Posted January 28, 200718 yr Babel or Blood Diamond? both about 143 minutes in length so i dont think i'm gonna do a double with these two especially as there's 4 hours of Salaam-E-Ishq to go see this week :lol: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b2/Salaam-E-Ishq_Audio_CD.jpg which is more essential movie to see? which will keep me interested the most and not get me bored? Babel has had various good and bad reviews from 1 star in the Sunday Times to an Oscar Nom (however this could be because it an issue that the Academy looks out for, or that they are all pretentious film buffs that like pompus films, which was another criticism from 1 of the film's reviews). i liked the 1st and 3rd stories in Amores perros but the 'Daniel and Valeria' strand bored me. how does it compare. Blood Diamond seems to be a 3 star film but one with a five star performance from Leo. how does it compare with last king of scotland, lord of war, constant gardener etc???
January 29, 200718 yr Babel is complete and utter sh*te imo, i haven't seen it, but Blood Diamond looks a lot better, i'd say go with that one..
January 29, 200718 yr I get a bit irritated by these films which are supposedly about Africa/The Third World, but are told from a First World perspective... Should we really have films which are supposed to be shedding light on the socio-political situation in Africa but continually use white characters as our cinematic guides... Would "Blood Diamond" have really suffered as a film if it had been completely 100% about the Djimon Honsou character and his struggle alone..? I dont think so, in fact I think it would've added more authenticity to proceedings... Having a high profile actor such as Leonardo Di Caprio in the film completely alters the film's ideological stance imo... I much prefer "Hotel Rwanda", that film's credentials as being a more true African story are much more sound imo because it centres almost completely around the Don Cheadle character...
January 30, 200718 yr Author I much prefer "Hotel Rwanda", that film's credentials as being a more true African story are much more sound imo because it centres almost completely around the Don Cheadle character... Hotel Rwanda was a good film. and if you havent seen it is on entertainment in video, so should be about £2.99 in Morrisons by now :o go buy!!!
January 31, 200718 yr Babel is another incredibly divisive film. Half the audience ADORED the film and the other half LOATHED it. And in "Crash" tradition, it will probably win the Oscar for Best Picture. I agree Hotel Rwanda was far superior. Personally, I'm not necessarily offended by DiCaprio's presence in Blood Diamond (his South African accent was admirable anyway) but I do agree he was probably there simply to make the film more appealing to its obvious audience.
January 31, 200718 yr Babel is another incredibly divisive film. Half the audience ADORED the film and the other half LOATHED it. And in "Crash" tradition, it will probably win the Oscar for Best Picture. I agree Hotel Rwanda was far superior. Personally, I'm not necessarily offended by DiCaprio's presence in Blood Diamond (his South African accent was admirable anyway) but I do agree he was probably there simply to make the film more appealing to its obvious audience. It is pretty offensive if you are an African and look at these films... Take the example of "Last King of Scotland"... I quite enjoyed the film, but then I would wouldn't I..? I'm not Ugandan... Talk to a Ugandan and ask how they feel about it (which I actually have done, to say that he was not impressed with how the film presented those times, in which he actually lived through, would be an understatement..). I slagged off Mel Gibson for his Hollywoodisation of Scottish history in "Braveheart", I would be a total hypocrite not to say the same thing about films like "Last King..." or "Blood Diamond" that play similarly fast and loose with political history and the facts.... Both films are good as 'Cinema', but really that's as far as it goes...
January 31, 200718 yr Author Babel is another incredibly divisive film. Half the audience ADORED the film and the other half LOATHED it. And in "Crash" tradition, it will probably win the Oscar for Best Picture. Crash normally gets rated as a good film but not a great film (4 stars rather than 5 stars). however as CBB shows: race, its a great topic to get noticed. and it has been said that film merit, perfomances etc are more to do with the issue, the triumph over adversity than an iconic performance or film.
January 31, 200718 yr Crash normally gets rated as a good film but not a great film (4 stars rather than 5 stars). however as CBB shows: race, its a great topic to get noticed. and it has been said that film merit, perfomances etc are more to do with the issue, the triumph over adversity than an iconic performance or film. I see "Babel" as being more about a failure that cultures have to communicate with each other than anything to be honest.... All films have their problems and there are certainly leaps of logic in "Babel", but on the whole it is hugely ambitious and wide in its scope, and in this bland world of mainstream rubbish that says and communicates nothing, I reckon "Babel" gets full marks for standing up and actually attempting to say something and have a bit of meaning...
