OTHER SCIENCE FICTION SERIES

What's the beef with Kevin Costner flicks?

POSTED BY: JEWELSTAITEFAN
UPDATED: Friday, April 2, 2010 20:59
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 4599
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, March 26, 2010 5:27 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


OK, so I've heard numerous snipes around here about his flicks, without much elaboration.

I'll agree to continue not to like Big Chill and No Way Out, but what are some valid reasons some people don't like his greater works? Specific reasons, please.

Some Discussion Targets:

Dances With Wolves
Field of Dreams
JFK
Waterworld
The Postman



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 26, 2010 6:03 AM

JONGSSTRAW


Oooh, the long-awaited Kevin Costner thread!

Big Chill ( he's the dead guy, right?).....loved it
No Way Out.....loved it
Dances With Wolves.....loved it
JFK....loved it
Waterworld ...liked it
Postman....never saw it
Untouchables.....loved it
Tin Cup....loved it
Wyatt Earp......loved it
The Bodyguard......liked it
Bull Durham......liked it
For Love Of The Game.....loved it
Robin Hood.....liked it

Never really thought about it before, but obviously I'm a fan.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 26, 2010 7:00 AM

THESOMNAMBULIST


Best thing he ever did is:
FANDANGO
Made that with his friend and director Kevin Reynolds - who Costner saddly disassociated himself with over Waterworld (which is more fun than people let on) and which - when you think about the logistics - Reynolds actually did a very good job over. Saddly he was locked out of the editing room by the studio and his 'friend' Costner and therefore Reynolds was unable to see his vision realised. He's never quite recovered from that.

Hollywood eh!

Dances with Wolves was good at the time... Not seen it since though, it feels like one of those films that may have dated a whole lot....

JFK - Hampered by it's ideology. Typical Oliver Stone.
Field of Dreams - Much ado about nothing, but it's a heartwarming story I guess. Plus Burt Lancaster gives a touching performance.
The Postman - not seen.
The Bodyguard - Give me a break.
And there's some film he did with Jennifer Aniston which somehow I got roped into seeing with my girlfriend and that film is TERRIBLE!!!!! (Can't recall the name of it)





NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 26, 2010 10:05 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:

The Postman - not seen.

Not bad- I own it.

Waterworld was the worst... absolutely puke-able.

Actually, I guess I'm a fan too.

Just never saw Wyatt Earp. After Tombstone, I just didn't see the point.


The laughing Chrisisall

"I only do it to to remind you that I'm right and that deep down, you know I'm right, you want me to be right, you need me to be right." - The Imperial Hero Strikes Back, 2010

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 26, 2010 12:04 PM

LWAVES


In my opinion:
Field Of Dreams - One of my fave films ever.
Fandango - Excellently funny film.
Dances With Wolves - Epic.
Bull Durham - One of the few baseball movies I really like.
JFK - Great cast, great story, intelligently done.
Untouchables - The only thing wrong with this movie is Connerys accent. I can get by that.

The mid range ones:
Tin Cup - Likeable enough.

The low end of the scale:
Wyatt Earp - Boring
Waterworld - I was seasick before I saw water.
The Postman - Tries to be something it isn't.
The Bodyguard - Blurgh. Only became a hit because of that bloody song.

And I'm biased because of my family history with the real Sheriffs Of Nottingham but Robin Hood was a travesty that is only worth watching to see Alan Rickman act everybody off the screen. Even Morgan Freeman was only okay. The rest of them deserved a hanging....

I've not seen any of his recent stuff.



"I don't believe in suicide, but if you'd like to try it it might cheer me up to watch."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 26, 2010 2:36 PM

ECGORDON

There's no place I can be since I found Serenity.


Why has no one mentioned Silverado? I like that film. It was one that Kasdan promised Costner since his flashback scenes in The Big Chill were cut.

Of the others listed:
Big Chill-doesn't really count
Fandango-very good, enjoyable film
Field of Dreams-loved it, still do
No Way Out-haven't seen it
Dances With Wolves-liked it, but probably won't see it again, but if I do it will be for Mary McDonnell and Graham Greene
JFK-liked it
Waterworld-never finished watching it
Postman-some great scenes, but overall a yawn
Untouchables-did not like
Tin Cup-never saw it
Wyatt Earp-loved it. I'm sure I'm in the minority, but it makes Tombstone pale in comparison.
The Bodyguard-never saw it
Bull Durham-great, but mainly for Sarandon and Robbins
For Love Of The Game-never saw it
Robin Hood-refused to see it. Errol Flynn is the only Robin Hood I need.

And here's a few others not yet mentioned, all of which I liked:
Mr. Brooks
Open Range
Dragonfly
Thirteen Days

I suppose I'm a semi-fan, depends on the film, the director, and his co-stars.



