Cool News
Roger Avary - The God Of All HellFire!!!
Hey folks, Harry here... How cool is Roger Avary? Ya know, people often talk and measure success by the amount of box office a film does, the filthy lucre with which the shallow like to wallow. Well RULES OF ATTRACTION came out in the United States and I still get letters from folks that are enjoying the hell out of it. That get it. RULES OF ATTRACTION is a film one discovers or that one wakes up to. It is easy to dismiss on surface level, but then you discover you're wrong and you reconsider, you take that second look, and you realize that it was simply a completely different film than you were expecting and that it does indeed have merit, that it indeed has something on its mind, and that we're just conditioned to look at these movies as vacuous empty sticky substances, when in reality... Like Lex Luthor says, sometimes the ingredients of Bubble Gum unlock the secrets of the Universe. Here's a fellow in London that got to experience the Avary Reality, where he's proud of a damn good film. Confident that he's right, and that presents the film as what he did, not what others wrongfully accuse him of. HERE YA GO...
Rock n' roll
...So I get to the Odeon in Leicester Square for the first showing of
Rules Of Attraction and I'm kind of bummed that my seats are on the back,
back, back row and then an eight foot giant and his equally tall
girlfriend slump into the seats in front of me blocking out the entire
screen so I kind of half-sit half-stand just to get a view as the lights
dim and Roger Avary comes bounding onto the stage at the front and it's
when he starts talking that I realise that this is a guy who really
deserves to be directing films as he has a real passion for it that's
contagious and in the space of a few seconds the whole cinema crowd is
buzzing with anticipation for this film.
Most other directors take the opposite route, going for the laidback
"yeah, I made a film, so what?"-approach. Not Avary.
Damn, I wish I'd brought my notebook as it's hard to remember all the
stuff he was saying as he said it in machine-gun fashion, with hardly any
full-stops or commas in his talking, kind of like the way Brett Easton
Ellis wrote the original book, which this film really captures in spirit
even if it does deviate from it quite radically.
And the way he introduced himself was pure gold. Anyone who can stroll out
in front of a 300 hundred strong audience and hold his arms out wide
proclaiming, "I am the God of all Hellfire" gets my vote. He seems really,
really excited with the film he has created saying that when he first
started the adaptation process he wasn't fully aware of what it would
become and only as he worked at it and worked at it did it start to grow
and expand in new directions.
He said that his aim in making the film was to capture the reality and the
melancholy that goes with being a student as opposed to all the other
films that deal with college/university life making it into a comedy. As
he said, "are these really the kinds of films that we want to represent us
and the experiences we've all had?" The man has a point. Stuff like The
Breakfast Club and American Pie seem so alien to my way of thinking they
may as well be set on Mars.
He described films as falling into two categories. The first being the
escapist film, where people go see the film and just escape from reality
for two hours. The second, and the one he's interested in, is the kind
that starts after you've left the cinema (in his words, "spreading like a
virus and occupying your thoughts for days and weeks after"). This film is
definitely one of those.
Talking about the adaptation process, he went on to say that he started
reading the book 13 years ago and then began writing it two years ago when
he felt he was old enough to be distant from his own college days but not
too old to be out of touch with the audience he was trying to reach.
He did say that he was glad to be back in London after he'd originally
been here filming the Victor-cam holiday montage and described how he'd
follow Kip Pardue with his camera while he went on the pull and, on one
occasion, wound up in a hotel room recording the actor and
whatever-girl-he-had-nabbed getting ready to get down and dirty while, in
the background, he would bark orders at them "okay, now take her blouse
off. Get your hands up in there." Shit, this film sounds like it was a
blast to film.
There was other stuff, but it was all said so quick that it scrambled my
brain.
... And so we watched the film and I won't review it here as I know you've
already had about twenty reviews on the website, but I'll say that I
genuinely liked it and especially liked the references to The Wicker Man
and Walking Tall while picking up on a few geographical references in
Victor's montage that may have passed others by (a 'Bateman Street'
street-sign in London is given a momentary close up. It does actually
exist in London, my girlfriend works one road down from it. And Victor
goes into Virgin Megastore in Camden (same name as the college in the
film) Town, London). I especially liked the scenes with the drug dealer
and his henchman: "I need you like I need an asshole on my elbow, you
muthaf*ckin' muthaf*cka!" Priceless.
