josh-coomber
You wrote:
I'm not going off an imdb message board. I'm going over more than a million members casting a lesser vote on a film like the long good friday. And i wouldn't pitch up the idea of telling me that a top 100 list clearly states it's not and under appreciated film. You don't find this film in many top 100's at all and those that do have an opinion cast on a few critics that make those lists. Unless that list is specifically aimed at gangster cult films in which there aren't many good ones. A few people that makes these lists over a much higher figure of people in my opinion, isn't enough to tell me it's not under appreciated. Because people still know more knowledge of what lock stock is and have never heard of the long good friday. Or even other much older gangster films like it such as get carter.
And Average of people that log onto these forums as users are based around all ages and not just one in particular. That being your so called under 40's range of aged users is not an average because as i said there are an abundance of people registered with imdb. Just take a look at one of the highest voted films in the top 250 the shawshank redemption and you can clearly see my average is backed up by a source. So no need to get all cocky as if you know more than i do.
You say you’re not “going off” an IMDb board and then proceed to tell me to view the highest voted film in the Top 250 citing another example of a film undeservedly given classic status as if it means anything or supports your threadbare argument. I did not define the term average; I suggested you turn
your attention to the word. Advice you clearly ignored choosing instead to get personal in order to try and gain back some of the ground you lost. It seems I struck a nerve and without meaning to sound “cocky”, clearly on this point at least, I do know more than you.
Your opinion about this film not being compatible with something like the goodfellas because of it's budget is absolute bolox. There have been plenty of films in this decade with a low budget that have gathered numerous amounts of people in it's audience. Films such as Juno, little miss sunshine, 28 days later, Napoleon dynamite and big cult hits from the 90's such as reservoir dogs. Even you mentioned the Godfather which is a 6.2 million dollar budget is considerably low budget and one of the most famous films to date.
The point I made is clearly lost on a mind befuddled with the question “what is popular?” struggling in an attempt to answer your question with a small list of films that only a fool would consider being “off the beaten track”. Then, in what I can only assume is an attempt to deride my point or act as subterfuge to mask your misunderstanding of the discussion you cite the actual budget of
The Godfather as if it lends weight to your point while completely ignoring the fact that
The Godfather was not a low budget film for its time and would require an equal budget had it been made in the same period as
Goodfellas... and you expect me to take these musings seriously? In short, far from being böllöcks, you undermine your own argument without knowing it.
So when films like The long good friday were made in britian set unto a genre that not alot of people cared to see because of the simple factor of it being a british gangster movie, is my opinion on why it's so under appreciated. That and the 80's held some pretty good films and the long good friday was over shadowed because of this. People didn't want to see british films like this. They'd rather go and watch films like the shining which was released in the same year. And as years go past and people don't acknowledge the long good friday so they'll forget about it. Until even today when people have no idea what the long good friday is.
You should re-read the first sentence of your paragraph and study it to learn that your circular reasoning is essentially stating that films made from earlier decades never later gain the accolades or plaudits they deserve and remain forgotten.
Oh dear, you really are in a muddle.
As for people not wanting to see British films like
The Long Good Friday, I am not going to say the film is a classic. It isn’t. Nonetheless, it has enjoyed the popularity of being released to the domestic market several times in digital format (admittedly, a practice that Anchor Bay should be ashamed of) and as the years go by it has slowly drawn a larger audience. This is the nature of cult films, which invariably begin life collecting dust but with the passing of time grow into something instantly recognisable with a strong base of fans that come to fully appreciate it. Just a reminder for you; no one involved ever expected
The Long Good Friday to become the box office hit, which you seem to think it is deserving of being. Furthermore, few expected it to gain the status of becoming the highly appreciated little English gem it is today.
Films like the goodfellas did so well because of it's american audience and it's typical gangster back round it was based on. Not because of its budget. Fair enough you had some top actors in there which would of pushed that boundary into its budget. But it wasn't the main reason people wanted to see the film and it's not the main reason today. Goodfellas was the first film since scarface depicted to this type of genre and it was one that has been very successful in america and overseas.