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 27, 2010 4:24 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:


Waterworld was the worst... absolutely puke-able.

The laughing Chrisisall



Please read the OP and provide specific valid reasons for your claim.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 27, 2010 4:33 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by lwaves:
In my opinion:

Waterworld - I was seasick before I saw water.


Are you trying to say you dislike water so you went to see a movie named Waterworld and this is the sole reason you dislike it, or the Charleton Heston narrative turned you off, or do you have something more substantive to report?
Quote:


The Postman - Tries to be something it isn't.


So what do you think it was, and what do you think it tried to be, and how do you think it fell short?
Quote:


The Bodyguard - Blurgh. Only became a hit because of that bloody song.


Are you referring to the 2 decade old Dolly Parton classic?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 27, 2010 4:51 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by ecgordon:

No Way Out-haven't seen it


Gene Hackman in another of his mean-bastard-who-kills-his-mistress-and-covers-it-up roles. Also has an early role for Will Patton, who later teams up in Postman.
Quote:


Robin Hood-refused to see it. Errol Flynn is the only Robin Hood I need.


So you won't watch the Russell Crowe/Ridley Scott version?
Quote:


And here's a few others not yet mentioned, all of which I liked:
Mr. Brooks
Open Range


I agree with these, but it seems that most who disparage his works have not bothered to see these.

His co-stars I've enjoyed: Mary McDonnell, Granham Greene, Rodney Grant, Maury Chaykin, Larenz Tate, Will Patton, Giovanin Ribisi, Sean Young, Olivia Williams, Rene Russo, Dennis Hopper, Michael Jeter, Joe Santo, James Russo, Scott Glenn, Kevin Bacon, Joe Pesci, Robert Duvall, Gary Oldman, George Dzundza, Fred Thompson, Dennis Burkley, Marshall Bell, Joanna Going, Bill Pullman, James Earl Jones, Charles Martin Smith, Robert DeNiro, Gaby Hoffman, Dwier Brown, Madeline Stowe, Robert Pastorelli, Alan Rickman, Michael Wincott, Jennifer Aniston, Christopher McDonald, Danielle Panabaker, Kevin pollack, Jon Lovitz, Courtney Cox, Kurt Russell, Vincent D'Onofrio, Wayne Knight, Michael Rooker, Laurie Metcalf, Walter matthau, Tommy Lee Jones, Dale Dye, Donald Sutherland, Bob Gunton, Clint Eastwood, Laura Dern, Bruce McGill, Jack Black, Tom Petty, Mary Stuart Masterson, Daniel Von Bargen, Kelly Preston, Brian Cox, Clancy Brown, to name a few.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 27, 2010 5:22 AM

NVGHOSTRIDER


Favorite Costner flicks

A Perfect World- Strange premise and improbable situation, but the bonds of fatherless children really shine between Butch and Buzz.

3000 Miles To Graceland- More improbability, but it just looked like a damn fun movie to make. And Murphy is the bad guy I'd have fun playing.

Open Range-Charley Waites relationship with the other characters seems shallow and awkward... and real. The lack of posturing and delay in his performance amped the characters true nature and force of violence ten fold.

Mr. Brooks- Sometimes the bad guys alter ego isn't too far from his true self. Not the best movie, but I strangely enjoyed myself watching it.

Also, I was a bit emotional watching The War. I used it as an occasional teaching interaction about the perceptions and treatment of people we think we know.

Costner seems a bit dry and two dimensional but adds something when not trying to be a good guy. LT. Dunbar from Dances With Wolves was sort of an exception as it played well with the period and the people.

After studying people and knowing some who don't say a lot but still project their experience, I have to say that Kevin Costner does a great job at playing "just some guy". Not an easy thing for most people to do, even in the real world sometime.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The country is making a big mistake not teaching kids to cook and raise a garden and build fires.
-Loretta Lynn
Smarts are the brains that make America think.
-Will Sasso as Steven Segal, MadTV

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 27, 2010 5:27 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
Best thing he ever did is:
FANDANGO
Made that with his friend and director Kevin Reynolds - who Costner saddly disassociated himself with over Waterworld (which is more fun than people let on) and which - when you think about the logistics - Reynolds actually did a very good job over. Saddly he was locked out of the editing room by the studio and his 'friend' Costner and therefore Reynolds was unable to see his vision realised. He's never quite recovered from that.

Hollywood eh!


And there's some film he did with Jennifer Aniston which somehow I got roped into seeing with my girlfriend and that film is TERRIBLE!!!!!


Rumor Has it.

Costner and Reynolds together again with Learning Italian.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 27, 2010 6:31 AM

ECGORDON

There's no place I can be since I found Serenity.


