Sidney Lumet (aka "I'm mad as hell" that several films aren't on DVD) - Page 2

Guest 51652 · 13-01-2008, 19:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by McClintock!!!

Why are filmmakers judged on their visual motifs? This is the same short-sighted nonsense that gets levelled at Clint Eastwood's films; yes there are people who've made their mark with great camerawork; Kubrick, Hitchcock, Welles etc but they all had skills elsewhere too, style alone isn't worth a thing - who's the better filmmaker; Tony Scott or John Huston? Isn't it enough to create an engaging narrartive and be responsible for nurturing great performances from your cast?

Yes. And why do people equate "style" with ostentatious camerawork?

anephric · 13-01-2008, 19:13

I'm aware sparseness is a stylistic trait - I may have seen a Bresson film or two, in between drooling over De Palma's zooms.

Guest 57579 · 21-02-2008, 04:08

I caught up with a double feature of The Anderson Tapes and The Deadly Affair today. I wasn't keen on the former. The surveillance aspect seemed to go nowhere, despite being called attention to over and over. I thought the heist was anticlimactic. Just didn't work for me, though Connery was great.

The Deadly Affair I enjoyed much more. Like others' said, the cinematography was a stand-out. It's another one of those films that disproves some of the criticisms of Lumet's supposed limitations. A very solid, atmospheric film. Both prints looked extraordinary, with almost zero damage. Typical Sony holds the R1 DVDs hostage for no good reason.

DanWilde1966 · 21-02-2008, 21:04

I seem to recall Lumet was involved in the early development of Scarface, and was even responsible for suggesting that the film be set in Miami.

anephric · 21-02-2008, 21:52

Yep, indeed. He and De Palma effectively traded projects - Lumet did Prince of the City (which De Palma was going to do with Travolta) and De Palma did Scarface, which Lumet was going to do because of his previous work with Pacino.

Orion fired De Palma from Prince of the City because WB weren't interested in part-financing the film with De Palma at the helm - they felt safer with Lumet. De Palma then "inherited" Scarface, which Bregman was quite keen on him for anyway.

Livius · 21-02-2008, 22:03

The Beaver has a comparison up for the new 12 Angry Men disc - now anamorphic.

Guest 57579 · 15-07-2008, 06:04

Since I started this thread in part to ask about Daniel, I should probably comment again now that I've seen it. The film was not what I was expecting, which maybe lessened my opinion of it somewhat. It flashes back to Daniel's parents, stand-ins for the Rosenbergs, throughout the entirety and the title character isn't explored very well.

One of the things I did find commendable in the film was the insistence on going all the way in portraying Daniel's parents as being essentially railroaded by the anti-red government. I liked how it made me question my own ideas and thoughts on a piece of history without being obnoxious in the process. The unfortunate side effect there was that in the flashbacks the parents are one-dimensional and given martyr-like status without any real justification. What works as an asset in the film as a whole founders when isolated.

I discussed some of that in the DVD Times review I did of the Legend Films disc, but it might have made more sense in my head.

Those interested in purchasing the DVD should be aware that there are no subtitles or extra features, but the transfer is pretty strong (aside from being interlaced).