register

  • Categories

Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

 

RAMIN DJAWADI

General Discussions » RAMIN DJAWADI (Posts 181 to 210 of 671)

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. ...
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. 10
  12. ...
  13. 23
  14. >
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteven
    • CommentTimeMay 6th 2008
    Christodoulides wrote
    Steven wrote

    You assume there must be some other reason people rate a film like this so highly. Can it not just be it's a good film? Good film, extremely average score.


    Well, depends how one defines a "good film" 'cause i see Spiderman up there with the top blockbusters of all time and i want to throw up but generally speaking, i see a vivid tendency (*cough* fsm *cough*) to toss the score in high contrast to the supposed brilliance of the film. I don't buy it..Iron man? Nah.


    Well I like it.
    •  
      CommentAuthorRalph Kruhm
    • CommentTimeMay 6th 2008 edited
    jedizim wrote
    Well...I for one thought Iron Man was a much better film than any and ALL of the Spiderman films.
    And on almost every level, I agree. Effects (especially the "flying/swinging" scenes), Male Lead, Female Lead (Gwynneth just looked yummy in every scene AND has a brain), supporting actors, coolness, humour, and (people will hate me for this), I even like the music better. shocked
    •  
      CommentAuthorScribe
    • CommentTimeMay 6th 2008
    jedizim wrote
    Well...I for one thought Iron Man was a much better film than any and ALL of the Spiderman films. I won't say it is cinematic brilliance or anything, but it was a very good time and I will see it again and buy the DVD when it comes out. Oh...I also pre ordered the CD several weeks ago...will see how it holds up on CD when I get it...


    It's as close to cinematic brilliance as anything "popular" will ever get.
    I love you all. Never change. Well, unless you want to!
    •  
      CommentAuthorSouthall
    • CommentTimeMay 6th 2008
    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    jedizim wrote
    Well...I for one thought Iron Man was a much better film than any and ALL of the Spiderman films.
    And on almost every level, I agree. Effects (especially the "flying/swinging" scenes), Male Lead, Female Lead (Gwynneth just looked yummy in every scene AND has a brain), supporting actors, coolness, humour, and (people will hate me for this), I even like the music better. shocked


    I could never hate you, Ralph!

    Personally I think Spiderman and particularly its sequel are amongst the finest modern film scores, and they are certainly my two favourite scores from comic-book movies. But there's no need for me to dislike anyone who disagrees - after all, I have the satisfaction of knowing I'm right and they're wrong. wink
    http://www.movie-wave.net | http://facebook.com/moviewave
    •  
      CommentAuthorSouthall
    • CommentTimeMay 6th 2008
    Scribe wrote
    jedizim wrote
    Well...I for one thought Iron Man was a much better film than any and ALL of the Spiderman films. I won't say it is cinematic brilliance or anything, but it was a very good time and I will see it again and buy the DVD when it comes out. Oh...I also pre ordered the CD several weeks ago...will see how it holds up on CD when I get it...


    It's as close to cinematic brilliance as anything "popular" will ever get.


    Lawrence of Arabia is popular...
    http://www.movie-wave.net | http://facebook.com/moviewave
    •  
      CommentAuthorbartley
    • CommentTimeMay 6th 2008
    Southall wrote
    Scribe wrote
    jedizim wrote
    Well...I for one thought Iron Man was a much better film than any and ALL of the Spiderman films. I won't say it is cinematic brilliance or anything, but it was a very good time and I will see it again and buy the DVD when it comes out. Oh...I also pre ordered the CD several weeks ago...will see how it holds up on CD when I get it...


    It's as close to cinematic brilliance as anything "popular" will ever get.


    Lawrence of Arabia is popular...

    Point being?
    confused
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeMay 6th 2008
    That there's also an alternative meaning to the word "popular" and what's considered as such.
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSouthall
    • CommentTimeMay 6th 2008
    bartley wrote
    Southall wrote
    Scribe wrote
    jedizim wrote
    Well...I for one thought Iron Man was a much better film than any and ALL of the Spiderman films. I won't say it is cinematic brilliance or anything, but it was a very good time and I will see it again and buy the DVD when it comes out. Oh...I also pre ordered the CD several weeks ago...will see how it holds up on CD when I get it...


    It's as close to cinematic brilliance as anything "popular" will ever get.


    Lawrence of Arabia is popular...

    Point being?
    confused


    That Iron Man is a million miles from being "as close to cinematic brilliance as anything popular will ever get".

    If Lawrence of Arabia doesn't float your boat, then Star Wars might? Both massive box office triumphs, critical successes too. It can be done.
    http://www.movie-wave.net | http://facebook.com/moviewave
    •  
      CommentAuthorbartley
    • CommentTimeMay 6th 2008
    wink Totally got it. Good point: isn't popularity usually the result of cinematic brilliance?

    Ty for explaining.
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeMay 6th 2008
    bartley wrote
    isn't popularity usually the result of cinematic brilliance?


    No.
    It's generally the result of good marketing (i.e. knowing your demographic and knowing your target audience's preferences).

    Cinematic brilliance is -like in any other art form- generally only realized years, or even decades later. (Case in point: Citizen Kane, which received a very lukewarm welkcome and is now generally considered to be the best example of cinematographic art in the world)
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    •  
      CommentAuthorbartley
    • CommentTimeMay 6th 2008
    Martijn wrote
    bartley wrote
    isn't popularity usually the result of cinematic brilliance?