Quote:

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
Quote:

Originally posted by ecgordon:

No Way Out-haven't seen it


Gene Hackman in another of his mean-bastard-who-kills-his-mistress-and-covers-it-up roles. Also has an early role for Will Patton, who later teams up in Postman.
Quote:


Robin Hood-refused to see it. Errol Flynn is the only Robin Hood I need.


So you won't watch the Russell Crowe/Ridley Scott version?
Quote:


And here's a few others not yet mentioned, all of which I liked:
Mr. Brooks
Open Range


I'm well aware of the plot of No Way Out, seeing as how it is a remake of the great film noir "The Big Clock." It's just one I never got around to seeing.

I probably won't see the new Robin Hood. I am a semi-Ridley Scott fan too, but not so much of Russell Crowe.



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 27, 2010 8:16 AM

OPPYH


I echo what has been said about Fandango. His best film to date.

Other films he was way above average in:

-Revenge

-No Way Out

-------------------------------------------------

70's TV FOREVER

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 27, 2010 8:19 AM

OLDGUY

What Would Mal do ?


what's the beef with Costner flicks?...uh... Costner.


actually , for light viewing, I like many of his otherworld type of flicks..Postman, Waterworld...all good for what they were...blame bad directing for some hokey parts more than acting...robin hood was actually well done all around..great supporting cast...Costner was the weak part of the entire project..but in spite of him..he seems likeable and I tend to give his movies a try.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 27, 2010 10:35 AM

LWAVES


Quote:

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
Quote:

Originally posted by lwaves:
In my opinion:

Waterworld - I was seasick before I saw water.


Are you trying to say you dislike water so you went to see a movie named Waterworld and this is the sole reason you dislike it, or the Charleton Heston narrative turned you off, or do you have something more substantive to report?
Quote:


The Postman - Tries to be something it isn't.


So what do you think it was, and what do you think it tried to be, and how do you think it fell short?
Quote:


The Bodyguard - Blurgh. Only became a hit because of that bloody song.


Are you referring to the 2 decade old Dolly Parton classic?



Waterworld - I'm not afraid of water and don't get seasick so probably not the most accurate comment but then it was meant to be descriptive of the fact that I felt I had wasted my money (the sick feeling) on this film instead of seeing The Usual Suspects. Costner was still a big cinema draw at the time and that had persuaded us to pick this over the others. The phrase 'It's a Costner movie, it can't be that bad' being uttered.
As for the actual film Costner himself failed to show any kind of acting skill. Dennis Hopper was so OTT it was laughable (in a bad way). It was obvious to me from the start that the little girls tatoo was a map and that she and the woman would eventually break down Costners 'shield'. The other characters were just cliches that had been seen so many many times before.

The Postman - I liked the idea of this, keeping the world going by keeping communication going which gave people hope. It tried to be an epic and thought itself a epic but it wasn't. It tried to be more meaningful than it needed to be. It was a simple message that could have been done well. It ended up being a plodding, mostly boring, overly patriotic story of what should have been a normal man making a difference, instead of a film showing Costner as the American Hero.

Bodyguard - Partons song is a classic, I agree with you. But it wasn't Partons version in the movie. It was Whitney Houstons and over here it seemed to be on the radio incessantly, you just couldn't escape it. All she did differently from the original was sing it as loud as she could in that way that divas do on covers. Fair enough that a lot of people liked it but a portion of those fans would then see the movie bacause if that song, not because of the film itself, helping boost the box office.
As for the film it was a completely by-the-numbers affair which signposted every plot point that was coming along. Totally predictable with bad writing and bad acting (especially Houston).

Is that enough detail for you?



"I don't believe in suicide, but if you'd like to try it it might cheer me up to watch."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 27, 2010 5:58 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by lwaves:
Quote:

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
Quote:

Originally posted by lwaves:
In my opinion:

Waterworld - I was seasick before I saw water.


Are you trying to say you dislike water so you went to see a movie named Waterworld and this is the sole reason you dislike it, or the Charleton Heston narrative turned you off, or do you have something more substantive to report?
Quote:


The Postman - Tries to be something it isn't.


So what do you think it was, and what do you think it tried to be, and how do you think it fell short?
Quote:


The Bodyguard - Blurgh. Only became a hit because of that bloody song.


Are you referring to the 2 decade old Dolly Parton classic?



