The Quentin Tarantino Archives logo

The New Wave (yes, I'm angry!)


#1

Ok, the 90s are far from over. When are we gonna start seeing the new wave of filmmakers?!



I have to admit that most American filmmakers are fucking shit! They work with overly-plotted screenplays that provide no insight to life, Hollywood is turning some brilliant minds into dull minions of zombie filmmakers! I can see why the best of the best have resisted the temptations of working in big budget films! I mean there are a few exceptions like Chris Nolan who is a good director, but if you take away the 500 million dollars, which is like stripping away Ron Jeremy’s dick, you have nothing left. Most modern filmmakers rely too much on special effects, when in fact guys like Jacques Tourneur relied on miniscule budgets and creative collaborations between the DoP and set designers!



I haven’t seen any brilliance gleaming from the silver screen, these filmmakers aren’t even A)Trying to figure out their films visually in an exciting way or B)Writing exceptional screenplays with great dialogue, suspense, or what have you…



I have a right to complain as an avid film-goer, we are paying to watch films and lately they’re just uninspired pieces of shit!



Do you remember guys like: Ernst Lubitsch, George Stevens, Billy Wilder, Elia Kazan, Victor Fleming, Mihael Curtiz, Joseph Mankiewicz, Orson Welles, Edmund Goulding, William Wyler, Clarence Brown, Raoul Walsh, Ida Lupino, John Huston, John Ford - all of them American establshed!



Today’s future is Michael Bay!



The new generation of idiots think that a Michael Bay and the Twilight movies are future classics!



Ah, I’m so angry!



I hope a new slew of European filmmakers, from Romania (most probably) beat the Hollywood and the greedy Jews at their own game. Fucking sellouts!



And don’t even get me started about Spielberg! The MOST overrated “filmmaker”



If George Stevens were alive, he’d teach him a thing or two about cutting a film together.



Why should the Jews have control over cinema?! Who made them kings of the celluloid?!



And look what they’ve done to it. Targeting teens with their vampire shit, getting richer.


#2

Anti-Semitism and race baiting will surely get the forum moving into a positive direction!


#3

I was so into it until the end part about the jews ;D



These assholes have no reason to make films better. They seem to be doing okay cranking out shit that makes disturbing amounts of money. The only thing more shocking is how many people put there hard earned dollars down to watch it. Assholes. And don’t start with that bullshit about just wanting to be entertained!



JEWS!


#4

[quote=“Lt. BioBasterd”]Do you remember guys like: Ernst Lubitsch, George Stevens, Billy Wilder, Elia Kazan, Victor Fleming, Mihael Curtiz, Joseph Mankiewicz, Orson Welles, Edmund Goulding, William Wyler, Clarence Brown, Raoul Walsh, Ida Lupino, John Huston, John Ford - all of them American establshed!
[/quote]

Ok, it sounds like of course there were awesome directors back then, all the people you mentionned were great THOUGH none of them were loved back then too. Take Orson Welles, Ernst Lubitsch, Elia Kazan (well, he was loved, then after his wellknown political mistake, he was blacklisted by everybody), Ida Lupino, and so on. Critics from the seventies made their reputation, French critics from the New Wave especially made the reputation of famous and popular american filmmakers that were NOT recognized in France and Europe as auteurs like Hitchcock, Ford, Huston, all the film noir and western genre.



So basically, what I’m saying is that some of the gems of nowadays might be underrated, criticized, hated or not seen at all and might be for the future generations the best directors of the 90s and 2000s.



Plus another thing, look at the filmmakers you mentioned, these all belong to specific genres and types of cinema that was the Golden Age of Hollywood. Since the 90s, late 80s, Sundance and indie movies have been considered as the New Wave in the US cinema, and even now indiewood is becoming a product of Hollywood or big studios. Juno ? Garden State ? (500) Days of Summer ? All Fox features. But they’re considered as indie. Sofia Coppola ? P.T. Anderson ? Burton ? Wes Anderson ? Tarantino ? All of them ARE working with big studios, but they’re considered as auteurs.



That’s the big change now, the new spirit of nowadays cinema. You can change Hollywood, accept the rules but staying an auteur. Back in the seventies, when the New Hollywood started, they had that auteur vision but they had more difficulties to fight against Hollywood. They wanted to create an alternative system, just like Coppola or Lucas but they ended in the system itself or created their own Hollywood system bis (see Lucas). They lost their idea of indiewood. So I guess “indiewood” is precisely what defines best the cinema of 90s and 2000s. Indie movies are no more mavericks, pushed to the margin, they’re copied, reproduced by the dominant system.


