Discussion in 'Dynasty' started by Gabriel Maxwell, Sep 22, 2016.
All the crepes.
Speaking of crêpes, somehow I can't make pancakes anymore. Well I can, physically, but they're hard and dry and crusty, not at all what a good pancake should be.
Well I guess every country's cinema will have something that you won't find anywhere else. But French Cinema certainly has been rich and varied for many decades with perhaps more energy, money and creativity channeled into it than probably any other country on the European mainland.
Try eating out instead.
Also what I find sets apart French cinema from that of the rest of Europe, is the French speaking. Not something everyone is going to pick up on right away, you need a finely tuned ear to notice it.
That's correct. And you'll also notice many, many more French people than you would in Cinema from pretty much any other country. That was one of the main things I learned on my course.
My town doesn't have a pancakery or creperette.
And then there are the onions. Strewn around a pretty waif's neck, or hanging in a rustic farmhouse kitchen. And lets not forget the onion's more pungent cousin, le garlic!
Not even a crêperie? Probably your best bet is to move to a new town.
Thats right, who's probably riding a bicycle wearing a beret and a black and white striped top, and smoking a cigarette.
It cant be French cinema without her. And she must be silent for 70% of the film. And then inexplicably get her baps out and make love to an artist and his sister.
Right, after which she probably goes insane and throws herself off a bridge.
Isn't that Swedish cinema?
If the bridge is in Sweden then yes.
You're good... You're very good.
Hey, I studied this stuff. Feel free to pick my brain. I'm here to help.
Atmosphere and noir photography are not just an artistic conceit. One of the reason the film noir pictures of the '40s are still far more popular than other genre of Old Hollywood is that that dark atmosphere can really focus a drama as almost nothing else can --- even though that type of lighting was virtually anathema to Spelling's sensibilities (or Uncle Lenny's).
In a way, the psychological impact of deep, shadowy camerawork is akin to the old maxim that "it's not what you see but what you don't see" -- or, really, the mix of the two... In a late-'90s interview, Janet Leigh reflected something that I had thought before -- that the effect of the legendary shower scene in PSYCHO was derived not from how much you saw nor how much you didn't see, but by the orchestration of both. And that combination, when carefully blended, gets inside the audience's collective and individual brains and sticks with you because it makes the viewer part of the creative process.
At the very least, it's a great way to strengthen borderline scripts.
Ahhh, Estelle Windwood --- she could play Sable's maternal grandmother who gave birth to Agatha... but you'd have to cast her before 1984 when she died at circa~101. Otherwise, I'd make her Eva Braun in Season 10, if she hadn't shot and killed Billy Waite in TWILIGHT ZONE thirty years earlier in precisely the way I'd have Braun kill Sable and Caress.
"Mother says pray, dear..."
The sequel to that would be Swedish cinema!! Talking to death about all those things that happened to them in long close shots and then Death itself showing up to play chess...
PS: I love everything Swedish as I said in a previous post, don´t make a mistake...
I think Adam in season 8 was given material far superior than the cardboard villain in season 9. There were certain characters Paulsen did not know what to do with, and he was one of them.
Actually Collins likes to portray herself as some sort of wise woman of film and TV, so she may have been trying to insert her "I told you so" quip about the ratings decline that was apparent, and which had more to do with the time slot than anything Paulsen was doing.
Lack of material and ideas was never Dynasty's problem. It's how they tackled them or, to be more precisely, how they didn't.
I don't completely disagree with you that Adam's "make-over" for season 9 felt a bit jarring considering his "journey" in the Dynasty story.
But it's not like there hadn't been bizarre changes before.
When we first met Michael Torrance he seemed like a cool and decent guy who then turned villainous after being rejected by Blake and then even more villainous when he decided that Jeff was the enemy.
Only to explain it with that lacklustre he-did-drugs which was hard to connect with the cool Michael Torrance that we saw in his first episodes.
Then we had a few years of boring bickering (my office, my files) trying to sabotage Steven, trying to befriend Steven and then he met Dana and it seemed like the final chapter in his journey. I agree that this marriage had the potential of some serious soap-y shenenigans that could last for several seasons if the show hadn't been cancelled (and of course, if Dana hadn't left).
But the marriage did fall apart and he was more embittered than ever. And I think it makes sense that this would bring out the worst in him, again.
Separate names with a comma.