Waterworld - I'm not afraid of water and don't get seasick so probably not the most accurate comment but then it was meant to be descriptive of the fact that I felt I had wasted my money (the sick feeling) on this film instead of seeing The Usual Suspects. Costner was still a big cinema draw at the time and that had persuaded us to pick this over the others. The phrase 'It's a Costner movie, it can't be that bad' being uttered.
As for the actual film Costner himself failed to show any kind of acting skill. Dennis Hopper was so OTT it was laughable (in a bad way). It was obvious to me from the start that the little girls tatoo was a map and that she and the woman would eventually break down Costners 'shield'. The other characters were just cliches that had been seen so many many times before.

The Postman - I liked the idea of this, keeping the world going by keeping communication going which gave people hope. It tried to be an epic and thought itself a epic but it wasn't. It tried to be more meaningful than it needed to be. It was a simple message that could have been done well. It ended up being a plodding, mostly boring, overly patriotic story of what should have been a normal man making a difference, instead of a film showing Costner as the American Hero.

Bodyguard - Partons song is a classic, I agree with you. But it wasn't Partons version in the movie. It was Whitney Houstons and over here it seemed to be on the radio incessantly, you just couldn't escape it. All she did differently from the original was sing it as loud as she could in that way that divas do on covers. Fair enough that a lot of people liked it but a portion of those fans would then see the movie bacause if that song, not because of the film itself, helping boost the box office.
As for the film it was a completely by-the-numbers affair which signposted every plot point that was coming along. Totally predictable with bad writing and bad acting (especially Houston).

Is that enough detail for you?



"I don't believe in suicide, but if you'd like to try it it might cheer me up to watch."


Sounds like your complaint about Costner flicks is that Costner flicks are soooo excellent that your level of expectation is so much higher than for any other actor that when the editor, director, writers, or producers create a less-than-spectacular film, you blame Costner. Like Streep or DeNiro never had a dud. Not to mention Gabriel Byrne or Kevin Spacey.
Summarized enough?
Thanks for your explanation, that helps explain the attitudes which caused me to start this thread.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 28, 2010 3:55 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:


Waterworld was the worst... absolutely puke-able.

The laughing Chrisisall



Please read the OP and provide specific valid reasons for your claim.



Costner is a gill man... why exaxctly? No time to evolve another species, no science that advanced yet... oh, and if he's so strong as to survive pressures at the bottom of the sea, why can't he bend some FLIMSY bars or break rusty locks? Speaking of pressure, how'd the girl survive her trip to the bottom? And HOW did Costner pull down a thing with such severe buoyancy?

See Lwaves post for my other reasons.


The laughing Chrisisall

"I only do it to to remind you that I'm right and that deep down, you know I'm right, you want me to be right, you need me to be right." - The Imperial Hero Strikes Back, 2010

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 28, 2010 4:16 AM

THESOMNAMBULIST


Chrisisall wrote:

Quote:

Cstner is a gill man... why exaxctly? No time to evolve another species, no science that advanced yet... oh, and if he's so strong as to survive pressures at the bottom of the sea, why can't he bend some FLIMSY bars or break rusty locks? Speaking of pressure, how'd the girl survive her trip to the bottom? And HOW did Costner pull down a thing with such severe buoyancy?


All good points Big 'C' and not really any way to challenge them - however I find that with certain films if you just give way to it's internal logic you can enjoy them enough.... The Mummy films are like this as are most time travel flicks. I know it doesn't make much sense but on occaisions a poor film can be quite enjoyable - given enough leeway.

That said there are films that just rub you up the wrong way. I dare say this is the case with Waterworld for you, and that's fair. No grumbles from me. I've done the same with many films..... Me I just can't get past hobbits!


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 28, 2010 4:20 AM

GWEK


Coster films are, traditionally, somewhat pompous with glacial pacing.

Does that make 'em all bad? Nope. Does it make me stay away from them? Yep.

Making a general statement, when Costner directs, he's a little too in love with himself and with his scenery. Despite the basic Hollywood adage of "less is more," Coster seems to think it's a good idea to do in 10 minutes what normal folk would do in 3. Occassionally, he is right, but more often, he's just taking too long.

Having said that, there are quite a few good Coster movies. Not going through the entire list, I enjoy OPEN RANGE quite a bit (sidenote: his character reminds me of Mal) and was pleasantly surprised by THE POSTMAN (although it is slooooooow).

WATERWORLD is not as bad as people give it credit for, but it's definitely not a good movie (bad acting, predictibly slow, weak and obvious plot... and, yet again, a woman throws herself at Coster for no reason other than that he's Costner).

WYATT EARP isn't bad, either, bu as someone (CiA?) said, after TOMBSTONE, why bother? Yes, I know they're different movies with different purposes, but when you compare the two and see the ENERGY that TOMBSTONE has that's lacking in WYATT EARP, I think it's easy to see some of the flaws in a traditional Costner film.

www.stillflying.net: "Here's how it might have been..."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 28, 2010 4:54 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
The Mummy films are like this

Yeah, but the Mummy flicks are breakneck popcorn fun, no time to ponder- Waterworld just pushed its nonsense in my face during its slow pace.


The laughing Chrisisall

"I only do it to to remind you that I'm right and that deep down, you know I'm right, you want me to be right, you need me to be right." - The Imperial Hero Strikes Back, 2010

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 28, 2010 4:58 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by GWEK:
was pleasantly surprised by THE POSTMAN (although it is slooooooow).


However, I think it works for that film, gives it a realistic feel. I didn't need it to be Mad Max, so I was okay with it.


The laughing Chrisisall

"I only do it to to remind you that I'm right and that deep down, you know I'm right, you want me to be right, you need me to be right." - The Imperial Hero Strikes Back, 2010

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 28, 2010 8:44 AM

STEGASAURUS


Personally, I like Kevin Costner. I would, however say that his acting is a lot like Keanu Reeves: they act as themselves. Either one of them do not show a great range when it comes to acting, their characters are almost always seemingly the same person.

However, I personally like Kevin Costner's personality, where I could care less about Keanu's.

That being said, it seems like The Postman and Waterworld were almost the same story. I mean, they're both post-apocolyptic(sp?) stories where Kevin's character takes on the status-quo to bring about a happy fairy tale resolution.

Folks get tired of that. I, however, enjoyed both stories, and generally most all of his work. He's kinda like Dennis Quaid, where as he get older, you just see his work less and less.

And, as always, this is all just my opinion.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 28, 2010 1:12 PM

GWEK


I think part of the problem with THE POSTMAN is that it followed WATERWORLD. Having seen the two of them pretty much back-to-back not too long ago, I can can that they're quite different movies. Although they're post-apocalyptic, the tones are very, very different.


www.stillflying.net: "Here's how it might have been..."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 28, 2010 2:12 PM

GINOBIFFARONI


I am surprised nobody has picked this one





Mind you Scott Glenn, and Kevin Kline put in the better performances... and Danny Glover was great too... and John Cleese makes me laugh as always

but Costner was still in it...


does still count right

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 28, 2010 7:12 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:


Waterworld was the worst... absolutely puke-able.

The laughing Chrisisall



Please read the OP and provide specific valid reasons for your claim.



Costner is a gill man... why exaxctly? No time to evolve another species, no science that advanced yet... oh, and if he's so strong as to survive pressures at the bottom of the sea, why can't he bend some FLIMSY bars or break rusty locks? Speaking of pressure, how'd the girl survive her trip to the bottom? And HOW did Costner pull down a thing with such severe buoyancy?

See Lwaves post for my other reasons.


Clearly you were not paying attention.
Gills: clearly explained as the mutantions derived among some, he was detained at the atoll merely because he was labeled "muto" and for no other reason. Loss of terra shade, trees, protection from radiation, thus are the causes of mutation.
Bodily structural integrity is not the same as leverage. You think hand strength equates to diaphram stength? Thought fail. And a few hundred feet depth is not exactly "bottom of the ocean"
If you're asking about decompression from her trip, slow ascent can account for soem of that. They were down a loooong time before resurfacing.
He didn't need strength to pull her down, that was what the weight on the bubble was for, it's called ballast - balance the weight against the bouyancy. there would be more weight, because the cable is pulling up witht he bouyancy.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 28, 2010 7:18 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by GWEK:
Coster films are, traditionally, somewhat pompous with glacial pacing.

Does that make 'em all bad? Nope. Does it make me stay away from them? Yep.

Making a general statement, when Costner directs, he's a little too in love with himself and with his scenery. Despite the basic Hollywood adage of "less is more," Coster seems to think it's a good idea to do in 10 minutes what normal folk would do in 3. Occassionally, he is right, but more often, he's just taking too long.

Having said that, there are quite a few good Coster movies. Not going through the entire list, I enjoy OPEN RANGE quite a bit (sidenote: his character reminds me of Mal) and was pleasantly surprised by THE POSTMAN (although it is slooooooow).

WATERWORLD is not as bad as people give it credit for, but it's definitely not a good movie (bad acting, predictibly slow, weak and obvious plot... and, yet again, a woman throws herself at Coster for no reason other than that he's Costner).

WYATT EARP isn't bad, either, bu as someone (CiA?) said, after TOMBSTONE, why bother? Yes, I know they're different movies with different purposes, but when you compare the two and see the ENERGY that TOMBSTONE has that's lacking in WYATT EARP, I think it's easy to see some of the flaws in a traditional Costner film.

www.stillflying.net: "Here's how it might have been..."


So you dislike all slow paced films, not just Costner? That's the most reasonable explanation so far, thanks.
But, I actually considered Open Range to be far slower than the others here, almost as slow as Merchant Ivory work.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 28, 2010 7:18 PM

CHRISISALL


Sorry.
*FAIL*

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 28, 2010 7:31 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by Stegasaurus:
Personally, I like Kevin Costner. I would, however say that his acting is a lot like Keanu Reeves: they act as themselves. Either one of them do not show a great range when it comes to acting, their characters are almost always seemingly the same person.

However, I personally like Kevin Costner's personality, where I could care less about Keanu's.



I feel the same about Will Smith, haven't seen him act yet. I get more out of Costner, and even Reeves. But I get your meaning.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 28, 2010 7:32 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
I am surprised nobody has picked this one





Mind you Scott Glenn, and Kevin Kline put in the better performances... and Danny Glover was great too... and John Cleese makes me laugh as always

but Costner was still in it...


does still count right


Ooooooo. Brian Dennehy, another fave.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, March 28, 2010 8:02 PM

GWEK


Quote:

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
Quote:

Originally posted by GWEK:
Coster films are, traditionally, somewhat pompous with glacial pacing.

Does that make 'em all bad? Nope. Does it make me stay away from them? Yep.

Making a general statement, when Costner directs, he's a little too in love with himself and with his scenery. Despite the basic Hollywood adage of "less is more," Coster seems to think it's a good idea to do in 10 minutes what normal folk would do in 3. Occassionally, he is right, but more often, he's just taking too long.

Having said that, there are quite a few good Coster movies. Not going through the entire list, I enjoy OPEN RANGE quite a bit (sidenote: his character reminds me of Mal) and was pleasantly surprised by THE POSTMAN (although it is slooooooow).

WATERWORLD is not as bad as people give it credit for, but it's definitely not a good movie (bad acting, predictibly slow, weak and obvious plot... and, yet again, a woman throws herself at Coster for no reason other than that he's Costner).

WYATT EARP isn't bad, either, bu as someone (CiA?) said, after TOMBSTONE, why bother? Yes, I know they're different movies with different purposes, but when you compare the two and see the ENERGY that TOMBSTONE has that's lacking in WYATT EARP, I think it's easy to see some of the flaws in a traditional Costner film.

www.stillflying.net: "Here's how it might have been..."


So you dislike all slow paced films, not just Costner? That's the most reasonable explanation so far, thanks.
But, I actually considered Open Range to be far slower than the others here, almost as slow as Merchant Ivory work.



Yes, I do dislike slow-paced movies. If a movie is slow, it typically means that the script is failing, the direction is failing, or both (or there's a disconnect between the two). I would draw a dividing line between a "slow" movie and one that moves at (for lack of a better term) a "stately pace", but such movies that are slow for good reason rarely pull if off.

Often, good acting and rich character development offsets slow pacing (as I felt happened to some extent in OPEN RANGE).

Point is, though, if you're looking for an answer for what's wrong with a lot of Costner films: many of them can tell the same story as well (if not better) and be a good 10-20% shorter than they are. That means 10-20% of the movie is waste.

www.stillflying.net: "Here's how it might have been..."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 29, 2010 3:31 AM

LWAVES


Quote:

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
Sounds like your complaint about Costner flicks is that Costner flicks are soooo excellent that your level of expectation is so much higher than for any other actor that when the editor, director, writers, or producers create a less-than-spectacular film, you blame Costner. Like Streep or DeNiro never had a dud. Not to mention Gabriel Byrne or Kevin Spacey.
Summarized enough?
Thanks for your explanation, that helps explain the attitudes which caused me to start this thread.



I don't see how you draw that conclusion from my comments. Fair enough if it's your take on what I wrote but that's not how I feel on this subject.

If you look again at my first post you will see that, of the films of his that I've seen, I like more of them than I dislike. The Postman, Waterworld and The Bodyguard are what I consider to be his worst. And I certainly don't feel that I fit in with the attitudes that you mention in your original post. My comments were directed more at him because your post was about Costner and his movies, not just the movies as standalone items. He isn't completely to blame for how I feel about these movies but the emphasis of your original post led my comments to be about him. Plus he directed The Postman, was involved in directing on Waterworld and was a producer on all three of the ones mentioned. That shows he had a lot of involvement in how these films turned out so he has to take his share of the criticism (good or bad) that goes with that.

I don't hold him in any higher esteem than any other actor that I like. I am a big DeNiro fan, I like a lot of his movies. Again, like Costner, they tend to be the earlier ones. I haven't seem much of either of their recent movies, not because I think it's bad, but because I have a lot of other things to watch and their recent movies just haven't appealed to me in a way that their earlier works did. I don't really have an explanation as to why they don't appeal except that it's the way I feel about them. Doesn't mean they are bad movies.

