Why the Zemeckis hate? - Page 2

I haven't.

Decent poet, in my opinion...

Not big on poetry, but i'll enquire about him.

Devin's right.

Signed,

Meaningless Producer

SPLASH.

Just to put an end to that whole Frighteners thing, the only reason Robert Zemeckis' name is in the credits for that thing is because it *almost* ended up as as a Tales From the Crypt Presents project (a la Demon Knight), but he decided to let it stand alone.

So, Devin's right. Zemeckis' name is really there for a pointless reason. The end.

That doesn't sound too unreasonable. Surely it's better to teach kids to be respectful than to take up heroin.

Well, you've missed the point.

It helps to read the book on which the film is based, which is a satire, which this movie is not. But beyond that the film creates a scenario where a retarded man who never questions his lot in life or the people around him goes places. In the book that was the satire. In the movie that's the moral.

-Never saw, or intend to see, the Polar Express.
-Cast Away's 2nd act is great, and makes me wish for the return of silent films(as if that will happen). The simple fact that the trailer gave away that he got off the island, plus that act of the movie was really weak, really hurts it.
-I used to really like Gump around the time it came out of video. Good entertaining mindless flick, but still undeserving of all the success. Since then I've become more cynical in my movie tastes, and well although I still like moments, Forrest's catchphrases make me want to wretch. Same with a lot of the other sappy parts(and boy are there a lot of them).
-Contact kept my attention for most of the movie, but then again I really like that getting signals from an alien world type thing. I found it to be a lot better than people had told me.
-Roger Rabbit is great, saw it over Christmas and it holds up well. Judge Doom with red eyes scared the utter living shit out of my nephew, wasn't expecting that one.
-Back to the future is still gold, still mixed on the sequels though(kind of like the Matrix actually).
-What Lies beneath is crap.
That's all I've seen that he's directed, but hey the guy did cowrite Bordello of Blood!!! Hahahahaha

I can't call the guy a hack, technically he's very good, and up there with Spielburg, Cameron, Jackson and Lucas for pushing visual effects.
But his storytelling usually leaves something to be desired, and he plays it safe more often than Spielburg, which is saying something.

Were you watching TV last Thursday? Seems like the film is pretty good satire after all.

http://chud.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72762

He works hard and reaps the rewards. Isn't that the American dream?

She's a hippie slut. Forrest deserved better.

Where does he get ahead by hard work? He gets put into Alabama due to his athletic ability, his fortune comes about as much due to the fact that he managed to survive a hurricane that demolished all the other shrimp boats on the gulf coast through dumb luck, and just about everything else he just blunders into. He only ends up with the love of his life because he knocked her up the ONE time they had sex, and she needs someone to take care of the kid because she's dying.

Hard work? More like blind luck.
Well, I guess I understand why you love the film.

But the thing with Gump is that it isn't even brilliant filmmaking. Sure, when I saw it in high school, it made me sad at the end, but it wasn't too soon after thinking about it that it soured.

I dunno, I wouldn't cast aspersions on its QUALITY - Hanks, Sinise, and Mykelti Williamson give pretty good performances, the special effects are well done in a "didn't even notice them" sort of way, at the very least.

I think it's just a reprehensible script, at least in the thematic sense. Or perhaps the script hewed close to the book but Zemeckis softened it either during shooting or postproduction.

I guess as far as the Beowulf project goes I have to ask myself which weighs heavier:

My trust of Gaiman, who hasn't let me down as a storyteller (so far)

or my disdain of Zmeckis since Forest Gump?



I trend more toward trusting a Gaiman involved project (But he is due for a loss IMO)


So......damn....I don't know.

Y'know, there are things to determining brilliance in filmmaking other than acting and special effects. And I will agree that the acting and special effects, generally, are very good. Gump has fantastic production values, but there's a whole lot bankrupt in the film.

If that godawful soundtrack is supposed to be satirical in nature, I missed it, as I'm sure most of the people who bought it at Wal-Mart did also.

I haven't seen the film in years, so I don't remember the details, but it seems to me Forrest always gave 110% whether running for touchdowns or saving his wounded comrade.

When did I say I loved it? I thought it was visually inventive, had a laugh or two and a decent story, but I wouldn't go further than that. I merely spoke up because people are painting Zemeckis as the second coming of Hitler for this film, which strikes me as ridiculous.

I stand corrected.
Gump sucked.

You see, I just can't take the film seriously enough to be offended by it's conformist ideology. People getting this worked up over it seems like a lot of overreacting, kind of like Andre's take on Ferris Bueller. Sure, I can see where there's a message I don't agree with, but the entire film is such fluff it just doesn't bother me. Intellectually it disagrees with me, but aesthetically I like the movie. It's fantasy.

You just summed up my exact feelings about the film. Thank you.

You still lose human points in my book for hating Roger Rabbit, though.

Sounds like Gaiman and Avery are going to be "working" exec producers. Hopefully, if this is for real... then there is hope.

I couldn't agree more with the Gump hate or the Zemeckis trouncing. Outside of Cast Away I haven't liked one of his films in years. Oh and did I mention I never really saw the trailers to Cast Away?

Dunno why you quoted me, as we're about to go down the "disagreeing to agree" path, but I DON'T think Gump is a transcendent film by any stretch; it APPEARS to be one to many people, but it is just populist claptrap in the service of a morally egregious message.

