Movies
Related: About this forumI have to do it. Poll question: How many of you own a copy of "The Big Lebowski"?
3 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited | |
Yes, I own a copy. It really ties the room together. | |
1 (33%) |
|
Not yet, but I can get one by 3 o'clock this afternoon, with nail polish. | |
1 (33%) |
|
No, I don't. It's out of my element. | |
0 (0%) |
|
...say what you want about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos. (this will count as "other") | |
0 (0%) |
|
Shut the fuck up, Donny. (this will count as a "yes" vote) | |
1 (33%) |
|
Sometimes you eat the bear, and sometimes, well, he eats you. (this will count as a "no" vote) | |
0 (0%) |
|
Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man. (this will count as "did not wish to select any of the options provided") | |
0 (0%) |
|
0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided. | |
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll |
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)I always thought it was a "guy" movie in that most women don't seem to care for it.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)I loved it from the very first, it's one of my favorite movies of all time!
Maybe it's my generation - I'm from the early Boomer cohort, born in 1949. Plus I lived in LA in my early 20s. The Big Lebowski speaks to me - deeply.
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)"I mean, say what you want about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos."
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)"No Donny, these men are cowards....."
Scuba
(53,475 posts)scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)Are they open until 3 o'clock?
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)"Those are good burgers, Walter...."
"SHUT THE FUCK.......up Donny....."
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)I don't know about you, but I take comfort in that. It's good knowin' she's out there.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)My art has been commended as being strongly vaginal which bothers some men. The word itself makes some men uncomfortable. Vagina.
brooklynboy49
(287 posts)I have it on both DVD and Blu-ray. Why couldn't I vote twice? !
(I'll betcha Walter knows why... and it's related to Vietnam.)
brooklynboy49
(287 posts)And I doubt we will.
I never buy movie merchandise. Never.
But I own a Lebowski calendar and tee shirt
Lastly, on two other forums I frequent, my avatar is The Dude. I even have one on my computer for use if the site doesnt offer one.
Well, DU let me down. They don't offer The Dude as an avatar (blasphemous!), and I don't see anywhere where I can upload an avatar from my computer.
It's a fuckin' conspiracy, man!
brooklynboy49
(287 posts)I love Creedence, and I cried when The Dude learned his Creedence tapes weren't coming back.
And I, too, am not an Eagles fan. I like Hotel California; I hope I will be forgiven for this one transgression.
Little_Wing
(417 posts)For all the reasons stated above, plus: Coen Bros. rule.
brooklynboy49
(287 posts)They were gods to me. Until they remade True Grit. I have to be honest, I haven't seen it. And I don't intend to. It just has to be crap. It was such a horrible movie the first time, I just don't see how it could be made palatable. I'd rather remember them by Miller's Crossing, Fargo and Raising Arizona. And, of course, The Big Lebowski.
I guess they needed the money. And made a Faustian deal.
If I'm wrong, please correct me.
Speaking of gods, wasn't Jeff Bridges in that?
smh
Paladin
(28,734 posts)The Coen Bros.' version of True Grit is miles and miles ahead of the John Wayne version, because the Coens were wise enough to adhere to the book. Check it out.
Oh, and just to leave a turd in everybody's punch bowl: I don't regard Big Lebowski as a sacred relic. It's a bit self-indulgent for my tastes......
Little_Wing
(417 posts)I truly dislike John Wayne, and never saw the first version. You couldn't make me for a million bucks. But, being a Bridges fan, I did see the remake, and loved it. He (Bridges) was funny, gross and disagreeable. The young girl who played Mattie, Hailee Steinfeld, was perfectly cast. Plus it has Matt Damon, Josh Brolin and Barry Pepper in the cast. All excellent. Art direction totally on point (one of my favorite aspects of a film). At the time it was out, I was the lead graphic designer at a motorcycle magazine and every year we did a "yearbook" to acknowledge staff and writers, and I did the whole thing as an homage. That was a total hoot.
The Coen Brothers have made some movies that I didn't care for, but when they succeed it is very great film making. They had me at Blood Simple. Boom. The Ladykillers, Burn After Reading and even their most recent Inside Llewyn Davis (which got decent reviews) weren't my cup of tea. Yet the good ones are are unlike anything else. Impeccably made. No Country for Old Men was chillingly good, have you seen that? Anton Chigurh (played by Javier Bardem) was one of the most evil characters ever committed to film (of course, it was based on Cormac McCarthy's excellent book, they didn't dream him up on their own. But still...)
Even with their great success, they have remained true to their own aesthetic, and I have to admire them for remaining independent, true auteurs and producing one hell of a legacy. Honestly, I don't see where they have sold out.
brooklynboy49
(287 posts)I'll have to check out True Grit. I concede that I can be a bit of a cynic at times and allowed my disdain for the original cloud my judgment to the point of not even giving the remake a fair try. Not only am I a big admirer of the Coen brothers, Jeff Bridges is one of my favorite actors of the last 30 tears or so. I, too, was hooked bt Blood Simple and remained a devoted fan of the Coens until True Grit. I have been known to do my fair share of stupid things, and not giving True Grit a viewing with an open mind is one of them. I will watch it as soon as I get my hands on a copy.
Thanks again for your post. It's always nice to hear from a fellow movie lover who takes the time to help dummies like me better understand what they're missing.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)I don't remember ever seeing the John Wayne version - can't stand the guy - so the Coen version was a whole new thing for me.
I thought it was absolutely amazing. I remember sitting there just open-mouthed in awe through much of the movie. It totally blew me away.
Saw it at the theater with my dad, and we talked about it for weeks afterward. It was like, after seeing THAT movie, how are any other movies ever going to measure up to such sublime perfection of the art of film?
Jeff Bridges was awesome, he just had that character down! It's hard to find words to describe what a stunningly perfect performance he made of it. The whole cast was pitch-perfect through and through. As someone else mentioned, the art direction was fabulous, too. A seamless movie, not a single jot out of place.
So, yeah, get your hands on it. I can't imagine that you'd be disappointed in any way.
brooklynboy49
(287 posts)I don't disagree with anything you or the earlier posters said. In particular, I couldn't agree more that Jeff Bridges turned in one helluva performance.
But I stand by what I initially said, at least to this extent -- It was a movie that didn't have to be remade, certainly not by the Coen Brothers. I expect somethingspecial from a Coen Brothers movie. Miller's Crossing, Blood Simple, Raising Arizona, The Big Lebowski, Fargo. All special, all classics for the ages.
True Grit? A very good movie, a big improvement on the original. But is it special? A classic? My answers are no and no.
Yes, it was a vast improvement on the original. But did it have to be made? Perhaps, by a studio looking to make a buck. But by the Coen Brothers? My answer is a big, fat, emphatic "no".
And my question remains, "What were they thinking?" A rhetorical question. "Let's make a few bucks." Either they were out of fresh ideas, or they were made an offer they couldn't refuse. But, being the cynic that I am, there is no doubt in my mind that they made this movie for and were "thinking" of one thing and one thing only -- a paycheck. Not that there's necessarily anything wrong with that. But I believe that no matter what else they may ever do from this day forward, they have forever tarnished their status as true auteurs.
Just my opinion. A strong one. But just one man's opinion nonetheless.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)They made it in order to give their good friend Jeff Bridges an opportunity to showcase his totally awesome acting chops.
They made it because, as consummate lovers of film, they wanted to pay homage to a distinctly American film tradition, the Western.
They made it because they like stretching their skills, and this was something totally different for them.
They made it because they appreciated having an opportunity to do right by the original material, the book on which True Grit is based.
They made it for the same reason they make all their movies, because it was fun to do.
I seriously doubt they're hurting for money, or that they would take on a project that they didn't totally believe in just to make some extra bucks. C'mon, they're the Coen Brothers - they're probably financially set for life already. They create what they create for the same reason all artists create - because sending their artistic visions out into the world is what gives their lives meaning.
If True Grit is not your cup of tea, no biggy. But I see no reason to call their motives into question on the basis of your personal opinion.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Lately, we've been catching it on cable. To give you an idea how much we love it, Mr. Mickey's Dad and I repeat most of what you've chosen in the pole. I couldn't say, "shut the fuck up, Donny"
cause I don't own it YET!
Oh yeah? Well.. That's my opinion
man
SwankyXomb
(2,030 posts)I've never seen it. I've tried a few times to watch it, but something makes me turn it off after a few minutes.