 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My point about apples and oranges is that one needn't disparage one film to praise the other. (Mainly I speak as a Laughton maven). Brando made the production of BOUNTY a living hell for all involved, including a director or two, but I haven't seen it for a long time, and perhaps if I see it again I'll be pleasantly surprised at what ended up onscreen. I rather enjoyed it in its first run when I saw it as a high school kid. Maybe it'll seem even better than I remember it. (Compared to what's produced and shown nowadays, silver age movies and golden age movies alike seem to grow in stature.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm surprised, as I trust Morricone's taste, to read his bad opinion of Howard's Bligh. I remember it as splendid, (and perhaps even my first exposure to this fine actor's work on the big screen.) But then, that was an awfully long time ago. Now I've got ANOTHER reason to want to see this film again soon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Mar 27, 2010 - 4:40 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
pp312
(Member)
|
I'm surprised, as I trust Morricone's taste, to read his bad opinion of Howard's Bligh.
Me too, and I have to say I've never read anything like it before. Indeed I think this is Howard's best performance with the possible exception of Charge Of The Light Brigade, where he was perhaps even more "unnuanced" ("black bottle" anyone?).
Odd, isn't it, how differently the same movie, the same performance, can strike two people?
PS: Sorry, Preston, I missed the point of your apples and oranges remark (must have been off my fruit). Those two films are indeed miles apart in concept and approach and really not comparable in any way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This movie, besides its wonderful score and photography (and the "Bounty" ship itself), is noteworthy as a historical record of a Tahiti that no longer exists, at least not in the pristine paradise state presented in the film. The native girls-and-sailors fishing sequence in the film is wonder to behold.
According to a not-so-recent National Geographic article, the added tourism that the film procured (plus the use of the islands as a French base for France's nuclear bomb tests in the South Pacific) altered the economy and the face of the islands forever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's okay, pp132, I probably could have been clearer and more straightforward.
'Night all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It must be because you look so much younger than you are!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Mar 30, 2010 - 1:47 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Tall Guy
(Member)
|
Flattery....is indeed the way to go! 
Excellent - so I can take it that you were being congratulatory, then.
Unfortunately your logic has taken a right turn when the sign definitely said left.
Well, hinted left, anyway.
In that case, perhaps you could explain why adding the words "in my opinion" would have rendered my post more acceptable to you. The original point was that the poster imagined that this set would b in everybody's top 5 FSM discs - a little presumptuous, I thought, so I expressed my top 5 FSM discs. I haven't got all possible FSM discs, to be sure, but of the ones I have, they are my top five. Perfectly reasonable, so far?
Why then, so I have to add that this is only my opinion? Whose opinion should I have? Would any third party or passer-by think that I'd be expressing their opinion? I thought my post and intentions were perfectly clear, unlike the original poster, who seemed to imply that there was something wrong with anyone who didn't have Mutiny in their top five FSM discs.
I also pointed out that I bought the Mutiny set, so I've certainly given it a fair crack of the whip, and supported FSM into the bargain.
Now it's your turn to explain your post - be as logical as you like!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Mar 30, 2010 - 4:28 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
pp312
(Member)
|
Flattery....is indeed the way to go!
Excellent - so I can take it that you were being congratulatory, then.
Unfortunately your logic has taken a right turn when the sign definitely said left.
Well, hinted left, anyway.
In that case, perhaps you could explain why adding the words "in my opinion" would have rendered my post more acceptable to you. The original point was that the poster imagined that this set would b in everybody's top 5 FSM discs - a little presumptuous, I thought, so I expressed my top 5 FSM discs. I haven't got all possible FSM discs, to be sure, but of the ones I have, they are my top five. Perfectly reasonable, so far?
Why then, so I have to add that this is only my opinion? Whose opinion should I have? Would any third party or passer-by think that I'd be expressing their opinion? I thought my post and intentions were perfectly clear, unlike the original poster, who seemed to imply that there was something wrong with anyone who didn't have Mutiny in their top five FSM discs.
