urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,711
Likes: 2,291
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Jul 28, 2019 9:09:53 GMT
Discuss. Both claim to be American pioneers, but I think PTA hasn't done anything Coppola hasn't already done (and a few others). His old bearded self also has the look of a soldier.... he's so much sexier. He schools little Paulie boy badly, dudes.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by TerryMontana on Jul 28, 2019 9:46:23 GMT
Francis by far!
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jul 28, 2019 10:22:24 GMT
Well look PTA is one of the worlds great directors and of his era and the average age of this board is 7 and 1/2 so we like shiny new things but he's got a long way to go to be FFC. First of all - he doesn't know how to end movies - Magnolia (and Inherent Vice) may still be playing since it never actually wraps up .......TWBB his greatest film has an ending right out of existentialist theater (it's The Lesson - not saying he stole it, but he kind of "used" it at least) and Phantom Thread is a great ending ..........for a NOVEL .........when everyone else would have ended it without dialog/narration a beat or two or three earlier. Now, FFC sometimes doesn't stick the landing either and you could accuse him of doing the SAME ending in all his greatest films - 5 in a row (Rain People-Apocalypse Now - main character suffers tragedy/horror left to reflect) ........but they are all his endings more or less and 4 of those are 4 of the all time greats......and you'll never forget any of them and he has a lot of films that are really good too.
|
|
Javi
Badass
Posts: 1,530
Likes: 1,619
|
Post by Javi on Jul 28, 2019 23:29:51 GMT
PTA can't compete with any of the American masters, not yet anyway - not Scorsese and certainly not Coppola or Altman. He's very talented but he isn't an original the way those guys were imo.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jul 28, 2019 23:33:11 GMT
PTA didn't make Jack.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,711
Likes: 2,291
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Jul 28, 2019 23:45:35 GMT
That sounds like someone claiming Kubrick is better than Hitchcock because he never made Jamaica Inn or Topaz. Kube might very well be better but its not because he invests more emotionally with a greater sense of craftsmanship in each individual film.
|
|
|
Post by Viced on Jul 28, 2019 23:49:05 GMT
He also didn't make The Godfather, The Godfather: Part II, The Conversation, or Apocalypse Now. lol
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jul 28, 2019 23:58:02 GMT
Guys, you can gang up on me for preferring PTA over Coppola, and that's fine, but still . . . motherfucker made Jack.
With that said, no director ruled a decade like Francis did in the '70s. No one.
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Jul 29, 2019 0:01:07 GMT
That sounds like someone claiming Kubrick is better than Hitchcock because he never made Jamaica Inn or Topaz. Kube might very well be better but its not because he invests more emotionally with a greater sense of craftsmanship in each individual film. Topaz is the shit. I would like Kubrick even better if he made it.
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Jul 29, 2019 0:02:13 GMT
I also went with PTA. The original Godfather is obviously the best movie between the two of them, but I would take TWBB, The Master, and Phantom Thread over anything else. I am also more personally attuned to PTA's visual style.
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Jul 29, 2019 0:06:47 GMT
hmmm that's a tough call. PTA is far more consistent and has fewer duds to his name, but Coppola made four of the best movies of all time in a single decade so for that alone I have to go with Coppola. His highs are just unbelievably high. So I guess it's not that tough a call.
Give PTA a couple more decades and ask me again.
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Jul 29, 2019 0:16:44 GMT
PTA can't compete with any of the American masters, not yet anyway - not Scorsese and certainly not Coppola or Altman. He's very talented but he isn't an original the way those guys were imo. ehh that's debatable. I'd certainly call PTA a unique and distinctive artist, and I definitely prefer him to Scorsese and Altman for starters (although that's totally subjective and irrelevant i know). Regardless, you can't deny PTA's films are recognizable as entirely his own. His films defy comparison. They're one of a kind. He's an original in every sense of the word.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,711
Likes: 2,291
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Jul 29, 2019 0:22:52 GMT
PTA can't compete with any of the American masters, not yet anyway - not Scorsese and certainly not Coppola or Altman. He's very talented but he isn't an original the way those guys were imo. ehh that's debatable. I'd certainly call PTA a unique and distinctive artist, and I definitely prefer him to Scorsese and Altman for starters (although that's totally subjective and irrelevant i know). Regardless, you can't deny PTA's films are recognizable as entirely his own. His films defy comparison. They're one of a kind. He's an original in every sense of the word. He would be a no name jag if his films weren't unique, but uniqueness applies to every major auteur. I think there was more to his argument than that but I guess we have to stay tuned to hear it.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jul 29, 2019 0:29:59 GMT