And this is where I became convinced that Roger Avary is the real deal. He
stayed and watched the whole film from the back of the cinema, about three
feet from where I was sat. Now, this may not sound like news, but I've
been to a hell of a lot of premieres and film festivals and 99% of
directors in attendance run away as soon as the lights go down. Avery
stood there grinning like a cheshire cat, getting off on the audience's
positive vibes. And even more rarely, he even stuck around to chat to
people afterwards. The guy's a gent.
Deal with it.
Jim Lowe
-
+ Expand All
-
Nov 16, 2002 11:31:01 PM CST
for god's sake: NEVER bring anything for Ellis' book "the inform
by beamish13
Putrid, pointless book. The story about the vampire visiting his therapist is the worst piece of writing I've EVER come across...
-
Nov 16, 2002 11:45:45 PM CST
And so now Roger Avery embarks on yet another film project that
by thefoywonder
RULES OF ATTRACTION was just a bunch of unpleasant, uninteresting nihilists getting stoned and getting laid. Sorry, Mr. Avery, but I have to deal with enough of those people in real life to not be entertained by a movie about them.
-
...and I need your help. First, why do people bother to leave out one vowel of a curse-word? "muthuf*ckah?" What, is some innocent child who shouldn't hear harsh language is going to be confused by the asterix? What the f*ck is the point? Oh-- and you don't have to say "FIRST!" You have to ask yourself, "Am I the guy who says "FIRST!, or am I the guy who's above saying "FIRST!"? And don't be that "FIRST!" guy. F*ck "FIRST!" posters. F*ck them up their stupid *sses.
-
N*w th*t *'v* st*rt*d d*ing *t, *'v* d*c*d*d t* d*v*st m* l*f* *f v*w*ls *ll t*g*th*r. C*ll m* "Thr** Q**rks."
-
Roger Avary has made one of the three best films of the year, along with Punch Drunk Love and One Hour Photo, and all you can do is whine that it was "nihilistic" and "pointless". The film contained nihilism but was not nihilistic. That was part of the subject matter . There is a difference, you realize that. Right? The film, is sad, hilarious, mesmerizing and disturbing. How can a film that engages all those emotions, in such a beatifully rendered trance-like way, be worthless. Pull your heads out of your asses and grow a brain (and a heart) you silly little robots.
-
Nov 17, 2002 3:55:56 AM CST
My apologies, Mr. Brownstone, and thank you for setting me strai
by thefoywonder
Thank God you came along and advised me to remove my head from ass. Otherwise, I would have actually formed a personal opinion and not bowed to the pressure or hailing something that I thought was a waste of time and talent as genius. My apologies, Mr. Brownstone, for not "getting it." God forbid somebody not like the movie. God forbid we don't all share the same opinion. My apologies, Mr. Brownstone, for the fact that you're the typical AICN talkback dipshit who begins spitting up blood whenever he hears an opinion that he does not share. You can insult everyone you want, it won't change the fact that I still didn't like the movie and you're still a immature asshole. Oh, if only the movie was as sad, hilarious, and disturbed as you clearly are. Now go back into your trance-like state and learn to live with your fellow man.
-
Nov 17, 2002 6:37:24 AM CST
Of f topic, but what the hell: League of Extarordinary gents
by silvio dante
http://www.thescotsman.co.uk/index.cfm?id=1272922002. That's it then, huh?
-
assholes.
-
I couldn't understand what you were saying with Avary's dick in your mouth like that.
-
I'm sorry others can't or won't. Everything just works together so well in it. Granted it doesn't have a definitive ending and it isn't the cheeriest of movies but that doesn't make it any less good as a movie. I was sorry to see it slip so quickly. Reminds me of "Never Again", which is a truly wonderful and funny movie. The way it was billed probably kept most of the people who would have appreciated it from seeing it. Hopefully it will get a big response overseas.
