Wasted Potential

[ShogunRua]

Recently watched the Walter Hill vehicle Streets of Fire (1984). You can read my mini-review if you wish, but suffice to say that it was stupid. And boring. And uninspired. However, there was one exception. It had a really cool visual aesthetic; , a funky 80's imitation of the 50s blending drab greys with bright colors.

Hell, that is best exemplified in this outstanding poster, likely the best thing about the movie.

http://i.ebayimg.com/images/i/300740357 ... -l1000.jpg

That aesthetic belonged in a better film, and in an alternate universe, the rest of the movie would have matched it.

Unlike Streets of Fire, the Australian film Two Hands (1999), starring a young Heath Ledger, is quite good. It's a neat little crime thriller and one of the best Aussie films I've seen, Mad Max series included. It also makes me wince and feel more sad than happy. Because it should have been a great film, not just a good one. The skeleton for a tremendous, all-time great action story was there. Like an Aussie Snatch. In some ways even better. Problem is that Gregor Jordan is no Guy Ritchie.

What's wrong, specifically? Well, the cinemaphotography and sound is often amateurish. Some of the scenes don't quite go together as well as they should. Certain scenes should be shorter. Others a bit longer. The pacing, especially near the beginning, is a little off. The opening is weird and unnecessary. It's lacking that little bit of humor in certain scenes. Lots of small details, but overall, it's the difference between a good and great film.

Possibly the greatest waste of potential I can think of is The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the Eighth Dimension! (1984). I always compare it to Robocop (1987), especially since they're both trippy 80's science fiction movies staring Peter Weller.

Buckaroo Banzai has a vastly superior premise. Way more interesting characters and universe. Hell, even better actors. It should be the much, much better and more famous film.

However, Robocop has an excellent director at the peak of his powers, Paul Verhoeven. Buckaroo Banzai has WD Richter, a first-time director (his only other credit would be a forgettable 1991 movie) whose shoddy work worsens numerous scenes with its presentation.

And that's why Robocop is the superior movie and all-time classic, while Buckaroo Banzai is an obscure cult film. Had someone as good as Verhoeven directed Buckaroo Banzai, it would be considered one of the great, great all-time classics, and not just among science fiction films. It might well have spawned a major franchise.

The potential of Buckaroo Banzai was mind-boggling. Some of the science fiction ideas and visuals are really outstanding, underexplored as they were by the movie. It's got an amazing blend of pulp and science fiction, a twist on Doc Savage with a distinctly 80's flavor, that no one else has really translated to screen successfully. It makes me think of the best works of the great Philip Jose Farmer, who blended science fiction, fantasy, and pulp so seamlessly in his books.

Also, it should have been a damn funny film (I mean fuck, John Lithgow plays the main villain!). Unfortunately, Richter is one of the worst people ever at directing comedy ever, successfully murdering every good joke. What a damn shame.

Focus-

What films make you think of how much better they could and should have been?

[CMonster]

This could possibly be the longest list of films ever compiled, so I will just throw out one that I thought was truly awful. I learned how to read from Calvin and Hobbes. There is a lot of silly fun, subtle humor, and a light touch of philosophy. As an adult some of it doesn't hold up, but a lot of it does which is more than can be said for almost all comics I read as a kid (especially Garfield). Dear Mr. Watterson was a very annoying film in my opinion. I watched it only based on the subject, but after watching I would say the subject was not Calvin and Hobbes. The subject of the film was the filmmaker and the interview subjects. This was so incredibly self centered and self satisfying. Admittedly, I have a much harsher opinion of this film than anybody else I know who has seen it. I guess the bottom line is I don't think Seth Green's saying he grew up reading Calvin and Hobbes is relevant information. I would love to know more about Watterson, his inspirations, his philosophy. I turned it off when the filmmaker started talking about his own book. Sure, the book was about Calvin and Hobbes, but this was not presented as a movie about him. And they were unable to get a interview the Bill Watterson. Maybe I'm just rambling at this point, but this was not good and I was really excited to see a movie about Calvin and Hobbes.

[JacoIII]

Take that back.

I think C & H is a comic strip mainly for adults. It's easily the best comic strip ever. Nothing even comes close. A good comic strip has around 2-3 funny strips per 10 strips. C & H has double that number easily.

I can name two better strips off the top of my head: The Far Side and Julius Knipl, Real Estate Photographer

Calvin and Hobbes, while great, gets far more credit than I think it deserves. That's not to say it isn't a great strip, it is (look at my avatar), but it never had the incredible storytelling of Larson's work (which he accomplished in one panel!) nor his next-level sense of humour.

EDIT: Seriously, look at this storytelling

https://theticktock.files.wordpress.com ... ntage1.jpg
http://oddlovescompany.com/wp-content/u ... ca7231.jpg
http://36.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m6akl ... o1_500.jpg
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/imag ... 5JJahgFa-g

Larson was able to place his cartoons at such a perfect moment that the entire past and future of the story was suggested without additional explanation. I had a few better examples in mind, but his cartoons are hard to find online.

[ShogunRua]

Dear Mr. Watterson was a very annoying film in my opinion. I watched it only based on the subject, but after watching I would say the subject was not Calvin and Hobbes.

I find many documentaries on beloved childhood properties are highly self-indulgent. No surprise that was the case there. Honestly, I'm not sure how much potential there was to begin with; what can really be said Bill Watterson? He wrote a pretty good comic that has become disgustingly overrated by hipsters in the decades since.

You think he has more interesting thoughts about art and philosophy than a Haruki Murakami or Chan-Woo Park?

As for what newspaper comic is or isn't "great" or the "best", it's irrelevant to the topic, and a really silly discussion to boot.