........... far more consistent and has fewer duds to his name .......and that's why nobody asks pacinoyes - obsessive fan of Argento AND De Palma - how important consistency is to him
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Jul 29, 2019 1:04:13 GMT
Not voting because a.) it seems like a nonsensical comparison and b.) I’ve only seen Coppola’s “major” work. PTA is one of my all-time favorites because for me he’s eight for eight and I don’t know of another filmmaker who’s never misfired like that ... and the unique vision he’s put forth with his last four films in particular plays to my taste like nothing else, impeccable craftsmanship and awareness of character all presented in this discordant yet still accessible way that just takes my breath away like nothing else. His current streak of films from TWBB onward is unmatched to me ... well except maybe for Coppola’s ‘70s output, so maybe the comparison isn’t that bizarre? Still, holding one of the current masters at the peak of his powers in comparison to an unprecedented legendary innovator who changed Hollywood and cinema as a whole forever ... it doesn’t compute for me. And, again, I’m not well-versed in FFC, but from what I’ve seen, he’s four for four for me, and like PTA’s last four they’re all masterpieces ... And maybe PTA’s sensibilities just play a bit better for me, but do I have any right to say that he’s “better” than the genius behind The Godfather, the madman behind Apocalypse Now? Probably not.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,711
Likes: 2,291
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Jul 29, 2019 1:07:59 GMT
Not voting because a.) it seems like a nonsensical comparison and b.) I’ve only seen Coppola’s “major” work. PTA is one of my all-time favorites because for me he’s eight for eight and I don’t know of another filmmaker who’s never misfired like that ... and the unique vision he’s put forth with his last four films in particular plays to my taste like nothing else, impeccable craftsmanship and awareness of character all presented in this discordant yet still accessible way that just takes my breath away like nothing else. His current streak of films from TWBB onward is unmatched to me ... well except maybe for Coppola’s ‘70s output, so maybe the comparison isn’t that bizarre? Still, holding one of the current masters at the peak of his powers in comparison to an unprecedented legendary innovator who changed Hollywood and cinema as a whole forever ... it doesn’t compute for me. And, again, I’m not well-versed in FFC, but from what I’ve seen, he’s four for four for me, and like PTA’s last four they’re all masterpieces ... And maybe PTA’s sensibilities just play a bit better for me, but do I have any right to say that he’s “better” than the genius behind The Godfather, the madman behind Apocalypse Now? Probably not. The comparison is due to them being American pioneers. Coppola was the original, PTA is the new guy, and there are definitely similarities in their work. Sounds like a reasonable comparison to me so I'll stand up, hear you out, then take your shade.
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Jul 29, 2019 1:17:27 GMT
Not voting because a.) it seems like a nonsensical comparison and b.) I’ve only seen Coppola’s “major” work. PTA is one of my all-time favorites because for me he’s eight for eight and I don’t know of another filmmaker who’s never misfired like that ... and the unique vision he’s put forth with his last four films in particular plays to my taste like nothing else, impeccable craftsmanship and awareness of character all presented in this discordant yet still accessible way that just takes my breath away like nothing else. His current streak of films from TWBB onward is unmatched to me ... well except maybe for Coppola’s ‘70s output, so maybe the comparison isn’t that bizarre? Still, holding one of the current masters at the peak of his powers in comparison to an unprecedented legendary innovator who changed Hollywood and cinema as a whole forever ... it doesn’t compute for me. And, again, I’m not well-versed in FFC, but from what I’ve seen, he’s four for four for me, and like PTA’s last four they’re all masterpieces ... And maybe PTA’s sensibilities just play a bit better for me, but do I have any right to say that he’s “better” than the genius behind The Godfather, the madman behind Apocalypse Now? Probably not. The comparison is due to them being American pioneers. Coppola was the original, PTA is the new guy, and there are definitely similarities in their work. Sounds like a reasonable comparison to me so I'll stand up, hear you out, then take your shade. Hmm sorry didn’t mean to throw shade at your poll ... even if I did think it was a Ray post before I clicked on it ... okay so maybe I did a little bit. Lol You are right, they are both pioneers and they’ve both made films that I can comfortably say feel entirely original and unlike anything I know of. I think my problem might be with the cross-generational nature of the comparison ... because obviously PTA hasn’t reinvigorated Hollywood to the extent that Coppola did and hence hasn’t had the same influence and likely never will, but these guys emerged in two totally different cinema climates and timeframes. So who’s to say PTA wouldn’t have made just as much a splash as that if he’d worked in the ‘70s...who knows. Maybe this discussion has no place in a comparison of personal taste anyway, so maybe it shouldn’t matter and I was reading too much into it ... in which case, I’ll reiterate, haven’t seen enough Coppola to be comfortable taking a side.