Your comment that DeNiro, Streep, Byrne and Spacey have made dud films (and they have, every actor has or will) but don't seem to accept that I think Costner has made some duds. My comments aren't about Costner flicks in general or even really Costner himself. They are about those particular three films, and Costner in them, that you singled out for me to explain myself further.

To me, you seemed to have generalised my comments about three of his movies to mean all of his work. If I'm wrong on this I apologise.

To sum up I like Costner and I really like some of his movies. As I said above Field Of Dreams is one of my all time faves and a style of film that I find myself drawn to.
But he has made some very poor movies in my opinion.


JSF: you haven't really commented yourself about which ones you like/dislike, barring a couple of them in your replies. You asked us what we think but what do you think?



"I don't believe in suicide, but if you'd like to try it it might cheer me up to watch."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 29, 2010 7:04 AM

STORYMARK


I wasn't very fond of The Postman - just found it a bit overlong/overindulgent and plodding. Otherwise, I've liked most of his films.

Off the top of my head:
Dances with Wolves - a bit played out now, but still a damned well made film.

The Untouchables - A bit slow in places, but awesome in others.

Open Range - Best western of the last decade.

Robin Hood - Okay, so his accent sucks and Rickman steals the show, but it's still fun.

Waterworld - A bit overstuffed, and I'm not a fan of Hopper as the villain, but still plenty of good stuff in this one.

Mr. Brooks - A nice switch-up from the usual Costner flick.... and one movie I can stand Dane Coook in.

JFK - Just saw this for the first time a while back - damned good film, and Costner's big summation speech is excellent.


"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 29, 2010 7:20 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Stegasaurus:
Personally, I like Kevin Costner. I would, however say that his acting is a lot like Keanu Reeves: they act as themselves. Either one of them do not show a great range when it comes to acting, their characters are almost always seemingly the same person.



This is true of most big stars.... or even not so big ones. I, for instance, have not seen a lot of variation between Fillion's roles, either.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 29, 2010 7:43 AM

STEGASAURUS


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:

Originally posted by Stegasaurus:
Personally, I like Kevin Costner. I would, however say that his acting is a lot like Keanu Reeves: they act as themselves. Either one of them do not show a great range when it comes to acting, their characters are almost always seemingly the same person.



This is true of most big stars.... or even not so big ones. I, for instance, have not seen a lot of variation between Fillion's roles, either.



I totally agree. Although his performance in Blast from the Past seemed a bit diff... oh wait, no it didn't. He still got punched in the face.

I think there are those actors/actresses out there that we just feel comfortable with, so we don't tend to criticize their acting. But those that we just can't find a comfort zone with, well, they are the ones we try to put on the chopping block.

Although I don't care for Keanu, my all time disliked actor is Harvey Keitel. There's just something about the guy that creeps me out to no end, even before I saw Bad Leiutenant.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 30, 2010 5:24 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Haven't seen anyone mention his role in Ron Howard's "Night Shift" as Frat Boy # 1. He was great. Didn't say a word. :)

Honestly, I like some of his movies, hate others.

Waterworld was laughable.
Postman, I gave up about 30 minutes in.

Liked JFK okay. Even liked American Flyers a li'l bit. Bull Run was okay. Silverado was fun. Liked Dances With Wolves. No Way Out was decent.

Never saw A Perfect World, but heard it was good.

Freaking HATED Robin Hood. Walked out on that one.

LOVED Fandango.

Some hits, some misses. Him being in a movie wouldn't keep me away from it, nor would it be the deciding factor in going to see it.




"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 2, 2010 6:19 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by lwaves:
Quote:

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
Sounds like your complaint about Costner flicks is that Costner flicks are soooo excellent that your level of expectation is so much higher than for any other actor that when the editor, director, writers, or producers create a less-than-spectacular film, you blame Costner. Like Streep or DeNiro never had a dud. Not to mention Gabriel Byrne or Kevin Spacey.
Summarized enough?
Thanks for your explanation, that helps explain the attitudes which caused me to start this thread.



I don't see how you draw that conclusion from my comments. Fair enough if it's your take on what I wrote but that's not how I feel on this subject.

If you look again at my first post you will see that, of the films of his that I've seen, I like more of them than I dislike. The Postman, Waterworld and The Bodyguard are what I consider to be his worst. And I certainly don't feel that I fit in with the attitudes that you mention in your original post. My comments were directed more at him because your post was about Costner and his movies, not just the movies as standalone items. He isn't completely to blame for how I feel about these movies but the emphasis of your original post led my comments to be about him. Plus he directed The Postman, was involved in directing on Waterworld and was a producer on all three of the ones mentioned. That shows he had a lot of involvement in how these films turned out so he has to take his share of the criticism (good or bad) that goes with that.

