MichaelB wrote:Did you know that Tarkovsky commented on James Glickenhaus' The Exterminator?
He was visiting London in 1981 for a NFT lecture, and insisted on seeing it, as it was the big British censorship cause célèbre at the time - so you can see why a much-censored Russian filmmaker would have a passing interest in the subject.
He wasn't impressed.
He wasn't impressed.
Neither was I - by far the worst adaptation of William Burroughs I have ever seen!
ando wrote:Media wolves as well as everyone else will read his film no differently simply because the release date is scheduled around national events. Why would we?
You're doing an awful lot of careless and uncharitable reading in order to bolster what you'd already decided was true beforehand. Spielberg seems to be saying that he doesn't want his film cheaply co-opted by political partisans to help sell whatever policies they're pushing, which is perfectly reasonable considering how often that has already happened with Lincoln. So he pushes the release date back so that no one can mangle the film to help them win an election and so that it isn't overshadowed by electoral rhetoric. Not only is this motive understandable, it functions perfectly well without your assumption that Spielberg is a political filmmaker who pretends to be a-political. That last bit is an unnecessary explanation.
Apparently not, Mr. Sausage, as I was asked to re-clarify the point. What seems careless, uncharitable and unnecessary is your contention that posters need comment according to your editorial satisfaction.
ando wrote:Apparently not, Mr. Sausage, as I was asked to re-clarify the point. What seems careless, uncharitable and unnecessary is your contention that posters need comment according to your editorial satisfaction.
Ah, another person who thinks they can disprove an argument through ad-hominems. I kinda of like this game, it's so easy to defeat. Watch:
Which one of my claims ceases to be true because I only like posters to comment according to my satisfaction? Which one of my claims suddenly becomes true when I stop wanting posters to only comment according to my satisfaction? Doesn't it strike you as odd that the exact same claim becomes right or wrong to you based on some sort of internal belief of mine?
stroszeck wrote:What could be more perfect than a photo of a confederate soldier bearing his rifle alongside a hollywood douchebag nursing a frapuccino...
Oh, I don't know. Perhaps a photo of young boy in a Union soldier's uniform alongside Steven Spielberg holding coffee? Throw in Daniel Day Lewis dressed as Lincoln and I think you'd have something "more perfect" than the imaginary scenario you described. Even better would be a picture of Yo Yo Ma laying on the floor of a bathroom with a wombat.
stroszeck wrote:What could be more perfect than a photo of a confederate soldier bearing his rifle alongside a hollywood douchebag nursing a frapuccino...
Oh, I don't know. Perhaps a photo of young boy in a Union soldier's uniform alongside Steven Spielberg drinking coffee? Throw in Daniel Day Lewis dressed as Lincoln and I think you'd have something "more perfect" than the imaginary scenario you described. Even better would be a picture of Yo Yo Ma laying on the floor of a bathroom with a wombat.
I clearly need to purchase a copy of Idiots Guide to Civil War....but anyways you sir win the "Greatest Photo in the History of Anything" award. Awesome post.
There's gotta be a way to segue from the assassination attempt in Gangs of New York to the assassination in this film, right? Both feature Day-Lewis and both feature Lincoln...
Also Steven, can we get a big speech at the end of this where he wishes he had freed more slaves?
stroszeck wrote:What could be more perfect than a photo of a confederate soldier bearing his rifle alongside a hollywood douchebag nursing a frapuccino...
Perhaps Lincoln can break down into hysterical fits of tears while trying to peddle his watch to raise money to buy one more slave's freedom, while the audience breaks out in hysterical fits of laughter at the awfulness of the acting.
stroszeck wrote:What could be more perfect than a photo of a confederate soldier bearing his rifle alongside a hollywood douchebag nursing a frapuccino...
Post of the year [x]
Have any of you ever had a frappucino? Or do you realize that movies get made in current time, and there are no time machines involved?
Spielberg should have followed DDL's lead on this. Instead of a film, he should have just shot a bunch of Mathew Brady-style albumen print photos of people churning butter and brandishing muzzle loaders.
stroszeck wrote:What could be more perfect than a photo of a confederate soldier bearing his rifle alongside a hollywood douchebag nursing a frapuccino...
Post of the year [x]
I think we've already covered Confederate versus Union uniforms, but there is still confusion, so here is what a douchebag and a Frappuccino look like. I'll leave it to you to determine which is which.