February 1, 200718 yr Author saw Blood Diamond, it was alright, but really just a mis-matched buddy movie that thinks its more important than it is. but i suppose if they had to have a map to show where Sierra Leone was maybe they knew this is what they were actually making, with the issue just something to win Oscars for??? it was good but not a 5 star film, 3 stars is about right. and tbh when it come to films with big pink diamonds still cant beat this dude at his best (not Steve Martin obv :lol: ) http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f4/Jacques_Clouseau.PNG Personally, I'm not necessarily offended by DiCaprio's presence in Blood Diamond (his South African accent was admirable anyway) like how he wasnt actually South African, but from Zimbabwe (Rhodesia) as it lets him off some of the inaccuracies of SA's dialect (no doubt Mugabe has all the white farmers in that country liquidised by now). and you have thought that being filmed in SA he could have just mimicked the locals :lol: All films have their problems and there are certainly leaps of logic in "Babel", but on the whole it is hugely ambitious and wide in its scope, and in this bland world of mainstream rubbish that says and communicates nothing, I reckon "Babel" gets full marks for standing up and actually attempting to say something and have a bit of meaning... Blood Diamond on the other hand seems to be have divised as a field day for the authors of movie mistake books. :lol: If they are in Sierra Leone shouldnt they be driving on the other side of the road??? they seem to be driving on the same side as South Africa (where the film was filmed) which is the same side as the United Kingdom (Sierra Leone like Nigeria changed sides years ago but someone forgot to tell Ed Zwick :lol: :lol: ). and it should have had a few more of these Pugs. the whole of North Africa is still a big market for them. http://personal.inet.fi/cool/makkesgarage2/entiset/veh20-2.jpg and omg I never realized that a white Rhodesian called Danny Archer was the first erson to ever utter the popular phrase 'Bling-Bling' in 1999 just beating various members of the Cash Money Millionares!!! http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/70/BDPoster.jpg yep! the white bloke on the left is the originator of that iconic word not these dudes below !!! http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/5/56/250px-B00000ILTK.01.LZZZZZZZ.gif http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/B00004XR5H.03.LZZZZZZZ.jpg
February 2, 200718 yr It is pretty offensive if you are an African and look at these films... Take the example of "Last King of Scotland"... I quite enjoyed the film, but then I would wouldn't I..? I'm not Ugandan... Talk to a Ugandan and ask how they feel about it (which I actually have done, to say that he was not impressed with how the film presented those times, in which he actually lived through, would be an understatement..). I slagged off Mel Gibson for his Hollywoodisation of Scottish history in "Braveheart", I would be a total hypocrite not to say the same thing about films like "Last King..." or "Blood Diamond" that play similarly fast and loose with political history and the facts.... Both films are good as 'Cinema', but really that's as far as it goes... I agree entirely, I think people who make historical films have an obligation to be as accurate as possible. As for Gibson, ugh the manipulative racist piece of $h!t. Don't forget how Jesus was scourged and beaten for 3 hours with more blood flying than could have actually been contained in a man's body, like Mortal f***ing Kombat or something!
February 2, 200718 yr Really good commentary on this page. let me also just say I can't stand Jennifer Connelly and never could. :P
February 4, 200718 yr On Entertainment.ie, which is a really excellent site for film reviews, they have Blood Diamond 2/5 and Babel 4/5. ^_^
February 5, 200718 yr i went to see blood diamond yesterday, wasnt sure at first cuz its really not my kind of film, it was the only film i'd seen advertised most at cinemas so i thought i'd give it a go i really enjoyed it, thought it was a really good film, lot better than i thought :)
February 5, 200718 yr Author I agree entirely, I think people who make historical films have an obligation to be as accurate as possible. As for Gibson, ugh the manipulative racist piece of $h!t. Don't forget how Jesus was scourged and beaten for 3 hours with more blood flying than could have actually been contained in a man's body, like Mortal f***ing Kombat or something! on something like Apocalypto have to ask are people actually reviewing the film or just the 'troubles'* that the director had got himself into? Apocalypto was a dumbass action film, however it was a good dumbass action film one that had you on the edge of your seat, even if it is probs riddled with loads of historical inaccuracies like blood diamond (which was not as good) *note: not wanting to go into the whole rascist thing as i suppose everyone is warn out from CBB
February 5, 200718 yr I get a bit irritated by these films which are supposedly about Africa/The Third World, but are told from a First World perspective... Should we really have films which are supposed to be shedding light on the socio-political situation in Africa but continually use white characters as our cinematic guides... Would "Blood Diamond" have really suffered as a film if it had been completely 100% about the Djimon Honsou character and his struggle alone..? I dont think so, in fact I think it would've added more authenticity to proceedings... Having a high profile actor such as Leonardo Di Caprio in the film completely alters the film's ideological stance imo... I much prefer "Hotel Rwanda", that film's credentials as being a more true African story are much more sound imo because it centres almost completely around the Don Cheadle character... hehe before I even came in the thread I knew I would have something like this to read :lol: I saw this film last weekend and its amazing. Really well acted and directed. You dont believe the plight of the third world involves both the third and 'first' world? In fact, have you even seen the film? This film is completely about the way that the third world is overrun by the first world, the way they use their country for what it can do for them rather than how their natural resource can help out Africa. Leonardo De Caprio plays the perspective of other countries taking from Africa at any cost. If you didnt have this perspective you woudnt be able to see the full picture and it woudnt have had half the effect. Before I structure this any further, have you even seen the film?