I also pointed out that I bought the Mutiny set, so I've certainly given it a fair crack of the whip, and supported FSM into the bargain.
Now it's your turn to explain your post - be as logical as you like!
Why certainly--my pleasure. Of course we know you're only expressing your opinion; nevertheless there's a certain bluntness, a certain incivility to failing to add that bit of assumed information. As it happens, you reassigned a personal favourite of mine to the end of a line populated by scores that, insofar as I'm familiar with them (and I would claim to be more familiar with their "type" than every individual note), I would not rate in my top 500; as a consequence I experienced a momentary irritation not ameliorated by the expected "in my opinion"--a phrase capable of cushioning the aggravation caused by even the grossest lapses of taste. It's a courtesy, you see, and like most courtesies slightly redundant but nevertheless greatly appreciated by all persons of civility and taste. Certainly by me.
Please take all that as my heartfelt and more-than-slightly-tongue-in-cheek opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Mar 30, 2010 - 1:47 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Tall Guy
(Member)
|
Why certainly--my pleasure. Of course we know you're only expressing your opinion; nevertheless there's a certainly bluntness, a certain incivility to failing to add that bit of assumed information. As it happens, you reassigned a personal favourite of mine to the end of a line populated by scores that, insofar as I'm familiar with them (and I would claim to be more familiar with their "type" than every individual note), I would not rate in my top 500; as a consequence I experienced a momentary irritation not ameliorated by the expected "in my opinion"--a phrase capable of cushioning the aggravation caused by even the grossest lapses of taste. It's a courtesy, you see, and like most courtesies slightly redundant but nevertheless greatly appreciated by all persons of civility and taste. Certainly by me.
Please take all that as my heartfelt and more-than-slightly-tongue-in-cheek opinion.
Thank you for that thorough if slightly florid (in my opinion ) explanation. You manage to accuse me of "a gross lapse in taste" by hiding it in a prolixity of multi-syllabic platitudes, which is a good trick.
Just for the exercise, I started to look at the posts before mine to see if anyone had unforgivably failed to pardon themselves when expressing an opinion, and it didn't take long to find this:
(ncidentally (sic), not that I want to turn the thread into loved it/hated it, but I could never take seriously any film that presented Clark Gable as an Englishman. There was never a more strictly American icon than Clark Gable, and he was wise not to even attempt an English accent).
Doesn't this opinion about Gable require qualification? After all, could John Wayne not have claimed this? Or Ernest Hemingway, Andy Warhol, Clint Eastwood and a dozen others? Or Marlon Brando, sticking to the theme of the thread! Or, some might say, Dick Van Dyke or Keanu Reeves, notwithstanding that they weren't wise enough to avoid assaying an English accent.... Each of these will have their promoters for the title, and may be dismayed by your bluntness in dismissing their views so unequivocally!
Some might say, well, ol' TG is a Yorskhireman, a breed well known for their bluntness. Well, I say, **** them! We're actually very diplomatic compared with some.
I do take on board that some delicate souls may prefer the IMO qualification after every pronouncement, and will certainly remember this while simultaneously ignoring it when I feel so inclined!
I was however interested in your comment about my list. You said:
As it happens, you reassigned a personal favourite of mine to the end of a line populated by scores that, insofar as I'm familiar with them (and I would claim to be more familiar with their "type" than every individual note), I would not rate in my top 500
I was unsure whether you're referring to Mutiny or King Kong as your personal favourite. Your context would suggest the former, but your words suggest the latter. Either way, I'm envious if Eye of the Devil and my other choices aren't in your top 500, because you must have some absolutely cracking scores in your collection that I haven't ever heard. All these FSM discs are amongst my very favourite scores. But then we've already established that I'm grossly lacking in taste.
Just ask any of my Goldsmith-loving friends on this board!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