|
|
Javi
Badass
Posts: 1,530
Likes: 1,619
|
Post by Javi on Jul 29, 2019 1:18:11 GMT
PTA can't compete with any of the American masters, not yet anyway - not Scorsese and certainly not Coppola or Altman. He's very talented but he isn't an original the way those guys were imo. ehh that's debatable. I'd certainly call PTA a unique and distinctive artist, and I definitely prefer him to Scorsese and Altman for starters (although that's totally subjective and irrelevant i know). Regardless, you can't deny PTA's films are recognizable as entirely his own. His films defy comparison. They're one of a kind. He's an original in every sense of the word. Yeah it's debatable. And what's original to some may seem worn out to others. Just look at the arguments around First Reformed last year... some people denounced it as Winter Light 2.0 for structural and thematic similarities. I can see where they're coming from but to me that's missing the point in a key way. You can't invent a "theme" and you'll have a hard time coming up with a new "structure", but an intuitive artist can express something new... and there's no way a 1961 chamber piece from Sweden (which uses a lot of 19th century ideas, true to Bergman) is expressing the same thing as the contemporary American nightmare that is First Reformed. I'd have no trouble calling it one of the most original American films of the decade. Because the mood is new, and this gives new meaning to old ideas. This is exactly what Mean Street does, and The Conversation, and McCabe & Mrs. Miller (but in a bigger, bolder way). Where the hell did these movies come from? They're small miracles in a way, not only authentic and lived-in and representative of something new but also truly singular. but And it's not a question of talent. You can be extremely talented and a top-tier craftsman as a director but fail to unearth anything truly revealing about the times you live in... and some directors aren't even remotely interested in that and that's fine too. It's not necessarily a criticism - but rather a limitation imo. I have a blast watching Boogie Nights but it just reminds me of stuff I've seen before... Magnolia is reminiscent of (bad) Altman. Phantom Thread is exquisite work but I get Ophüls, Visconti feels... can't really help it. I never get a feeling of "oh wow I'm watching something I've never seen before"... the thrill of discovery just isn't something I associate with PTA's (often excellent) work.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,711
Likes: 2,291
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Jul 29, 2019 1:28:37 GMT
The comparison is due to them being American pioneers. Coppola was the original, PTA is the new guy, and there are definitely similarities in their work. Sounds like a reasonable comparison to me so I'll stand up, hear you out, then take your shade. Hmm sorry didn’t mean to throw shade at your poll ... even if I did think it was a Ray post before I clicked on it ... okay so maybe I did a little bit. Lol You are right, they are both pioneers and they’ve both made films that I can comfortably say feel entirely original and unlike anything I know of. I think my problem might be with the cross-generational nature of the comparison ... because obviously PTA hasn’t reinvigorated Hollywood to the extent that Coppola did and hence hasn’t had the same influence and likely never will, but these guys emerged in two totally different cinema climates and timeframes. So who’s to say PTA wouldn’t have made just as much a splash as that if he’d worked in the ‘70s...who knows. Maybe this discussion has no place in a comparison of personal taste anyway, so maybe it shouldn’t matter and I was reading too much into it ... in which case, I’ll reiterate, haven’t seen enough Coppola to be comfortable taking a side. Now this is a good post. And you make a good argument perhaps PTA was born a little too late. And his work most certainly would've been well received in the 70s though not sure how much better. But then you can also argue... would he have been able to make these films if he didn't have Coppola/Scorsese/Altman's filmography to emulate and take inspiration from? Again these are what-ifs and life doesn't work like that, but apparently most people here just think The Godfather, GF Part II, Apocalypse Now, and The Conversation are better than the majority of PTA's work. That's what it boils down to. Personally, I'd rank The Master among his filmography above The Conversation but other than that... Coppola owns the rest of PTA's ass.