Far from being typical gangster fare,
Goodfellas is the true story adapted from Nicholas Pileggi’s book
Wiseguy dealing with the life of Henry Hill. There is no denying that
Goodfellas has all the Scorsese hallmarks of pageantry and hyperbole that panders to an audience seeking blockbuster fare but would you honestly have me believe this could have been achieved with budgetary restraint? By your reasoning, if
Goodfellas had been made for $10M it would have been the same success it was. It’s all starting to fall apart, isn’t it. Incidentally,
Goodfellas was not the first film since
Scarface to depict gangsterism. I suggest you dig a little deeper in the archives and start training yourself to look at earlier films if you truly aspire as you seem to suggest to being a film enthusiast capable of offering insightful comment. I can highly recommend David Thomson’s
The New Biographical Dictionary Of Film as a good starting point. You never know, you might just learn a thing or two.
No one really cares much for films like the long good friday from it's time period other than us british who liked the change from a turn over gangster movie starring bob hoskins in our neighborhood. But that was back then and things have now changed. Media attention helps out films a lot which is why something like snatch and lock stock have done so well.
You’re becoming quite proficient in making specious comments and claiming them as fact. No one really cares much for films like
The Long Good Friday except the British. Really? If that were the case, Criterion and Anchor Bay wouldn’t have taken the risk of releasing it on DVD Stateside. A new copy of the Criterion release fetches up to $50 in the Marketplace. Image Entertainment released it on BD in 2010 and re-released it on DVD in 2011. Anchor Bay’s release came before the Image release and Criterion’s release was the first release on digital format. The fact that the Criterion and Anchor Bay releases are both long out of print somewhat undermines your argument, wouldn’t you say? It would be so easy to cite a dozen other examples exposing the ignorance and ineptitude of the brash comments you made in your little paragraph but I have the measure of you to realise it would be akin to casting pearls before swine.
And i wouldn't go as far to even mention that paramount pictures wasn't a hierarchy distributor alongside warner brothers. So i've no idea why you'd think it wasn't comparable because of it's distribution.
Another reminder; it was you making the ridiculous comparison. In point of fact, Paramount did more than merely distribute; they commissioned
The Godfather and wanted Sergio Leone to direct it. On the subject of films being appreciated or not, Coppola recollected the following:
“The Godfather was a very unappreciated movie when we were making it. They were very unhappy with it. They didn't like the cast. They didn't like the way I was shooting it. I was always on the verge of getting fired. So it was an extremely nightmarish experience. I had two little kids, and the third one was born during that. We lived in a little apartment, and I was basically frightened that they didn't like it. They had as much as said that, so when it was all over I wasn't at all confident that it was going to be successful, and that I'd ever get another job.”Source:
http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/cop0int-3I do not think
The Long Good Friday and
The Godfather are comparable films.
You are the one that brought them into the discussion. All I did was highlight the shortcoming in your reasoning.
I'll let you argue all you want. So far you're just another typical member of these boards trying to act like a smart arse and having an argument just for the sake of it. It's quite clear that my sources on the average amount of members from all age groups "being that average" will not see your eye.
You can disagree with me all you want. You can bring up film budgets as if they'd ever make a difference and you can tell me in your OPINION that you don't think it's under appreciated. But to be honest that would be your only opinion because everything else you've come up with is absolute tripe.
On the contrary, the only one spewing bilge on this topic is you. With nothing in the armoury to defend your baseless and spurious opinions, you now resort to the lowest common denominator with personal attacks in the face of my first response on this thread, which was made in measured tones. Exactly who is being a smart arse and epitomising the typical IMDb board poster? You might want to take a look in the mirror.
If you wish to reply for the simple factor to argue like everyone else does because they want to prove a point, then please do. I might read it, i might not. But i certainly won't reply for shots at my own opinion and for the sake of arguing to seemingly enhance my knowledge on what i do and don't know. Which is the reason most people like to argue on here to be honest. They'd like to think they know more than the person they're arguing with. Pathetic really.
The only person who can enhance your knowledge is you but as you have made it abundantly clear that you prefer the myopic vision in your own world where opinions are like äršehöles and none are correct unless they concur with yours; far be it from me to impede your progress!
Heavens forbid you might even try to correct me on my spelling and grammar. Sorry to disappoint but i couldn't careless.
That’s quintessentially the cheapest of cheap shots one should expect from a “typical IMDb user” but should I expect anything but cheap shots coming from someone with such a flagrant passion for economy with the truth... no, not really. The fact that your English and grammar are appalling is neither here nor there and is not something I would ever bring up unless the other party points to it, as you predictably have here.
Suicide, it’s a suicide
reply
share