HOWEVER, that doesn't change the fact that on just about every TECHNICAL level you'd care to name, it's pretty much top-notch - that was the point I was trying to make.

I Wanna Hold Your Hand is a super coming of age movie.

Romancing the Stone is a great woman's version of Raiders.

BTTF is high-gloss entertainment.

It's all downhill from there.

I understood your point just fine, but I never "cast aspersions" on its technical quality. I just called the film not "brilliant." And technical mastery does not automatically make a film "brilliant" imo.

And I keep quoting you because I'm responding to your posts. Isn't that how its supposed to work around here?

Gump was one of the most intellectually insulting, vapid, absolutely godawful movies I ever had to sit through. Its picaresque, episodic structure is lazy and pandering.

Tom Hank's win over John Travolta began my slow burn of hatred for the Academy Awards.

Gotcha.
At times people quote just to address a general point, not the poster per se. Just making sure.

I think Gary Sinise is the best thing about Gump, mainly because his story finds a good balance between the two extremes of Gump and Jenny, and his performance conveys that extremely well. The message of Lieutenant Dan's arc, that you CAN become dislluisoned and questioning of society yet still wind up a fairly balanced human being, would've made a much better theme for the movie overall.

Although, thinking about it (and keeping in mind I'm sicker than a shithouse rat today), maybe that WAS the message we were supposed to take away from the film. Gump and Jenny are the two extremes, Dan is the closest embodiment of what most folks went through during the Boomer era.

Thank you, this is in very concise terms, exactly what I thought of Forrest Gump the first (and only) time I saw it back in '94. Movies that saccharine make my teeth hurt.

Contact I liked but it's ending... well, I think South Park covered that one. And after watching What Lies Beneath I said I wasn't ever going to see a Zemekis film again... and then my family wrangled me into seeing Castaway. I once again vowed never to see another Zemekis film.

Looking back on his works, the only ones I can still enjoy are the Back To The Future movies. Roger Rabbit I loved as a kid, but it really annoys me now.

It was that very same year that I became an Oscar hater. As equally for Gumps dominance over Pulp Fiction, as "the Travolta - best Actor, Sam Jackson - best supporting " bullshit. (They were both supporting roles imo.)

If I remember correctly, Jackson lost to Martin Landau for Ed Wood. At the time I couldn't disagree with the choice, as I had never seen Ed Wood, but I remember thinking that Landau must have been pretty goddamned brilliant to beat out Jackson. Alas, people later informed me that the award was of the "lifetime achievement" variety. Screw you Academy. (L.A. Confidential should have won over Titanic, BTW).

I've never quite understood where they draw the line between supporting actor versus actor, but for Pulp Fiction it seemed as though Travolta had far more screen time than Jackson. I could be wrong.

I still enjoy Romancing the Stone and Back to the Future I, II, and III, but the rest....it ranges from decent to completely unwatchable. What is truly amazing is that Zemeckis manages to churn out garbage while at the same time attracting extremely capable actors to his projects. Has anybody ever managed to waste so much talent across so many movies? If you're going to halt production for a year while Hanks loses weight, have something to say!

Saccharine is the perfect word for Forrest Gump. My teeth hurt and my brain rebels when I am forced to watch any portion of the movie.

But isn't there some truth in the message of Forrest Gump? It's often true that people can do very well in life and make a lot of money by doing what they're told and not questioning anything. Most of my friends that knuckle down and do what they are told seem to be on the road to success financially, but those who don't appear to find it a lot harder. i'm not saying that it's morally right, but I eblieve it is definitely connected to reality.

Seconded. Outside of some nice performances (Hoskins and Lloyd) the film is loud and obnoxious.

Loud and obnoxious? Only as loud and obnoxious as the cartoons it pays tribute to. I thought Who Framed Roger Rabbit was hard to dislike. It's a funny and imaginative family movie and an affectionate homage to cartoons and gangster films.

Robert Zemeckis may not have a signature style to speak of (like Rob Reiner) but I enjoy his movies just the same. The Back To The Future films are all excellent (I think some people are turned off the third because it's a western) and What Lies Beneath is a great creepy Hitchcock film (complete with shaky ending). Of the others I have seen, Castaway was a mostly one-man character piece that I pretty much enjoyed and intend to see again, Contact is mediocre science fiction and Death Becomes her is a hugely entertaining weird movie. Finally Forrest Gump is absolutely awful if it's intended to be a heart-warming piece of Americana with a message. The only way I enjoy it is as comedy at the expense of a retarded person.

Travolta DID have more screen time due to the whole "Vincent and Mia's Date" thing, but one could make the argument that when Travolta and Jackson are onscreen together, they are equals but Jules' conversion from hitman to holy man is definitely one of the central arcs of the film. Either way, aside from whatever the criteria may be for actual time on screen, Jackson certainly isn't SUPPORTING Travolta in any scenes - at least not without a quid pro quo going on.

But dissin' Landau for Ed Wood just ain't right, my friend. While I certainly think that the Academy can at times give a "lifetime achievement" award, Landau was IMO CERTAINLY deserving of the BSA for his role as Bela Lugosi. It was just fucking brilliant. My main complaint with that year was that Kim Basinger just wasn't even in the same league as the other supporting actresses - it might have been the best work SHE ever did, but was probably 5th best out of the 5 noms.

Agreed. Landau was fucking awesome.

Just watched "Contact" again and while it's not perfect by any means, it shows in a nutshell the decade we lost with him doing his creepy cartoons.