|
|
Film Socialism
Based
99.9999% of rock is crap
Posts: 2,553
Likes: 1,386
|
Post by Film Socialism on Jul 29, 2019 1:57:00 GMT
coppola by a big distance though i like pta. if you only compare his 70s run to pta i'd give it to the new boy, but coppola's late work has so many deep cuts that i think put him in another league.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,711
Likes: 2,291
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Jul 29, 2019 2:02:11 GMT
ehh that's debatable. I'd certainly call PTA a unique and distinctive artist, and I definitely prefer him to Scorsese and Altman for starters (although that's totally subjective and irrelevant i know). Regardless, you can't deny PTA's films are recognizable as entirely his own. His films defy comparison. They're one of a kind. He's an original in every sense of the word. Yeah it's debatable. And what's original to some may seem worn out to others. Just look at the arguments around First Reformed last year... some people denounced it as Winter Light 2.0 for structural and thematic similarities. I can see where they're coming from but to me that's missing the point in a key way. You can't invent a "theme" and you'll have a hard time coming up with a new "structure", but an intuitive artist can express something new... and there's no way a 1961 chamber piece from Sweden (which uses a lot of 19th century ideas, true to Bergman) is expressing the same thing as the contemporary American nightmare that is First Reformed. I'd have no trouble calling it one of the most original American films of the decade. Because the mood is new, and this gives new meaning to old ideas. This is exactly what Mean Street does, and The Conversation, and McCabe & Mrs. Miller (but in a bigger, bolder way). Where the hell did these movies come from? They're small miracles in a way, not only authentic and lived-in and representative of something new but also truly singular. but And it's not a question of talent. You can be extremely talented and a top-tier craftsman as a director but fail to unearth anything truly revealing about the times you live in... and some directors aren't even remotely interested in that and that's fine too. It's not necessarily a criticism - but rather a limitation imo. I have a blast watching Boogie Nights but it just reminds me of stuff I've seen before... Magnolia is reminiscent of (bad) Altman. Phantom Thread is exquisite work but I get Ophüls, Visconti feels... can't really help it. I never get a feeling of "oh wow I'm watching something I've never seen before"... the thrill of discovery just isn't something I associate with PTA's (often excellent) work. Even Hard Eight reminds me of the Coens on nyquil. That being said, I think Punch-Drunk Love and The Master do stand out as not someone else's work. Maybe PDL you can compare to Chungking Expres? Ha... I'm really reaching here - it's not really. I know PDL is PTA's film nobody else's. The Master is existential theater.... pacinoyes is spot on there. Still, in the medium of cinema I don't think anyone else can lay claim to it. Maybe some old European directors, but.... still nah.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2019 2:16:52 GMT
This comparison will probably make more sense in about 15-20 years - PTA should still have a good number of films ahead of him, and as he's gradually coming more into his own style with time (really starting with The Master - PDL wears all sorts of influences on its sleeve), I think that's pretty relevant here.
I see why Coppola will win in a landslide - he's undoubtedly a more refined artist and as a result his stuff feels more mature - but as of right now, having not seen much of Coppola's post-90s work, I'd give PTA the edge whether it'll get me stoned on here or not, only because I prefer my favorites from him over my favorites from FFC. Both are great directors.
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Jul 29, 2019 3:32:01 GMT
Hmm sorry didn’t mean to throw shade at your poll ... even if I did think it was a Ray post before I clicked on it ... okay so maybe I did a little bit. Lol You are right, they are both pioneers and they’ve both made films that I can comfortably say feel entirely original and unlike anything I know of. I think my problem might be with the cross-generational nature of the comparison ... because obviously PTA hasn’t reinvigorated Hollywood to the extent that Coppola did and hence hasn’t had the same influence and likely never will, but these guys emerged in two totally different cinema climates and timeframes. So who’s to say PTA wouldn’t have made just as much a splash as that if he’d worked in the ‘70s...who knows. Maybe this discussion has no place in a comparison of personal taste anyway, so maybe it shouldn’t matter and I was reading too much into it ... in which case, I’ll reiterate, haven’t seen enough Coppola to be comfortable taking a side. Now this is a good post. And you make a good argument perhaps PTA was born a little too late. And his work most certainly would've been well received in the 70s though not sure how much better. But then you can also argue... would he have been able to make these films if he didn't have Coppola/Scorsese/Altman's filmography to emulate and take inspiration from? That's a really interesting line of questioning ... because obviously PTA's early output especially was almost entirely shaped by Scorsese and Altman in particular. But in the last dozen years, the discernible influences he has all predate that generation, which is why I'd say that shows him at his most Coppola, i.e. being really nothing like Coppola or anyone else for that matter. Whether or not PTA would've developed into the unique filmmaker he is without those influences though ... impossible to say but might be fun to touch on totally hypothetically ... obviously all those New Hollywood guys were fresh out of film school, drawing on a lot of the same mostly-international influences and also playing off of each other quite a bit too, so who knows, PTA in this hypothetical scenario very well coulda been making similar films in the mid-'70s as he did in the late-'90s. Just think what Boogie Nights would've been if instead of looking back it was about the Cali porn industry of the here and now ... now that's something to think about. Again, sorry for criticizing your poll at first, they're just not two filmmakers I'd ever think to associate with each other ... Coppola vs. Scorsese or something like that I'd love to dig into, ditto PTA against anyone from his generation but I can't think of one he doesn't totally blow out of the water tbh ... but I think because it's such an unusual side-by-side it's opened up some fascinating avenues of thought for me.
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Jul 29, 2019 3:50:07 GMT
But where's the companion poll about who's more attractive?
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Jul 29, 2019 4:11:40 GMT
But where's the companion poll about who's more attractive? Well this one I'm pretty comfortable in giving to PTA as a no-brainer ... he's got kind of a weird DILF sexy vibe about him now and back in the cocaine days was just straight-up hot.
|
|