February 5, 200718 yr hehe before I even came in the thread I knew I would have something like this to read :lol: I saw this film last weekend and its amazing. Really well acted and directed. You dont believe the plight of the third world involves both the third and 'first' world? In fact, have you even seen the film? This film is completely about the way that the third world is overrun by the first world, the way they use their country for what it can do for them rather than how their natural resource can help out Africa. Leonardo De Caprio plays the perspective of other countries taking from Africa at any cost. If you didnt have this perspective you woudnt be able to see the full picture and it woudnt have had half the effect. Before I structure this any further, have you even seen the film? Yeah, I have, and I can see that point of view, but the whole idea you are talking about could have been much better put across by an actor who wasn't an A-list Hollywood celeb, he brings way too much baggage to it, Brad Pitt is a better fit in "Babel" because of the fact that it has three narratives running through it, so he isn't too much of a distraction to the overall idea that is trying to be put across... The relatively unknown Scottish actor in "Last King of Scotland" also does this, although that is another film that has pretty significant problems as it is attempting to tell the story or a real person and plays a bit too fast and loose with the facts... I'm not saying that "Blood Diamond" is not a good piece of Hollywood cinema, but you have to realise that this film is almost totally being told from a Westerncentric point of view and has no real African voice, apart from Djimon Honsou of course... Yes, I do believe that the plight of the third world does involve the first, and I can see this idea of what you say about the First World using the Third World for its own ends, but let's face it mate, that idea was put across far more effectively in the quite marvellous "The Constant Garderner" which is ten times the film that "Blood Diamond" is and is vastly more politicized IMO, mainly because the director of that film (Fernando Meirelles) is himself from a nation that is practically a Third World State and his perspective on the whole thing is not coloured by as many Western sensibilities. Far too often, "Blood Diamond" just comes across like an Action Movie (admittedly, a vastly superior one to most..), and on those occasions any pretentions it may have of being something meaningful or perceptive just go totally out of the window. Edward Zwick does have a conscience and he gets credit for at least trying, and I suppose if any mainstream Hollywood director was going to do it I would rather it was him more than some hack like Tony Scott (his attempts at trying to shed light on the troubles of a Third World nation resulted in the frankly awful, completely dumb, "Man on Fire"..) or Joel Schumacher, but he has the tendency to sacrifice the 'conscience' element in favour of following his instincts of producing something slick and typically Hollywood... Still, at least they never let Mel Gibson anywhere near it.... :lol: No doubt he'd've somehow worked in a theory that the Jews were responsible for all of Africa's problems.... <_< Have you ever seen "Tsotsi", the quite brilliant South African film which won the Best Foreign Language film Oscar last year....? Now this is the sort of film we should be seeing more of - African voices telling African stories about African concerns.. The quite brilliant directors we've had coming out of Latin America in the past decade have put across the concerns of Latin America with an incredible amount of brio, style and passion.... African film-makers should be doing the same thing their Latin American counterparts are doing, unfortunately, with the exception of "Tsotsi", this does not appear to be happening and it is, unfortunately, Western (British and American) film-makers that are putting words into the mouths of Africans when Africans should have a voice of their own.... THAT is my issue with films like "Blood Diamond".....
February 7, 200718 yr Author Before I structure this any further, have you even seen the film? Blood Diamond is now #1 in the UK chart
Create an account or sign in to comment