I said the last three movies "almost" ruined his career. Three movies in a row that failed one way or another, if he was any other director, he would be out of a job. That is how Hollywood works. But he has some kind of pull and now he's playing it smart by doing a token blockbuster type movie, a sequel, and then not writing. So maybe he'll get back on track. But to us, he still have three strikes on his record.

Originally posted by saturnwatcher Debating any point with you is utterly useless, MWG, when you won't even own up to your own arguments. I'm through trying. RELEASE THE KRAKEN!

Ok. It was interesting while it lasted.

Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn Okay, well how's this: a classic movie is one that stands the test of time, is still talked about as being one of the greatest decades after it's released, is considered a staple and prime of example of its genre. Are any movies from this past decade still going to be talked about 50 years from now? Doubtful. The "Lord of the Rings" movies, MAYBE, but that's about it. Everything else was sequels and remakes that were just quick money makers but were hollow otherwise.

I can put my money that AVATAR and Synecdoche, New York will be remembered 50 years from now.

Oscar nominated(and winning)movies aren't automatically future classics,but they can still be.AVATAR is.It didn't win "Best Picture",but it's the highest grossin'movie ever.Maybe another movie will be in 50 years or less,but TITANIC is also a classic,even if it's not #1 anymore.The same for LORD OF THE RINGS.

Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn As for "Synecdoche, New York", well if no one has heard of it, how is it a classic? And as for the other Charlie Kaufman movies, their classic status is up in the air as well, because they might be well loved by critics and art film circles, but I doubt the general public feels the same way.

How can you have not heard of it?! Well, I haven't seen it, but those who have seen it said it will be remembered 50 years from now, which was why I suggested this title. Sure, it had mixed reviews but so did The Shining. Nobody came to appreciate that film until many years later, which was the point I was trying to make with Syn, NY.

Originally posted by moviewizguy Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn As for "Synecdoche, New York", well if no one has heard of it, how is it a classic? And as for the other Charlie Kaufman movies, their classic status is up in the air as well, because they might be well loved by critics and art film circles, but I doubt the general public feels the same way. How can you have not heard of it?! Well, I haven't seen it, but those who have seen it said it will be remembered 50 years from now, which was why I suggested this title. Sure, it had mixed reviews but so did The Shining. Nobody came to appreciate that film until many years later, which was the point I was trying to make with Syn, NY.

Burn makes a good point about Avatar. It is somewhat ground breaking in the methods of CGI and 3D it employed, but those technologies will be vastly improved in the next decade or so, and Avatar is going to end up looking cheesy and dated. Then you are going to have a movie with a weak plot, no particularly strong performances and doesn't even compare to future state of the art efforts. Do you really think that will become a classic?

Well,I just saw SYNECDOCHE,NEW YORK, and since it doesn't have a forum,I'll tell you here that I didn't like it.I guess I had my hopes way too up.Here's my review of it: