"The beauty of history is that historians have the ability to find patterns, the big picture. When you make a movie, you try to find that. I'm doing in the cinema what historians try to do in their own media."
Filmography
Screenwriter Only (* = Co-Writer) Midnight Express (1978) Conan the Barbarian* (1982) Scarface (1983) Year of the Dragon* (1985) 8 Million Ways to Die* (1985) Evita* (1996)
Feature Directing (* = Screenwriter/Co-Writer) Last Year in Vietnam* (1971) [NYU Student Film] Seizure* (1974) The Hand* (1981) Salvador* (1986) Platoon* (1986) Wall Street* (1987) Talk Radio* (1988) Born on the Fourth of July* (1989) The Doors* (1991) JFK* (1991) Heaven & Earth* (1993) Natural Born Killers* (1994) Nixon* (1995) U Turn* (1997) Any Given Sunday* (1999) Persona Non Grata (2003) Comandante (2003) Alexander* (2004) Looking for Fidel* (2004) World Trade Center (2006) W. (2008) South of the Border (2009) Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps (2010) Savages* (2012) Oliver Stone's Untold History of the United States* (2012) Snowden* (2016) The Putin Interviews* (2017)
Producer Only Sugar Cookies (1973) Blue Steel (1990) Reversal of Fortune (1990) Zebrahead (1992) South Central (1992) Wild Palms (1993) The Joy Luck Club (1993) The New Age (1994) Indictment: The McMartin Trial (1995) Freeway (1996) The People vs. Larry Flynt (1996) Killer: A Journal of Murder (1996) Cold Around the Heart (1997) Gravesend (1997) Savior (1998) The Corruptor (1999) The Day Reagan Was Shot (2001) All Governments Lie (2016)
flyonthewall2983 wrote:RE: The Doors (Oliver Stone, 1991):
I wrote about it on Letterboxd recently, not giving it the greatest props. But it's interesting to me looking at the films about the 60's now as opposed to then. I said it in the Jackie thread, but it feels like we're getting closer to showing the time in a way that strips away the nostalgia and looks at the cold hard facts from a present point of view. This really didn't do it at all, and I'm not sure that if Morrison's story were told today that there is much that could be related to what's going on now. Maybe an exception for his preoccupations with anarchy, and possibly similar feelings held by the current administration.
I like this film quite a bit. It really is astonishing how prolific Stone was during this time-he managed to complete J.F.K. the same year and produced other projects as well. My biggest gripe has always been Meg Ryan's performance; she was terribly miscast, and every scene with her and Kilmer alone is an enormous slog to get through.
Last edited by beamish13 on Mon Jan 30, 2017 10:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The most glaring mis-casting is Kevin Dillon, who did a good enough replicating John Densmore's drumming style (it's incredible to me that they actually played as a band) but didn't sound at all like him.
Taking away from whether or not what Stone presented is what actually happened to a tee, a lot of this feels quite timely now. It builds up quite nicely to the Mr. X scene, and after which it kind of withers (except for much of the trial sequence, including the monologue by Costner in what's probably his finest moment). The stuff with Garrison's family feels almost from another movie, and is kind of cringe-worthy in some places. It's probably cringe-worthy everywhere else for some of you, but this is undoubtedly Stone's best work.
The Colbert interview killed off any interest I might have had. If I was going to be stuck with four hours of Russian propaganda I would need a better director than Stone.
Showtime is advertising it with that opening question about "why did you hack the election" as if it's some sort of hard-hitting exposé. It took a while, but I'm afraid Stone has finally lost it.
Like, I literally have no clue how the director of Salvador would be such a blind follower of a right wing, oppressive, violent ruler. I'm not saying Stone has shown himself to be particularly intelligent in the past and certainly he has a history of gullibility, but Putin seems outside that mold.
Putin apparently actually has a following among some anti-globalist leftists. As does Trump. I realize how insane this sounds but if Oliver Stone can support Putin nothing really shocks me anymore.
I've not seen "The Untold History of the United States" but I've heard from that he tries to paint Stalin in a better light as well. Whataboutism abounds apparently. Has anyone here seen that and can they confirm or deny that this occurs?
I've never thought much of Stone as a filmmaker but I know he has his fans. I wonder just how many will buy into all this.
If I remember rightly at the time of the movie he was also very complimentary of Bush. Maybe he has been on the right the whole time and just seemed on the left due to his anti-Vietnam stance.
Every time Oliver Stone comes up with me and my Frasier loving roommate, we shove his name into one of that show's classic exchanges.
"Remember when you used to think Oliver Stone was a great filmmaker?"
"Was I ever that young?"
I haven't seen the short Scorsese mentioned, but I don't doubt it's likely a good film because when he first started out, that was his greatest strength - playing out his experiences in Vietnam. It was the best use of his skills and he stood out even more because 1) very few filmmakers in Hollywood knew what it was like in Vietnam and 2) mainstream culture seemed ready to re-examine that topic in a way it hadn't before judging by the commercial success of Platoon (a $100+ million blockbuster in 1986 dollars) and the glut of Vietnam films and TV shows (China Beach for one, but even other shows like Quantum Leap did their own serious Vietnam episodes). I had a history teacher who was a Vietnam veteran and he singled out Platoon as perhaps the only film he had seen that perfectly captured what it was like to be in Vietnam. (At least certain combat scenes - he made that remark after screening the big ambush scene for us.)
In hindsight, it's pretty tiring that the Vietnamese are reduced to perpetual background characters in every Vietnam War film and documentary I've seen. Once in a while I'll hear a comedian make a bitter joke that one would think the soldiers who did the killing in My Lai had a rougher time than the actual dead. But since these are all American films, it's not entirely surprising.
Not a fan of Wall Street but I really started to lose interest when he turned out to be a crackpot. JFK at least seemed remarkable for its bold visual style, but that aesthetic soon looked sloppy, hamfisted and pretty shallow (Natural Born Killers, Nixon).
hearthesilence wrote:In hindsight, it's pretty tiring that the Vietnamese are reduced to perpetual background characters in every Vietnam War film and documentary I've seen. Once in a while I'll hear a comedian make a bitter joke that one would think the soldiers who did the killing in My Lai had a rougher time than the actual dead. But since these are all American films, it's not entirely surprising.
You could check out Stone's own film Heaven and Earth.
I would say that Heaven and Earth is one Stone's better films. It certainly helps that it's a movie told from a fresh perspective. I should mention that a good portion of the story takes place after the war though.
Askew wrote:I would say that Heaven and Earth is one Stone's better films. It certainly helps that it's a movie told from a fresh perspective. I should mention that a good portion of the story takes place after the war though.
Amen to that. I just saw it with the man himself and the film's star Hiep Thi Le several weeks ago at the American Cinematheque. Amazing performances, a beautiful score by Japanese new wave artist Kitaro, who sadly has yet to produce another score for a Hollywood film, and expectedly gorgeous photography by Robert Richardson. Stone felt that the movie's themes of refugees being displaced to new countries and the plight of women who are impacted by war would probably land better today than it did in 1993, and I'm inclined to agree. It's the only Stone film to explore themes like spirituality and motherhood, and the experience of making it and collaborating with its real-life subject Le Ly Hayslip inspired Stone to convert to Buddhism.
Him being back in the news somehow stirred me to go back to his IMDB page. Surprised to find I've only seen 8 of his features, even more surprised to realize I only actually like one of them (Talk Radio). Most have seemed middling, which is probably the last thing he wants.
“I don’t know what is going on with the American culture,” Stone told Putin. “It’s very strange right now. So much of the argument, so much of the thinking, so much of the newspaper, television commentaries about gender, people identify themselves, and social media, this and that, I’m male, I’m female, I’m transgender, I’m cisgender. It goes on forever, and there is a big fight about who is who.”
Putin responded by saying the younger generation “lives too well” and has “nothing to think about,” to which Stone said, “Yeah, but it’s not a healthy culture.”
The Russian leader explained, “We have a law banning [gay] propaganda among minors.”
Stone responded, “Yes, that’s the one I’m talking about. It seems like maybe that’s a sensible law.”
Putin continued, “It is aimed at allowing people to reach maturity and then decide who they are and how they want to live. There are no restrictions at all after this.”
Though there’s no way to verify the accuracy of the transcript published by the Kremlin directly, Stone isn’t denying what he’s quoted as saying. He posted a statement to his Facebook page. The director said that neither he nor the Russian president are “anti-gay/LGBTQ” and directed anyone angry with his comments to watch his 2004 historical drama “Alexander.”
“As to gay/LGBTQ beliefs in Russia, again much misunderstood,” Stone wrote on Facebook. “Mr. Putin made himself clear in ‘The Putin Interviews’ – he’s not anti-gay/LGBTQ. Nor am I. Have another look at ‘Alexander,’ for which we took a beating in 2004. Beyond the Hephaestion story in the sexuality department, I prominently featured Alexander’s love for the Persian eunuch Bagoas, certainly an example of a third sex and emblematic of Alexander’s world vision, which I much admired. Do not bring American expectations to Russian life any more than you expect Iran, Korea, Venezuela, or China to follow our political or social demands.”
Just checked his twitter feed. The two posts about his interview with Putin and what was said have only attracted 77 and 26 comments respectively. I’m sure these will go up once this indiewire article gets around