#5

[quote=“cyber-lili”][quote=“Lt. BioBasterd”]Do you remember guys like: Ernst Lubitsch, George Stevens, Billy Wilder, Elia Kazan, Victor Fleming, Mihael Curtiz, Joseph Mankiewicz, Orson Welles, Edmund Goulding, William Wyler, Clarence Brown, Raoul Walsh, Ida Lupino, John Huston, John Ford - all of them American establshed!
[/quote]

Ok, it sounds like of course there were awesome directors back then, all the people you mentionned were great THOUGH none of them were loved back then too. Take Orson Welles, Ernst Lubitsch, Elia Kazan (well, he was loved, then after his wellknown political mistake, he was blacklisted by everybody), Ida Lupino, and so on. Critics from the seventies made their reputation, French critics from the New Wave especially made the reputation of famous and popular american filmmakers that were NOT recognized in France and Europe as auteurs like Hitchcock, Ford, Huston, all the film noir and western genre.



So basically, what I’m saying is that some of the gems of nowadays might be underrated, criticized, hated or not seen at all and might be for the future generations the best directors of the 90s and 2000s.



Plus another thing, look at the filmmakers you mentioned, these all belong to specific genres and types of cinema that was the Golden Age of Hollywood. Since the 90s, late 80s, Sundance and indie movies have been considered as the New Wave in the US cinema, and even now indiewood is becoming a product of Hollywood or big studios. Juno ? Garden State ? (500) Days of Summer ? All Fox features. But they’re considered as indie. Sofia Coppola ? P.T. Anderson ? Burton ? Wes Anderson ? Tarantino ? All of them ARE working with big studios, but they’re considered as auteurs.



That’s the big change now, the new spirit of nowadays cinema. You can change Hollywood, accept the rules but staying an auteur. Back in the seventies, when the New Hollywood started, they had that auteur vision but they had more difficulties to fight against Hollywood. They wanted to create an alternative system, just like Coppola or Lucas but they ended in the system itself or created their own Hollywood system bis (see Lucas). They lost their idea of indiewood. So I guess “indiewood” is precisely what defines best the cinema of 90s and 2000s. Indie movies are no more mavericks, pushed to the margin, they’re copied, reproduced by the dominant system.[/quote]

Well to clear something out, John Huston was already a very respected writer. He won a lot of Academy Awards for his work, he dircted the actors more than he did the lenses, so in essence he comes from the Lubitsch school of directing, where basically the camera is nailed down and you just see the actors talk - as in “Ninotchka” for example, which is an unprecedented masterpiece of a comedy and social commentary about communism, the film focuses on Melvyn Douglas and Greta Garbo and he forms such a great story without being too fancy, you see the life - the world of this film is clearly seen through the eyes of an opressed person - she almost walks around hypnotized and regurgitates lines said by Stalin. These filmmakers were already venerated by the young Hollywood - you have to understand that the film medium is still very young, it’s been around for less than a hundred and fifty years! It derives from the theatre, but when the camera was invented by the Lumiere Brothers it became a great asset to communicate and entertain. Look around you, the camera is what built entire networks of entertainment! Back to the point, guys like John Ford, William Wyler were people of remarkable talent, John Ford alone won 4 Academy Awards and made over 80 films, these were the pioneers of cinema, and what ever knowledge they passed down to their apprentices has been lost!



A new generation has dawned in modern cinema. It is the age of reality TV! The age of the MTV generation! The age of the illiterate! The age of fast texting! People want their movies delivered at fast speed and want no commitment! Look at the young actors that have sprung up: They’re on every magazine cover out there! Did James Dean abide to such things? No - he rejected that noose that Hollywood was going to hang around his neck! He spat in their faces and demanded nithing but the best! Three films have become significant staples of cinema! What young actor has that in him - a true rebel - a true fighter!



Bette Davis, Jack Warner placed a noose on her neck and dragged her, until Arliss came to her life and gave her confidence! She fougt and she did Of Human Bondage and became THE greatest actress of the planet! Watch her films, therein lies the evidence!



Everyone is too afraid, they are an industry of sellouts, an industry of awards and fame! They don’t care! They don’t care about the past Gods of cinema! They are too engulfed with their petty fame! But they will loose! Because people like me know that they are shit!



