Shakespeare in Love | Page 2 | TigerDroppings.com

Posted byMessage
H-Town Tiger
Toledo Fan
Member since Nov 2003
42584 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


quote:

Now we're having a Saving Private Ryan bash, eh? I love it. Let's take all the popular movies that are also critically acclaimed and bash them in a single thread


There is a difference between criticism and bashing.

sorry that I think the whole flash back / flash forward at the begining and end of SPR is awful and unnecessary.
quote:


Think about how cool we'd appear to the other people on this board if we went against the prevailing thought on film

so anyone with any differing opinion is just trying to be cool?



This post was edited on 1/15 at 11:47 am


Back to top
TigerMyth36
LSU Fan
River Ridge
Member since Nov 2005
28742 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


Any other year and I think this movie wouldn't get so much hate. I quite enjoy it.

However, SPR should have won and since it did not people love to HATE SIL.









Back to top
RollTide1987
Alabama Fan
Aurora, CO
Member since Nov 2009
25002 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


I hated on SIL for years without ever having seen it. When I finally sat down to watch it I couldn't believe how snarky I had been. It was a great movie.





Back to top
  Replies (0)
Baloo
LSU Fan
Formerly MDGeaux
Member since Sep 2003
44047 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


quote:

I get the point of it, it's about as subtle as hitting you upside the head with a 2X4. It is overally smaltzy and out of place.

One thing i do like is the use of the faded color film, that was a nice touch. It is a good looking movie. But I think it is grossly over rated because it is about D-Day.

I largely agree. Had the movie just been the opening sequence, it would've won an Oscar for best short film. But the rest of the movie has a lot of problems, even going beyond that final scene which I think is incredibly awful. The central plot tension is solved within 45 minutes and most of the characters are incredibly flat. They are stock characters straight out of WWII cliches for dummies.

Love the D-day sequence, and really, all of the actions sequences. Love the scene of the car going to the mother's door. But other than that, I don't much like the movie and far prefer SiL.






Back to top
H-Town Tiger
Toledo Fan
Member since Nov 2003
42584 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


For me its a movie that suffered from repeated viewings. If i only saw it once, i think it would have been better, because the action scenes and especially the open were so intense. Except I always hated the "current day" scenes.

ETA: i feel the same way about the old lady scenes in Titanic, drives me bats



This post was edited on 1/15 at 12:47 pm


Back to top
  Replies (0)
elprez00
New Orleans Saints Fan
Hammond, LA
Member since Sep 2011
13306 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


quote:

There is a difference between criticism and bashing.

I wasnt bashing. I just said I would hate to have your taste in movies. But, I could say that about alot of the pretentious SOB's on this board. But, you know man, thats just like, my opinion...


FWIW, SIL was not awful, and def deserved its nomination. Its worth a watch. I just don't believe it was on the same level as SPR or TRL.

Also, I found the Thin Red Line to be very hard to watch and follow when it first came out. Its one of those movies you really have to pay attention to. Also, the war in Europe was such a different war than the Pacific. I think the majority of Americans are so conditioned to the fight against the Nazis when they hear about WWII, they dont really understand that. I thought HBO's The Pacific was fantastic, albeit not as well done as Band of Brothers. But I found myself not having as much of an emotional investment in the characters the way i did in BoB, but I really felt like I wasn't supposed to.






Back to top
H-Town Tiger
Toledo Fan
Member since Nov 2003
42584 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


quote:

I wasnt bashing


That wasn't directed at you, someone else popped in for a drive by posting and left apparently.

If SPR had won BP, i wouldn't have a problem with that, its the type of movie that usually does win stuff like that.

I think SIL was highly original and also unfairly hated upon. I did see both before the Oscars that year, a rarity for me even back then I think i saw all 5 movies that were nominated, or at least 4 of the 5.






Back to top
alajones
LSU Fan
Hell
Member since Oct 2005
22440 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


quote:

We could bash movies like Titanic, Braveheart, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Patton, The French Connection... hell, even the GODFATHER! Think about it! Think about how contrarian we can be! Think about how cool we'd appear to the other people on this board if we went against the prevailing thought on film and believed Chinatown to have been overacted! God, we'd look cool.
Actually, lots of people bash Braveheart and I personally was let down by Chinatown.






Back to top
LoveThatMoney
LSU Fan
Who knows where?
Member since Jan 2008
5964 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


I agree there is a difference between bashing and criticism and largely I was giving you shite.

There are problems with SPR, as there are problems with every film, but it is also one of the best films to have been made in the last 20 years.

The only thing about the opening and ending scenes that was not good, imo, was the actor who was supposed to be Matt Damon. Old dude didn't do very well.