    No.
    It's generally the result of good marketing (i.e. knowing your demographic and knowing your target audience's preferences).

    Cinematic brilliance is -like in any other art form- generally only realized years, or even decades later. (Case in point: Citizen Kane, which received a very lukewarm welkcome and is now generally considered to be the best example of cinematographic art in the world)


    Yes, but isn't it more often released at it's time of release (think Casablanca... )
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeMay 6th 2008
    Uh...yeah, generally a release of a release will be released around the time of its release... confused
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    •  
      CommentAuthorBobdH
    • CommentTimeMay 6th 2008 edited
    This reminds me of endless discussions with a friend, and probably a good example of Martijns point. DJ Tiesto was chosen by the mass audience as 'the best DJ in the world' on several occasions, and he said: "that makes him the best DJ and a brilliant musician". Of course, after what he did to Pirates, we know he isn't, he's just the most popular DJ. Still, he couldn't be convinced. "If the audience loves him en masse, then surely he must be a master?" (please, keep in mind; his music sucks). He's a master in playing the audience. He's a commercial master. But is he a masterful musician? (Music. Sucks.).

    But, this might be a discussion for another topic wink
  14. Martijn wrote
    Uh...yeah, generally a release of a release will be released around the time of its release... confused


    biggrin
    http://www.filmmusic.pl - Polish Film Music Review Website
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeMay 7th 2008
    BobdH wrote
    This reminds me of endless discussions with a friend, and probably a good example of Martijns point. DJ Tiesto was chosen by the mass audience as 'the best DJ in the world' on several occasions, and he said: "that makes him the best DJ and a brilliant musician". Of course, after what he did to Pirates, we know he isn't, he's just the most popular DJ. Still, he couldn't be convinced. "If the audience loves him en masse, then surely he must be a master?" (please, keep in mind; his music sucks). He's a master in playing the audience. He's a commercial master. But is he a masterful musician? (Music. Sucks.).

    But, this might be a discussion for another topic wink


    Couldn't agree more on how his music sucks.
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
    •  
      CommentAuthorThor
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2008
    DJ Tiesto is fine, but Oakenfold is the true master (both as musician, pioneer and DJ). smile
    I am extremely serious.
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2008 edited
    I already frown on "star" DJs: I simply can't see (or hear) the art. Anyone with half an ear could mix records properly, and I've heard excellent mixes in very small venues by volunteer DJs that would easily compete with the so-called "top level" ones, but aside from that trance really isn't my thing. So I dislike both, actually. smile

    But I gather both can still command a big crowd, so power to them and those who enjoy them spinning their disks enough to put down upwards of 50 euros to see them doing it live-ish.
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2008
    Whatcha talkin about? You know how much RAM and how good processors composing music like that requires?














    biggrin
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2008
    Composing? There's composing involved? confused
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2008
    Yeah, they are great composers.
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
    •  
      CommentAuthorBregt
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2008
    Well, I only heard Tiesto screwing up great melodies (Adagio for Strings) and themes (The Pirates Remix) and Oakenfold has always annoyed me with his theme remixes, of which Planetof the Apes is the most terrible one I heard. And I know there are others of him but I just can't name.

    Perhaps they do good what they are used too in their genre, but so far, those two can be arsed.
    Kazoo
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2008
    No, they don't do any good. There are far lesser know DJ's who can kick their asses out anytime and who actually work their music instead of sitting on the damn synth and their REASON and loopin ready-mate stuff for 5 minutes each into 30-minute same-chord borefests and actually calling them music!
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2008
    Bregt wrote
    but so far, those two can be arsed.


    I think I know what you're trying to say, but...well, no, I actually have NO idea what you're trying to say!
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2008
    Btw, interesting how a RAMIN DJAWADI thread turned into a discussion about talent-less people who can't compose but still get loads of gigs and call what they do music and art.













    biggrin
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
    •  
      CommentAuthorBregt
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2008
    Martijn wrote
    Bregt wrote
    but so far, those two can be arsed.


    I think I know what you're trying to say, but...well, no, I actually have NO idea what you're trying to say!

    biggrin

    I used this expression in my need to use various expressions all around, without actually completely knowing what it means. I thouh it was something like "screw them". Not?
    Kazoo
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2008 edited
    Bregt wrote

    I used this expression in my need to use various expressions all around, without actually completely knowing what it means. I thouh it was something like "screw them". Not?


    "I can''t be arsed about those two"
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
    •  
      CommentAuthorBregt
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2008
    Oooh. So an arse cannot be screwed.
    Right! Thanks.
    Kazoo
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2008 edited
    Bregt wrote
    I used this expression in my need to use various expressions all around, without actually completely knowing what it means. I thouh it was something like "screw them". Not?



    Ah...


    No.

    ("Can't be arsed" = "can't be bothered" or "isn't interested")
    So "can be arsed", although used significantly less, would be a rather off-hand way of saying that someone can be bothered (to do something).
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    •  
      CommentAuthorMartijn
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2008
    Bregt wrote
    Oooh. So an arse cannot be screwed.
    Right! Thanks.


    The air is RIFE with innuendo... moon
    'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
    •  
      CommentAuthorBregt
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2008
    Martijn wrote
    Bregt wrote
    Oooh. So an arse cannot be screwed.
    Right! Thanks.


    The air is RIFE with innuendo... moon

    What you just said, sounds like an abundance of indirect understandable expressions?
    biggrin
    Kazoo

181 to 210 of 671

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. ...
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. 10
  12. ...
  13. 23
  14. >