-
The headline had me all excited about the prospect of Roger Avery filming a biopic of Arthur Brown.
-
I saw Rules of Attraction because of this website. I had heard how much "Killing Zoe" sucked from friends, and ignored the warning. I had read review after review which said it sucked, and I ignored the warnings. Then I saw it. Everyone who likes this movie is impressed by the fact that someone did impressive editing tricks and DARED to put awful things on the movie screen. But none of it had a point, or at least one worth telling. As much as Rodger Bitches that Quintin stole all his ideas, at least Quintin tells stories I gave three shits about.
-
It's quite charming to see how Harry keeps promoting "Rules of Attraction" despite the fact that it has nearly disappeared from theaters (last weekend it played at 105 theaters and has grossed $6,509,077 so far) and that most people/critics don't seem to like it. Maybe it'll fair better overseas and/or on video/DVD. But it's quite clear he's fighting an uphill battle.
-
Nov 17, 2002 11:49:22 AM CST
That's the Crazy World of Arthur Brown's "I Am the God of Hellfi
by aquatarkusman
Featuring the delicious talents of future prog rock drumming savant Carl Palmer.
-
Im sorry but this film was a disappointing piece of shite. Yes the backward stuff was interesting (the first fifteen times) the split screen was inventive. Dawson casting ALL WRONG!! Dawson's Kubrick by way of Alex from a "clockwork orange" trademark staring into the camera with your chin way down and your eyes locked was just embarrassingly ripped off and over-used. The drugdealer was way too little to be threatening (I don't care how fucked up on coke he was...the actor was miscast) Pus, I think Roger Avary is a woman hating mysoginist. Just about all of his female characters are hookers, girls who like to get shit on, he shows a girl losing her virginity and getting puked on, he show a girl (very un-realistically) getting gangbanged by a whole football team. And I'm sorry but ANYONE who walks onstage proclaiming "I am the God of all Hellfire" kidding or not, needs a serious reality check or at the very least simply a MASSIVE TOOL!! What does he think he's Marilyn Manson now? As much as he claims that college life was not like "Breakfast Club" (well, duh, considering that was HIGH SCHOOL!) and American Pie, it certainly is NOT as flat out mean and ugly as in ROA. BTW Victor was also wayyy miscast. The actor seemed more gay than any kind of guy who could score at will like Victor. The best scene is with the drunk gay guy w/ his mom in the posh restaurant. It is the one time (I think because the guy never takes off his shades) that the movie finally gives up all pretense of reality and admits what it is, a blatant cartoon, and we are allowed to laugh at these characters for what they are...very broadstroked, evil, destructive cardboard characters who exist for no other purpose than inflicting evil on each other. Period. Sorry, don't buy it, people are more dimesional than that, and so is college. But Harry, just because you are "friends" with Roger Avary and he lines your coffers with advertising $$ you have no right to call we who didn't like ROA (but still paid admission) wrong!! We just differ on your opinion. Like a guy said in an earlier post, I swear I "get it", I just don't think a movie that ONLY shows the bad in people is that interesting. And fuck you Roger Avary, for dismissing entertainment for escapism as unworthy. With the economy in the toilet, the U.S. about to go to a purely political war w/ Irag, snipers etc., who is this guy to tell us that instead we should be letting his disturbing scenes (ungh the girl getting gangbanged by the football team was so gross it left me feeling like I needed to shower my eyes for a week...do I need that in my life? Why so Roger Avary can feel "cool" that he fucked w/ his audience's mind?) On the other hand, Jessica Biels is the hottest girl in hollywood bar none, except of course, when she's getting gang-banged by the football team. Killing Zoe was a way better film. Hey Roger, stop spending so much time w/ coke sluts and Hollywood sycophants and meet some women that you DON'T hate, ok?
-
I thought it was quite good. RoA was poignant, funny, etc. etc. and DEFINITELY wasn't a letdown. I don't understand the critical and popular backlash
-
i go to college and get wasted
-
and just because a guy has passion it doesn't make him anymore talented. For that matter, just because a guy can talk a good game doesn't make him anymore or less passioniate than the next guy. I've seen student projects from the quiet people in class that were brilliant. You would never expect this kind of stuff from them but there it is and there passion shows in there work. Now I saw Rules of Attraction and I enjoyed it but the movie was an excerise in excess. Avery just wanted to show the 101 things he can do with a camera; all unmotivated, often annoying. They were there just because he could do it. Talent is not what you can do but how you use it; Avery choose to used everything. Only when Avery chooses to grow up and use technique more discriminately is when his talent will truely shine. Right now he just chooses to do whatever.
-
First, Roger shouldnt do anymore Bret Easton Ellis book to movie adaptations. Just stop!! PLEASE!! Its 2002 not 1987, Wake the hell up and smell the maple nut crunch!
Second, Roger is coming across as a total arrogant idiot. He needs to come back down to Earth and actually do something that people give a damn about, maybe then he cant start proclaiming himself a great director.
Im not one to usually knock a director (Michael Bay maybe), but I was really hoping Roger would do something Id like and instead I got ROA. A big stinky turd that I wouldnt rewatch if someone paid me to.
I hear Rogers next film is going to be a sequel or something to ROA... Shitterati or Clitterati or something?
In the immortal words of Mr Pink: Fuck all that.
: FART: -
Nov 17, 2002 2:06:11 PM CST
Actually, isn't that Crazy World of Arthur Brown song just calle
by brother putney
The first line is "I am the god of hellfire." I've seen an old clip of them playing that song on "Shindig" or "Hullabaloo" or some old show. The lead singer wears a helmet that's actually on fire.
-
Nov 17, 2002 2:30:56 PM CST
Hey, Three Quarks (and other pedants) read this before bitching
by jimbolo
The reason I stick an asterisk in swearwords during any reviews/reports that get posted is that I use a work email which tends to get intercepted by the nosey administrator if swearing is detected. A couple of guys from my department have been threatened with the boot for this kind of thing, and I don't want to join them. So there.
And everyone else who diagrees with me and my opinion on the film, well, hey, you're entitled to your own opinion. It's a free world...
... But you're all WRONG! (Ho, ho) -
... What is it with you folks and the constant Harry-bashing, eh? Seems like he's stuck in a no-win situation. If he claims to like a studio pic, you call him a sell-out and then if he champions a movie that tries to be different you all go ahead and stick the knife in him for that too. What's going on, you self-righteous f**ks? Yeah, yeah, yeah, why not make a few more digs about his weight while you're at it since you're all so imaginative. Haven't heard that one before.
-
all people who bought ads here
simone number 1
-
Thanks, Pal. Keep on proving my point, you hilariously funny (translation: nasty-minded) comedian you! Isn't this supposed to be a website for film fans, not whinging tw*ts?
-
Plenty of movies have made critics think twice. There was one critic who saw Planet of the Apes once, gave it 4 stars, saw it again and changed his review to 2 (or 2 1/2 or something). Planet of the Apes made him think twice, and look how fucking incredibly good that movie was. Harry always gets everybody pumped up for shitty movies directed by some asshole he knows, and surprise surprise, when they come out they're crap. Avary's rep is still riding on his involvement in Pulp Fiction, which probably wasn't as big as he claims it was. ROA is shit.
-
Wow, there are some whining little maggots here who don't seem to like Rules. I haven't heard a very good reason why though. Please go into more detail besides it had "no point" or was "nihilistic". I could say the same about your little talkbacks! I recalled a quote from Tarantino on the Res Dogs DVD when I read this talk back. He says that he gets the impression from watching Godard (I think) that if you have enough passion for film, you get the sense that it is almost impossible to make a bad film. I believe that. Rules was 10 times Red Dragon, 8 Mile, Harry Potter, etc. on the basis of one or two scenes alone. Also, if a film contains characters that you haven't met in real life, does that make it garbage? WTF!? Step out of your shells you WHINING LITTLE MAGGOTS.
-
Yeah!!!!!!!!! Rock on.
-
Nov 17, 2002 9:12:53 PM CST
Why "Rules" wasn't very good, with justification this time...
by thepoleofjustice
...too slick. Too distracting. Same problem I have with Bret Easton Ellis, actually. If you're going to show severe dysfunction, great. If you're going to slick things up to prove a point, great. But combining them is a tricky business, for you're running the very real risk that you're simply going to trivialize the "shocking" point you're trying to make. Case in point: the vomiting on the back. If you want to emphasize the horror, freeze frame on the guy's shocked face, or the girl's. If you want the audience to go "Eww, GROSS," then you do what Avery did: freeze frame on the spew as it exits the dude's mouth. You go from seeing a disturbing scene of debasement to an outtake from JACKASS. ----------- This is why the only decent film made from Ellis' books so far has been AMERICAN PSYCHO. That film KNEW it was silly, and contrasted it, instead of trying to over emphasize or somehow "integrate" it. --------- I think this film gets the props it does for the same reason people spunk themselves over Paul Thomas Anderson: it's something they actually GET that doesn't feel like generic Hollywood product. Just because something is somewhat unusual, and isn't completely fumbled, doesn't mean it's brilliant, or even particularly good. It's why well meaning, competently executed (but ultimately flaccid) stuff like ROAD TO PERDITION gets so much fawning: Hollywood's standards have fallen so severely that mediocre seems brilliant.
-
At least Rules of Attraction wasn't a totally cynical money suck like most movies.
-
you may have read ebert's blurbs that have appeared on the apple.com website, but did you take the time to READ his FUCKING REVIEW!?! he gave it two stars!! YOU FUCKING RETARD!
-
Nov 17, 2002 10:12:40 PM CST
I`m just glad that "Phantasm`s End" (which Avary wrote) is final
by elgyn6655321
Didn`t see "RoA", but it seems like it`s getting the same response as movies like "Natural Born Killers",or perhaps "Gummo". Most hated it saying it`s nihilistic and pointless, while others think it`s incredible.
-
Nov 18, 2002 12:38:49 AM CST
This movie sucks balls. Why does Harry keep flogging it?
by heywood jablomie
It's a horrible movie that combines the worst REQUIEM FOR A DREAM film technique with the cheesiest cast this side of early-nineties UPN. And it bombed. Enough already. Move on to important things--like whacking it over the latest boring Lord of the Rings movie.
-
Ya, DJsmack...whatever is shelling out false info. Ebert went back and watched the movie again, that's true. He could understand why he didn't like it because he thought it was well made. So he gave it a second chance and realized he STILL didn't like it because there was not ONE character he felt he could invest his emotions into (or some shit like that, I'm paraphrasing). So in the end he felt the flick still didn't work for him.
-
Had problems with Blue Velvet and Wild At Heart. He praised Mulholland Drive a bit too much.He had problems with Fight Club. He gave good reviews to other Fincher films. When the subject matter is "controversial" or "family values" or"american way" is questioned, Ebert's thumbs go south.
-
Nov 18, 2002 8:15:56 PM CST
Someone should make a film about nihilistic and pointless the li
by jimbolo
... Course, I wouldn't watch it. Hee, hee.
-
Nov 19, 2002 3:11:50 PM CST
Agreeing with Foywonder, thejester, theenigma, Malcar, Winslow L
by alpha zebra
And thank you for reiterating the basic point -- relentless nihilist posing dressed up with last week's flashy camera tricks does not compensate for the lack of story or at the very least something interesting to say. All this movie told me is that WB kids are aching to do movies that aren't rated PG. In Jessica Biel's defense, she was the one bright spot in the otherwise laughably bad Summer Catch.
-
A nihilist of less than extensive demonstrated ability who is narcissistic enough to sit through a screening of his own work for the umpteenth time earns street cred???
-
What are you talking about?
Where did I use the term 'street cred'?
And what's so narcissistic about watching your own film? It's something he's proud of and he obviously wanted to see what an audience thought of it. They loved it. What's wrong with that? Oh, you'd prefer it if he just pretended he didn't give two fucks what the audience thinks, right?
