Look at me! I'm an artiste!

[stray]

Carpenter's like.... De Palma... Hasn't made anything really good in YEARS. Years upon years upon years. So I agree... Definitely not a guy who gives "what the audience wants".

Except De Palma was an even bigger genius once (and fuck no, I'm not talking Scarface. I'm talking radical 70's Hi Mom De Palma).

[edit] Wait, Carlito's Way was cool. At least Charlie's dialogue/narrating was. And the Grand Central scene.

[DraconianOne]

Yeah, Carlito's Way was a good film

Lumet suffers too.  The man who directed 12 Angry Men, Serpico, Dog Day Afternoon and Network then went on to do The Wiz (aka The WTF?), Family Business and Gloria. I gather "Before The Devil Knows You're Dead" isn't bad but haven't seen it.

[justdave]

Woah, woah, woah, back the truck up, there. I never said that I agreed that digital wasn't a viable option. I think you want to argue that point with Margalis. Second, I think you're missing the point; The point is that RR is a lazier director than John Carpenter, and his choice of digital reflects that. Not that using digital is inherently lazier, but that his reason was that it's cheap and easy...Which sounds like a valid point to me. Whether Carpenter is smoking crack about whether digital can 'deliver' is beside the point, it's the attitude. 

And as far as calling Mel Gibson the equal of Soderbergh because the visuals in his movie are stunning, okay, fine, Apocalypto proves that you can good visuals in digital. Mel Gibson still doesn't belong in that list. I was never arguing the digital looks worse than filmstock argument in the first place.

[DraconianOne]

 

I was actually arguing that point with Margalis. I was just standing on you to do it.

Also, that list was not necessarily a list of equals. It's a list of directors who have all in their own way made films which have been described as visually impressive.  Except perhaps for Doug Liman who I respect because he brings guerilla filmmaking techniques to blockbuster films.

Sidney Lumet said that he loves digital because it sidesteps all the hassle of using film stock and yeah, at the end of the day, digital is more convenient, quicker and easier and, most importantly, cheaper. The Red One camera is going to be a godsend to independent and low budget filmmakers - especially when the next-gen version comes out and the current 3k/4k version drops in price (rental as well as retail).

Then again, Danny Boyle shot 28 Days Later with a Canon XL1 and those are dirt cheap these days.  Not really good enough for 35mm transfer but still.

[justdave]

I was actually arguing that point with Margalis. I was just standing on you to do it.

Hah! fair enough. :)

[Margalis]

I was merely contrasting RR with Carpenter.

RR argued that digital is "good enough" and is convenient. Carpenter argued that it isn't good enough and convenience doesn't matter. (Remember Carpenter is used to cutting and splicing film by hand physically)

I wasn't implying that everyone who uses digital is a bad director or that digital sucks, I just found that particular incident illustrative. Especially since RR is often considered a director in the vein of Carpenter, cites him as an influence and they were purposely paired together at this event. But their conversation showed that they had little in common. The more I see of both of them the more I see that they are nothing alike.