Comments on: Brian De Palma’s land of paradox http://www.directorama.net/2006/08/26/brian-de-palmas-land-of-paradox/ A steady feed of all things Peet Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:04:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Andreas Tennyson http://www.directorama.net/2006/08/26/brian-de-palmas-land-of-paradox/comment-page-1/#comment-97 Andreas Tennyson Sun, 21 Oct 2007 20:26:56 +0000 https://peet.wordpress.com/2006/08/26/brian-de-palmas-land-of-paradox/#comment-97 please tell me why, i'm feeling . Andreas Tennyson. please tell me why, i’m feeling . Andreas Tennyson.

]]> By: Phillip http://www.directorama.net/2006/08/26/brian-de-palmas-land-of-paradox/comment-page-1/#comment-96 Phillip Mon, 04 Sep 2006 17:26:47 +0000 https://peet.wordpress.com/2006/08/26/brian-de-palmas-land-of-paradox/#comment-96 It's easy to give praise to a man who's had such a splendid career, but when do you turn him around and kick him in the rear and say, how about you start making some of those great movies again - where your camera work actually elevates a good story rather than working to create a story through the style. Characters aren't created through tricky shots, neither is dialogue... camera work is only there to heighten something that exists in the script already. And for the past decade these themes you speak of have only been used as paper thin devices in sub par scripts. How do you get a creator whose had some really great years to start becoming that anxious, young director again; willing to take risks and sacrifice the idea of being content with what one knows. Because eventually what one knows loses it's depth, and it becomes a diatribe, and then a cliche. De Palma has reached that point. All of his memorable moments of filmmaking in the past decade, have been moments produced in films already. For instance the zero gravity dance in "Mission to Mars" was first seen in Tarkovsk'y "Solaris". De Palma has fallen into a cycle of his own and other's creations. It's easy to say that his style is brilliant, but without the proper story it becomes unnecessary, and at times ridiculous to watch - "Snake Eyes" is of course the perfect prism for this theory. It's like watching a diver gracefully jumping off a board into a pool with no water. He needs to begin focusing on what matters first, filling that pool, so when he's ready to dive, there's something there for him to land in. That being said I'll give "Dahlia" a chance. It’s easy to give praise to a man who’s had such a splendid career, but when do you turn him around and kick him in the rear and say, how about you start making some of those great movies again – where your camera work actually elevates a good story rather than working to create a story through the style. Characters aren’t created through tricky shots, neither is dialogue… camera work is only there to heighten something that exists in the script already. And for the past decade these themes you speak of have only been used as paper thin devices in sub par scripts. How do you get a creator whose had some really great years to start becoming that anxious, young director again; willing to take risks and sacrifice the idea of being content with what one knows. Because eventually what one knows loses it’s depth, and it becomes a diatribe, and then a cliche. De Palma has reached that point. All of his memorable moments of filmmaking in the past decade, have been moments produced in films already. For instance the zero gravity dance in “Mission to Mars” was first seen in Tarkovsk’y “Solaris”. De Palma has fallen into a cycle of his own and other’s creations.

It’s easy to say that his style is brilliant, but without the proper story it becomes unnecessary, and at times ridiculous to watch – “Snake Eyes” is of course the perfect prism for this theory. It’s like watching a diver gracefully jumping off a board into a pool with no water. He needs to begin focusing on what matters first, filling that pool, so when he’s ready to dive, there’s something there for him to land in.

That being said I’ll give “Dahlia” a chance.

]]>