But there are so many memorable scenes outside of that and even outside of the first 20 minutes, it's not really even funny.

When Vin Diesel is trying to get the note to his father to his buddy while shot and bleeding to death under sniper fire.

When Giovanni Ribisi exclaims "OH GOD! MY LIVER!"

Opum letting the Nazi run up the stairs because he's too paralyzed with fear (even thinking about it makes my blood boil).

Matt Damon having bullets sprayed all around him as he sits in a fetal position screaming while we see and hear through Hanks' POV.

The acting is superb. Hanks is fantastic. Damon is great. Even the bit parts, like Paul Giamatti are great. There was no real lull in the film and it was terrifically paced, with a unique (as you said) faded film approach that gave the movie an authentic feel. Everything about SPR felt real, even if you don't think the mission itself seemed real (me personally, I could see it happening).

At the end of the day, to me, SPR holds up even after multiple viewings like Braveheart and other action films that have a real heart to them.

In other words, you're entitled to your opinion, but SPR is a far superior to 98% of the films created in the past 20 years, maybe more. It has nothing to do with the WWII setting or the D-Day Invasion, and everything to do with its mechanics, with the superb acting, directing, and story that presented memorable character after memorable character seamlessly and effortlessly, right down to the German soldier they capture and have dig the graves.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
LoveThatMoney
LSU Fan
Who knows where?
Member since Jan 2008
5964 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


quote:

Actually, lots of people bash Braveheart and I personally was let down by Chinatown.


Of course you were.

And I wasn't saying people don't bash Braveheart. I was saying those people are morons.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
LoveThatMoney
LSU Fan
Who knows where?
Member since Jan 2008
5964 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


quote:

If SPR had won BP, i wouldn't have a problem with that, its the type of movie that usually does win stuff like that.

I think SIL was highly original and also unfairly hated upon. I did see both before the Oscars that year, a rarity for me even back then I think i saw all 5 movies that were nominated, or at least 4 of the 5.


I dig SIL. Great movie. SPR was better in every way, imo, from script to direction. Joseph Fiennes was great in it and so was Geoffrey Rush, and Paltrow was serviceable as the stereotypical fish out of water.

I don't really agree it was highly original, but I do think they played well on the frequently used themes of love stories to make them slightly different and appealing to the audience. But nothing about SIL screamed Oscar to me. It's kind of like Bradley Cooper's and Jennifer Lawrence's performances in Silver Linings Playbook. They were great, but they just didn't really come off as Oscar-worthy.

But I agree, SIL is unfairly hated upon.

quote:

That wasn't directed at you, someone else popped in for a drive by posting and left apparently.


Still here.



This post was edited on 1/15 at 1:34 pm


Back to top
alajones
LSU Fan
Hell
Member since Oct 2005
22440 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


I agree with just about everything you said about SPR, I don't get what the hell they are talking about.





Back to top
H-Town Tiger
Toledo Fan
Member since Nov 2003
42584 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


One thing is I completely disagree about the characters being memorable. The actors are memorable, but as Baloo said the characters are straight out of cliches 'r us.

The one execption may have been Opum and the fact that people get pissed that he is paralyzed with fear missed the point. Not everyone is cut out of combat.






Back to top
SlowFlowPro
Stanford Fan
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
297981 posts
 Online 

re: Shakespeare in Love


quote:

I largely agree.

i third this motion






Back to top
  Replies (0)
LoveThatMoney
LSU Fan
Who knows where?
Member since Jan 2008
5964 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


quote:

The actors are memorable, but as Baloo said the characters are straight out of cliches 'r us.


I don't really agree with Baloo on that at all. Yes, there is the hard-nosed sergeant, the well loved CO, the outcast soldier, but each character has a backstory. Each character is fleshed out. They may have a cliched basis, as most characters do in every story told since the dawn of modern history, but most are actually well thought out.

The same is true in SIL. Shakespeare is your stereotypical down and out artist with a creative block, Paltrow is the stereotypical character who is different from her peer group trying to live her dream. The story is cliched as well. The down and out artist with a creative block meets the "different" girl and she becomes his muse. They fall in love. The world is shocked by the "different" girl's behavior, but all ends happily. They do have some meat on their bones, though, and the characters are well thought out and real (except, maybe, Ben Affleck's character )

In any case, I disagree with SPR's characters being flat.


quote:

The one execption may have been Opum and the fact that people get pissed that he is paralyzed with fear missed the point. Not everyone is cut out of combat.