I look, I hope for another country to deprive the Hollywood system from their Global dictatorship of the celluloid! Germany once ruled cinema in the UFA days, hell in WW II they ruled the earth in every field: science, military, and cinema! But the Jews stole it from their grasp!



NEIN!



The Zinoists are hypnotizing you, they own you all. A global conspiracy to rule you through cinema. They own our very own Quentin Tarantino, they rule our Paul Thomas Anderson - the Studio Systems own cinema. And they have made their forefathers sad! For they weep to the greed! And the insolence!



I hope Hollywood dies.


#6

All the filmmakers you mentionned before, Ford, Huston, Wyler, and so on. They were ALL part of the Hollywood system. The Golden Age was a very strict Hollywood policy, remember that almost no director was famous back there, only producers ruled the system. Don’t you think we reached a wider autorship period ? No matter what you think about the dominant blackbuster cinema, I do agree with you on that, THOUGH you missed my point.



The new generation isn’t bad either, indiewood and autorship have never been more powerful. Read Geoff King’s book, Indiewood, USA: Where Hollywood Meets Independent Cinema or J. Berra 's Declarations of Independence : American Cinema and the Partiality of Independent Production.



In a way, you’re also blind by this Hollywood, glamourous system, cause you criticize it by only seeing the big productions, and you cannot see the good part of this new system. P.T Anderson, Tarantino, might be part of the system, as Coppola, Scorsese, Lucas, De Palma were, BUT have they ever been restreined ? Only James Gray can be a figure of autorship still limited by the dominant system, you can see how producers changed the ending of The Yards which pushed James Gray away from film production for almost seven years. But now, he’s done We Own the Night with a great freedom on the shooting, he’s made money with it and could finally made Two Lovers very shortly after We Own the Night, again with a great freedom.


#7

[quote=“cyber-lili”]All the filmmakers you mentionned before, Ford, Huston, Wyler, and so on. They were ALL part of the Hollywood system. The Golden Age was a very strict Hollywood policy, remember that almost no director was famous back there, only producers ruled the system. Don’t you think we reached a wider autorship period ? No matter what you think about the dominant blackbuster cinema, I do agree with you on that, THOUGH you missed my point.



The new generation isn’t bad either, indiewood and autorship have never been more powerful. Read Geoff King’s book, Indiewood, USA: Where Hollywood Meets Independent Cinema or J. Berra 's Declarations of Independence : American Cinema and the Partiality of Independent Production.



In a way, you’re also blind by this Hollywood, glamourous system, cause you criticize it by only seeing the big productions, and you cannot see the good part of this new system. P.T Anderson, Tarantino, might be part of the system, as Coppola, Scorsese, Lucas, De Palma were, BUT have they ever been restreined ? Only James Gray can be a figure of autorship still limited by the dominant system, you can see how producers changed the ending of The Yards which pushed James Gray away from film production for almost seven years. But now, he’s done We Own the Night with a great freedom on the shooting, he’s made money with it and could finally made Two Lovers very shortly after We Own the Night, again with a great freedom.[/quote]

Coppola, Scorsese, Lucas, De Palma - look at these guys, they ushured a new age of cinema in the fucking 70s!



Most modern filmmakers do not fight the system! And most of these so called “modern filmmakers” are MTV music video directors! No one is fighting for better scripts or better acting! The ones who do fight are in the minority, guys like Aranofsky.



I’m talking about a groundbreaking new wave of filmmakers that will take cinema to another level and cloud it with mainstream trash! All these Indie filmmakers ever do is write movies about poor people trying to buy fucking groceries! Booo-hooo! There are people in Africa who have to eat monkeys for breakfast and dinne, they are dying of AIDS, women are being raped! - These Indie filmmakers write movies about drug addicts trying to fight addiction! Why make a movie, there’s already reality TV!



There was once a time where brilliant minds ruled movies. Guys like Zanuck who let a little guy like Mankiewicz flourish!



…My head hurts…no point to argue…



At least I have my classic films.



You wanna watch a great films , here’s one:



Frank Capra’s "American Madness"



O0


#8

[quote=“Lt. BioBasterd”]
All these Indie filmmakers ever do is write movies about poor people trying to buy fucking groceries! Booo-hooo! There are people in Africa who have to eat monkeys for breakfast and dinne, they are dying of AIDS, women are being raped! - These Indie filmmakers write movies about drug addicts trying to fight addiction! Why make a movie, there’s already reality TV!
[/quote]

Ahah, again, did you read my post ? I’m talking about talented indie filmmaker : Sofia Coppola, Wes Anderson, P.T. Anderson, Quentin Tarantino, Aronofsky if you want too, Zach Braff, Michel Gondry, Anton Corbijn, James Gray, Julie Delpy, screenwriter like Charlie Kaufman, Diablo Cody (for Juno only), and so on. Do any of them talk about poor people trying to survive ? Again your vision of indie filmmaker is limited. Maybe I should there again make you a list of recommandations, so that you’ll change your mind.