I don't hold him in any higher esteem than any other actor that I like. I am a big DeNiro fan, I like a lot of his movies. Again, like Costner, they tend to be the earlier ones. I haven't seem much of either of their recent movies, not because I think it's bad, but because I have a lot of other things to watch and their recent movies just haven't appealed to me in a way that their earlier works did. I don't really have an explanation as to why they don't appeal except that it's the way I feel about them. Doesn't mean they are bad movies.

Your comment that DeNiro, Streep, Byrne and Spacey have made dud films (and they have, every actor has or will) but don't seem to accept that I think Costner has made some duds. My comments aren't about Costner flicks in general or even really Costner himself. They are about those particular three films, and Costner in them, that you singled out for me to explain myself further.

To me, you seemed to have generalised my comments about three of his movies to mean all of his work. If I'm wrong on this I apologise.

To sum up I like Costner and I really like some of his movies. As I said above Field Of Dreams is one of my all time faves and a style of film that I find myself drawn to.
But he has made some very poor movies in my opinion.


JSF: you haven't really commented yourself about which ones you like/dislike, barring a couple of them in your replies. You asked us what we think but what do you think?



"I don't believe in suicide, but if you'd like to try it it might cheer me up to watch."


I asked because so frequently somebody posts that those flicks are so bad, as if it is a given or understood universally, yet no reason or particular is given. Thus I didn't get an answer from you I could categorize. perhaps you are not one of those people, explaining why your response was not one I was seeking, but no reason for me to detract from all replies in the thread.
I own Waterworld, and enjoy it repeatedly. I agree Hopper was over the top, but I normally don't care for him, other than Blue Velvet. Even Speed didn't do much for me. Hot Spot keeps me interested in what he does.
I own Postman, and enjoy it repeatedly. I really like the casting.
I own Dances With Wolves, and enjoy it repeatedly, likely more than the others.
I might own Field of Dreams, and have enjoyed it many times, largely due to the cast. Not that big a baseball fan.
JFK was an Oliver Stone piece, Costner was one of a massive cast.
I liked Mr Brooks, perfect World, his part in Truth or Dare, Open Range, and Revenge.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 2, 2010 12:14 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:

I own Waterworld, and enjoy it repeatedly.

If ya like it, that's fine. I just can't get past the laffable 'science.'
Quote:


I own Postman, and enjoy it repeatedly.

I own that one, I think it's really good- I find the patriotic thing strangely appealing, and the post-apocalyptic vibe is a subtle thing, more realistic because it's not in your face like in a Mad Max movie (not better btw, just more eerie for it's understatement IMO).


The laughing Chrisisall


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 2, 2010 8:59 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:

Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:

I own Waterworld, and enjoy it repeatedly.

If ya like it, that's fine. I just can't get past the laffable 'science.'
Quote:


I own Postman, and enjoy it repeatedly.

I own that one, I think it's really good- I find the patriotic thing strangely appealing, and the post-apocalyptic vibe is a subtle thing, more realistic because it's not in your face like in a Mad Max movie (not better btw, just more eerie for it's understatement IMO).


The laughing Chrisisall



I also forgot to mention that I've noticed some people do not think there is any character development unless words are spoken, running dialogue. For those who feel words speak louder than actions, these flicks will not appeal. For those who realize actions speak louder than words, the character devlopment or revelations do not make the film seem slow or plodding. Plodding is Rob Reiner film.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Three-Body Problem by Liu Cixin
Sat, March 23, 2024 18:09 - 7 posts
Video Games to movie and tv series and other Cartoon / video game adaptions
Thu, March 7, 2024 14:26 - 42 posts
Favourite martial arts film of all time-
Wed, March 6, 2024 15:02 - 54 posts
PLANETES
Tue, March 5, 2024 14:22 - 51 posts
Shogun, non scifi series
Tue, March 5, 2024 13:20 - 4 posts
What Good Sci-Fi am I missing?
Mon, March 4, 2024 14:10 - 53 posts
Binge-worthy?
Mon, February 12, 2024 11:35 - 126 posts
Are There New TV Shows This Fall You Must See?
Sat, December 30, 2023 18:29 - 95 posts
The Expanse
Wed, December 20, 2023 18:06 - 27 posts
What Films Do You Want To See In 2023?
Thu, November 30, 2023 20:31 - 36 posts
Finding realistic sci-fi disappointing
Thu, October 5, 2023 12:04 - 42 posts
Worst Sci-Fi Ever.
Wed, October 4, 2023 17:51 - 158 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL