Sign Up | My StoryLink | Help | Sign In
Decisions, Decisisons
The Oscar® nominations just came out last week, and I have already seen three of the Best Picture nominees: Atonement, Juno, and There Will Be Blood. Usually I find myself playing catch-up after the announcements. Given my good foresight, I wonder if I should rush to go see one of the other must-see films--Michael Clayton and No Country for Old Men. Or, since I am so far ahead of schedule, if I should say the heck with it, and go see Cloverfield, which is getting excellent reviews, though the likelihood of it making next year's ballot is somewhere between slim and none. (Come on. I am not being harsh. No one releases a movie in January that they think will be the next Great American Movie.) Will let you know what I think of Cloverfield.
Comments
Thoughts on Cloverfield: I didn't love it, didn't hate it. Could have lived without seeing it, but was glad I did. It was nice to see a movie I didn't have to think about.
Hey Deb,
No Country and Michael Clayton are both challenging, but well worth it. Especially as a writer, these are the kind of folks you want to study.
Tony Gilroy went from the three Borne films to Michael Clayton and is the best when it comes to writing Thrillers right now -- just as William Goldman who said as much in the intro for the Clayton screenplay that was just published.
The Coen Brothers have long been the best at Genre reinvention and are true masters of dialogue -- even in a film as sparse as this one. It would be an interesting learning experience for writers interested in adaptations to compare the Coen's film to Cormac McCarthy's novel.
PS: As someone interested in comedies—if you haven't read their scripts for Raising Arizona, Big Lebowski, Hudsucker Proxy, O Brother, Where Art Thou?, and Intolerable Cruelty—get to it!