Opum is one of the best characters in the film. I still hate the fact that he let his buddies go without fricking ammo to be ambushed by Nazi soldiers. It makes me want to kick the guy. I understand why Opum was included. I understand not everyone is cut out for combat. Shit, Opum had only fired a rifle in basic. He wasn't a Ranger. He didn't storm the beaches of Normandy. It wouldn't make sense for him to be fricking Rambo, but the reason that scene was included was precisely to evoke an emotional response. Opum's cowardice in the face of the enemy is very real, but it's also infuriating and nearly every guy who saw the film wanted to shout "GET THE HELL UP THOSE STAIRS, YOU WHINY LITTLE BITCH!" But he doesn't. He cries. And it's brilliant.



This post was edited on 1/15 at 2:10 pm


Back to top
Baloo
LSU Fan
Formerly MDGeaux
Member since Sep 2003
44047 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


Opum's character actually gets to everything I dislike about the film. He's the effete intellectual who is too big of a pussy to actually fight for his country, unlike the true Americans who are salt of the earth. It's just offensive. Like, World War I didn't crank out a high amount of great poets who fought with valor in that war.

It's just lazy. It's picking on the weak, nerdy kid in the audience, telling him that while these more virile men have bravery and courage, you're just a weak coward because you went to college.

The WWII cottage industry of the "Greatest Generation" is essentially the Baby Boomers growing up and realizing what jackasses they were to their parents, so they better apologize before they die. Since I'm not the one with daddy issues, I'm not really interested in the haliography. But Opum represents the Baby Boomers, who dodged the draft and went to college and are less of a man than those heroes who fought the Nazis. It is the ultimate in Spielberg wallowing in self-pity and talking about what a loser and a coward he is.

Opum is not only unnecessary as a character, he's downright offensive, as if one can't be both brave and intellectual. But he's in the film because after the Normandy Beach sequence, this is not a film so much about WWII, but about Baby Boomers feeling guilty about disrespecting their fathers. Which reaches its apex at the coda scene, which is cringe-inducingly terrible. Opum takes me out of the film almost entirely.






Back to top
iwyLSUiwy
Southern Fan
I'm your huckleberry
Member since Apr 2008
21273 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


Poor Shakespeare In Love. It's like one of the most hated films ever, simply because it won Best Picture. If it hadn't won Best Picture it would generally be considered a good movie, but now it is terrible because Saving Private Ryan is every Americans greatest movie I guess.

Who cares, the Oscars rarely get it right and this was just another mistake. I'd you like Saving Private Ryan awesome, don't see why that effects everybody's view of Shakespeare In Love.






Back to top
Baloo
LSU Fan
Formerly MDGeaux
Member since Sep 2003
44047 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


Hell, I think Affliction was the best movie from that year, and it didn't even get nominated for Best Picture (though James Coburn won for Supporting Actor).





Back to top
  Replies (0)
alajones
LSU Fan
Hell
Member since Oct 2005
22440 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


quote:

If you like Goodfellas awesome, don't see why that effects everybody's view of Dances With Wolves.


quote:

If you like Shawshank Redemption awesome, don't see why that effects everybody's view of Forrest Gump


We could probably do this all day.






Back to top
RollTide1987
Alabama Fan
Aurora, CO
Member since Nov 2009
25002 posts

re: Shakespeare in Love


quote:

Opum is not only unnecessary as a character, he's downright offensive, as if one can't be both brave and intellectual.


This is where you lose me. I think you are wrong for two reasons:

1. As Captain Miller clearly shows, one CAN be both brave and an intellectual at the same time. He was obviously college educated, like Upham, and was also a school teacher. If that doesn't scream "intellectual" then I don't know what else does.

2. Upham is an essential character in the film as he is the one who helps flesh out the character of John H. Miller. They both identify with each other as they are both intellectuals and they seem to form some kind of bond that isn't present with the other men in the squad.

Upham was a non-combatant, having not held a rifle since basic training. The only reason he was pulled into the mission is because the translators Miller had in his company had been killed. Because he wasn't one of them, and because the guy had not seen a lick of action, the veteran guys in the squad were destined to pick on him.

Despite his weak and cowardly nature, Upham becomes the moral compass of Miller's unit on their quest to find Ryan. In fact…I would argue Upham is most instrumental in making the key part of the story happen. After Wade is killed in their assault on the German machine gun position everyone, including Miller, wanted to execute the German POW on the spot. Upham was able to change Miller's mind and the German soldier is set free. As we all know, this same German soldier goes on to be the one who fires the fatal shot that kills Captain John H. Miller.

My favorite scene of the movie is the one where Upham, having listened to Mellish getting killed from the confines of the stairwell, stares up at the offending German. Upham has a clear shot at this guy. The German has no rifle, just his bayonet, and is completely and utterly defenseless. Upham, however, breaks down into tears as he finds himself unable to take the man's life and allows the German soldier to pass him on the stairwell to continue the fight against his comrades in arms.






Back to top


Back to top