Your points have already been raised by about fifty other bitter, talentless geeks so your sarcastic bitching is redundant.
Oh, and, what is all this bullshit about the 'point'? What's the 'point'? What's the 'point'? What's the 'point'? Describe for me the 'point' of any other teen movie. What's the point of The Breakfast Club, for instance? What's the point of all the other safe littledogshit-movies that make the difficulties of growing up into a fucking dumb joke. Oh, I'm sorry, the 'point' is entertainment. Oh, okay, that's alright then. -
That is the most moronic statement I have ever heard. Breaskfast club is not a bad movie, it is okay movie, no great work of film, but it had a FRICKIN OBVIOUS Point. Teen movies have simple points. Common ones: "Beauty is on the inside" "Love Conquers all," Etc.
We are more complicated then the clichees we get thrown into. The RoA is one of those movies that people get themselves worked up over simply because it IS contriversal. Whereas there is no subject matter that should be avoided, contriversey in and of itself does not make art. Compare it to "Requiem for a Dream" A movie I saw two years ago but remember better the RoA, which I saw three weeks ago, because it is a better movie.
RoA present no characters I cared about or hated. Bland, which, given the subject manner, is very hard to accomplish. And all the camera tricks, as nifty as they were, felt very "First Year Film Student" trying to show off. Sorry, I was rooting for it to be good, but simply put, it wasn't. -
... Reqiuem For A Dream? I vaguely remember it. Wasn't it that flick where that woman who won an oscar once gets chased around her kitchen by a fridge? Oh, yeah, I kinda remember since it was just a poor man's rip-off of Trainspotting. And there you are talking about points again.
Yeah, beauty is on the inside according to Breakfast Club. So what was that great scene at the end where Ally Sheedy is given the Ringwald makeover all about? Huh? huh? Seemed to me that it was saying as long as you strip away your real identity and fall into the cookie-cutter mould that is socially acceptable you'll suddenly become acceptable to the Jocks out there. Wasn't that the point? Oh, sorry, you saw a totally different one, eh? Can't have been very well made then, can it? -
"Reqiuem For A Dream? I vaguely remember it. Wasn't it that flick where that woman who won an oscar once gets chased around her kitchen by a fridge? Oh, yeah, I kinda remember since it was just a poor man's rip-off of Trainspotting. "
Um . . . because people did drugs and Hallicinated? Yeah, that's a rip off.
"And there you are talking about points again. Yeah, beauty is on the inside according to Breakfast Club."
Did you even read my post? Breakfast Club= We are more than what we are Stereotyped as.
In response to your "Teen Movies have no point" comment, I was listing a common, albiet crappy and simple point of a number of Teen Movies a La "She's All that"
"So what was that great scene at the end where Ally Sheedy is given the Ringwald makeover all about? Huh? huh? Seemed to me that it was saying as long as you strip away your real identity and fall into the cookie-cutter mould that is socially acceptable you'll suddenly become acceptable to the Jocks out there. Wasn't that the point? Oh, sorry, you saw a totally different one, eh? Can't have been very well made then, can it? "
And what gave you the impression that I thought "The Breakfast Club" was a shining example of Film? You said it didn't have a point. It did. An obvious and simple minded one, but a point none the less.
And whoever it was that claimed Ebert doesn't like contriversy is full of it. As much as I don't like Ebert, contraversy and unpleasentness is not something he shies away from. He wrote "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls" for gods sake. -
...supacalafradgilisticexpialididocious!!
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 439 total posts 159 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 144 total posts 142 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 155 total posts 140 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 55 total posts 45 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 196 total posts 45 posts
- I am The Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day! No, I’m the Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day! -- 35 total posts 35 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 60 total posts 34 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 127 total posts 32 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 513 total posts 29 posts
- The Sensorties Revisit The Friday Docback (And Still Smell)!! DOCTOR WHO Story #7 Again, The Coming Of Season/Series 7, And More!! -- 118 total posts 27 posts