#9

Bio, have you started watching foreign (or non-Hollywood American) films yet?


#10

Maybe it’s time for an American New Wave to hit where film critics start making films, like the French did. But I don’t think the outcome will be as important, but could be fun to see.


#11

[quote=“G”]Bio, have you started watching foreign (or non-Hollywood American) films yet?[/quote]


I have! I saw Vampyr, La Ronde, Another Max Opuls movie about a ring or was it a necklace....?

I also saw Diabolique, which obvously inspired Bob Aldrich to make Hush...Hush Sweet Charlotte.

And I love Simone Simon. She's great.

Oh and is anyone anticipating the Zach Efron movie called Orson Welles and Me?

#12

[quote=“Lt. BioBasterd”]
Oh and is anyone anticipating the Zach Efron movie called Orson Welles and Me?[/quote]

No.


#13

There hasn’t been a fresh wave of American indie talent since the late ninties (PTA, Wes Anderson, Darren Aranofsky, Spike Jonze etc…) no noteworthy auteurs have appeared in the dv age.


#14

[quote=“Lt. BioBasterd”][quote=“G”]Bio, have you started watching foreign (or non-Hollywood American) films yet?[/quote]


I have! I saw Vampyr, La Ronde, Another Max Opuls movie about a ring or was it a necklace....?

I also saw Diabolique, which obvously inspired Bob Aldrich to make Hush...Hush Sweet Charlotte.

And I love Simone Simon. She's great.

Oh and is anyone anticipating the Zach Efron movie called Orson Welles and Me?[/quote]

Cool, so do you like those foreign films? If you like comedy you should watch some Jacques Tati (which his films had inspiration in Punch-Drunk Love).



I saw something about that Efron/Welles movie, but I just laughed. But maybe kids will see it and learn about Orson Welles. But I have a feeling they are going to show him as some big giant that likes to eat kids. (He was a tall man though)


#15

[quote=“G”][quote=“Lt. BioBasterd”][quote=“G”]Bio, have you started watching foreign (or non-Hollywood American) films yet?[/quote]


I have! I saw Vampyr, La Ronde, Another Max Opuls movie about a ring or was it a necklace....?

I also saw Diabolique, which obvously inspired Bob Aldrich to make Hush...Hush Sweet Charlotte.

And I love Simone Simon. She's great.

Oh and is anyone anticipating the Zach Efron movie called Orson Welles and Me?[/quote]

Cool, so do you like those foreign films? If you like comedy you should watch some Jacques Tati (which his films had inspiration in Punch-Drunk Love).



I saw something about that Efron/Welles movie, but I just laughed. But maybe kids will see it and learn about Orson Welles. But I have a feeling they are going to show him as some big giant that likes to eat kids. (He was a tall man though)[/quote]


I absolutely loved them, I like how Ophuls mixes musical numbers - especially in that movie about a necklace...or was it a ring....? I forget - anyways, there's a great scene whee the chracters waltz around, I liked that........ ;)

And Diabolique was so suspenseful, it kept you guessing! The guy disappeared from the swimming pool! And well, we all know what happens in the end! :-X

I loved Bob Aldrich's take on Diabolique with Hush, Hush Sweet Charlotte -

But yeah, I'm really loveing the foreign films: Caligari, M, etc.....

#16

Cool you watched “M”. Fritz Lang is one of the best directors ever. Hope you get into some Godard soon. His New Wave era films are funny, full of pop culture, and political (if you care for that stuff). Kind of like Tarantino before Tarantino could steal these ideas. ;D


#17

La Ronde is fucking awesome. I just love it. :slight_smile:



Most critics turned to Asian cinema at the beginning of the digital age. Contemporary Korean and Japanese cinema has a lot of new and distinctive talent like Nobuhiro Yamashita and Tsuki Inoue.



But I don’t think American cinema is dying out. And most of the new talent in the US is still really quiet and understated. It is the DV age and directors who work in digital video aren’t appreciated all that much in the US.