[VinegarBob]

Schindler's List
A.I. Artificial Intelligence
War of The Worlds
Minority Report
Amis...

Fuck it...Steven Spielberg.

[JacoIII]

But in the end, it's a matter of taste. My "Take that back" was just a throwaway comment.

Agreed. I was just tossing my opinion into the ring. I didn't mean to come off like an ass.

As for what newspaper comic is or isn't "great" or the "best", it's irrelevant to the topic, and a really silly discussion to boot.

About as silly as talking about RoboCop and Buckaroo Bonzai? C'mon man, it's just for fun. We're not solving world hunger here.

[Stewball]

Recently watched the Walter Hill vehicle Streets of Fire (1984). You can read my mini-review if you wish, but suffice to say that it was stupid. And boring. And uninspired. However, there was one exception. It had a really cool visual aesthetic; , a funky 80's imitation of the 50s blending drab greys with bright colors.

Hell, that is best exemplified in this outstanding poster, likely the best thing about the movie.

http://i.ebayimg.com/images/i/300740357 ... -l1000.jpg

That aesthetic belonged in a better film, and in an alternate universe, the rest of the movie would have matched it.

Well naturally, since I've rated SoF at 100, I can't let those remarks go....unremarked.

First, this is the poster in it's original colors which was completely bastardized by that (??European/Asian??) monochromatic short cut:


As for the movie itself, yes, the plot as was characterized back then by the director, Walter Hill, is comic book in nature--meaning a simple (even simple-minded) story used as a framework for a continuous stream of surreal sequences. But even above that, the real meat is right there in it's tagline: "A Rock and Roll Fable". The Ry Cooder score with its fantastic opening and showstopping closing numbers by Jim Steinman is what put it up on that pinnacle for me.

Yes, the characters are comic book in nature as well, but the supporting cast, Rick Moranis, Willem Dafoe and especially Amy Madigan (she had most of the one-liners, ["some of you guys got some cute little asses; be a shame if I hadda blow 'em off!"]) give the movie, if not the story, some depth between the music videos. I need also to emphasize the music at the biker's sleazy dive is the pinnacle of the surreality, especially "One Bad Stud"--a R&R set piece to Bluegrass' "Dueling Banjos".

And hey, the movie should have another tagline, "No matter what it seems, tonight it what it means to be young." One thing for sure, if you don't like the music, you won't like the movie.



As for wasted potential (i.e. disappointment), the only one that springs to mind for me is Prometheus--a total pointless mess.

[CMonster]

You think he has more interesting thoughts about art and philosophy than a Haruki Murakami or Chan-Woo Park?

Not really sure what I said that made you think I was putting him on a pedestal above people you like. He wrote some stuff that was a big part of my childhood. Pardon my interest in the genesis of his work. Next time something interests me, I will be sure to make a list of superior Japanese and South Korean writers/filmmakers I am overlooking at that moment.

...and you say other people are bringing up things irrelevant to the topic.

@movieboy
I knew Watterson is a recluse. Doesn't matter. If you are making the film either find a way to get the interview or go out of your way to make it not self-centered congratulation for liking a thing other people also like. Also, if you want to say it perfectly holds up as an adult, I won't argue with that. All I can say is, for me some didn't hold up, a bunch did.

[ShogunRua]

Schindler's List
A.I. Artificial Intelligence
War of The Worlds
Minority Report
Amis...

What is your reason for choosing those?

Well naturally, since I've rated SoF at 100, I can't let those remarks go....unremarked.

First, this is the poster in it's original colors which was completely bastardized by that (??European/Asian??) monochromatic short cut:

As for the movie itself, yes, the plot as was characterized back then by the director, Walter Hill, is comic book in nature--meaning a simple (even simple-minded) story used as a framework for a continuous stream of surreal sequences. But even above that, the real meat is right there in it's tagline: "A Rock and Roll Fable". The Ry Cooder score with its fantastic opening and showstopping closing numbers by Jim Steinman is what put it up on that pinnacle for me.

Yes, the characters are comic book in nature as well, but the supporting cast, Rick Moranis, Willem Dafoe and especially Amy Madigan (she had most of the one-liners, ["some of you guys got some cute little asses; be a shame if I hadda blow 'em off!"]) give the movie, if not the story, some depth between the music videos. I need also to emphasize the music at the biker's sleazy dive is the pinnacle of the surreality, especially "One Bad Stud"--a R&R set piece to Bluegrass' "Dueling Banjos".

And hey, the movie should have another tagline, "No matter what it seems, tonight it what it means to be young." One thing for sure, if you don't like the music, you won't like the movie.

I actually DID like the music. Unfortunately, as cool as the visual aesthetic and music was, it couldn't make up for how shitty, boring, and cliched literally everything else about the movie was. And yes, Amy Madigan's irritating tough female sidekick character is included. Her one-liners weren't good to begin with and delivered extra clunky, nevermind the silliness of a petite 5 foot tall woman (who can't throw a punch) routinely knocking out men a foot taller than her with one punch. It's even dumber than Willem Dafoe, at an emaciated, muscle-free 5' 9" and maybe 140 pounds, who also can't throw a punch, being a menacing fighter.

Didn't know you rated it so highly, but I'm not surprised. You loved the Walter Hill movie Undisputed, rate visuals and music far more heavily than I do, and originality and script far less.

[Stewball]

Didn't know you rated it so highly, but I'm not surprised. You loved the Walter Hill movie Undisputed, rate visuals and music far more heavily than I do, and originality and script far less.

BS, I'm emphasizing script/dialogue all the time; and without a reasonable degree of originality, nothing even makes it to average in my book. Our main difference is my insistence on realism unless the movie is an up front fantasy/fable--like SoF for example. In those instances, art take precedence; and comedies, like dramas, can be either.