View Poll Results: What is your favorite Robin Williams role?

Voters
96. You may not vote on this poll
  • Mork from Ork

    7 7.29%
  • Popeye

    0 0%
  • TS Garp (The World According to Garp)

    4 4.17%
  • Adrian Cronauer (Good Morning Vietnam)

    13 13.54%
  • John Keating (Dead Poets)

    15 15.63%
  • Dr. Sayer (Awakenings)

    2 2.08%
  • Parry (The Fisher King)

    3 3.13%
  • Peter Pan (Hook)

    8 8.33%
  • Genie (Aladdin)

    6 6.25%
  • Mrs. Doubtfire

    6 6.25%
  • Alan Parish (Jumanji)

    0 0%
  • Armand Goldman (Birdcage)

    2 2.08%
  • Sean Maguire (Good Will Hunting)

    21 21.88%
  • Patch Adams

    2 2.08%
  • Other (list in post)

    7 7.29%
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 91
  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by throatybeard View Post
    It's mildly lame, but here are two much more smarterer people than I on the issue:

    Kevin Dettmar:
    http://www.theatlantic.com/education...nities/283853/

    Roger Ebert:
    http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/de...s-society-1989

    I've seen a lot of Facebook "tributes" to Robin Williams quoting DPS. This is akin to posting a YouTube of the 18th-best roadrunner cartoon to "honor" Chuck Jones instead of, say, Rabbit of Seville or Bully for Bugs.
    I read the linked articles to see what all the venom was about. To me it comes off like the critics don't like that the character because he wasn't who they think a private school English teacher should be. It wasn't intended as a documentary.

    It's one thing to say it's not a masterpiece but to loathe the movie for the reasons given would be akin to disparaging Die Hard for being an irresponsible and unrealistic portrayal of an off duty policeman

  2. #62
    Throaty certainly has ever right to his opinion that Dead Poets is lame ... and I respect Roger Ebert, so his dislike for the film carries some weight (Dettmar, not so much).

    On the other hand, the film did do 85 percent on Rotten Tomatoes (92 percent in audience ratings) and countering Ebert were a number of glowing reviews, including one from Time's Richard Schickel, who is at least as respected a critic as Ebert.

    And one of the negative reviews come from Vincent Canby, the respected New York Times critic, who hated the film -- but largely because he thought the story undercut Robin Williams brilliant performance as John Keating!

    So while Throaty might not like Dead Poets ... but posting that as a favorite Robin Williams film is hardly an outrageous opinion.

  3. #63
    I voted other, because frankly I loved his standup more than any of his movie roles.

    I would vote Good morning Vietnam otherwise.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    My wife and I were just dating when Dead Poets came out. We were deeply in love but when the movie ended she swears she almost broke up with me on the spot because we walked out and I said, "That movie was so flawed!!!" Meanwhile, she and the rest of the audience had tears running down their cheeks.

    Want to know why I did not like Dead Poets at the time? Everyone who "followed" Keating's ideas ended up worse, much worse, for doing so.

    Neil (Robert Sean Leonad) kills himself
    Keating (Robin Williams) is fired
    Charlie, aka "Nwanda" (Gale Hansen), is kicked out of school

    The rest of the Dead Poets Society have black marks on their high school record and are last seen openly disobeying the headmaster of the school (which will likely impact their grades if not lead to suspensions and perhaps even expulsions).

    Is anyone who embraced the ideals of Keating's "Dead Poets Society" bettered by it?

    That is what I thought as I left the theater. Given the chance to think about the film a bit longer, I came to the conclusion that it is possible that some of these young men would be better off for their time with Keating, if not right away, then down the line as they grew into adults and had to deal with all the challenges of life. I would imagine that most teachers would say their ultimate goal is to create better people down the line, not just perfectly behaved and educated kids right now. So, in that light, I can see how Keating migt look at those young boys who are all in a ton of trouble and think that he had accomplished something special.

    Still, his two most ardent followers are dead and expelled. Not exactly a good outcome for either of them. Even if Nwanda turns into a fabulous person at whatever school he attends after being kicked out of Welton Academy, Neil is still dead. Can one argue that Neil was fated to kill himself as a result of his father's oppression? Perhaps. Was it better for Neil to truly live those few moments he was on stage than it would have been for him to suffer a lifetime of repressing his true nature? Maybe. But death is a pretty harsh outcome for a teenager, no matter how awful his home life may have been.



    Of course, the responsibility for knowing how far to take the "seize the day" attitude of the Dead Poets Society does not rest solely with Keating. Neil should have known there would be consequences for his performance in the play against his father's wishes. He is just months away from being free of his father's yoke by attending college (likely at one of the premiere schools in the country) so if he could have just held on a little longer, he could have had the life he wanted without having to worry about his horrible father. But, he chose suicide.

    Anyway, I am getting off point -- bottom line is that it takes a bit of a leap of logic to say that the impact of Keating's teachings were truly positive. The movie is about an attitude in life but the people who take that attitude are resoundingly punished for it. And that is why I have always had a bit of a problem with the film.

    That said, I think all of us in the audience see the value in the Keating philosophy and the "seize the day" way of approaching life. We watch the movie and sorta ignore how bad it turned out for everyone in the film because we know that if we acted that way in our life, it would be a largely positive change. So, the lesson we take from the film is in how it affects our view of ourselves, not in how the film actually depicts the impact of the philosophy on the characters in the story. That's ok, but I hope you can see why I still consider the film flawed in a pretty significant way.

    -Jason "Well, that took a long time and was awfully rambling at times. Sorry. Hope it made sense. Now you know why I voted for Good Morning, Vietnam " Evans
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post

    Of course, the responsibility for knowing how far to take the "seize the day" attitude of the Dead Poets Society does not rest solely with Keating. Neil should have known there would be consequences for his performance in the play against his father's wishes. He is just months away from being free of his father's yoke by attending college (likely at one of the premiere schools in the country) so if he could have just held on a little longer, he could have had the life he wanted without having to worry about his horrible father. But, he chose suicide.

    -Jason "Well, that took a long time and was awfully rambling at times. Sorry. Hope it made sense. Now you know why I voted for Good Morning, Vietnam " Evans
    How does attending one of the elite schools change Neil's life? Wouldn't his old man still try manage every part of his life until he is done with medical school? Does Neil's dad cut him off the minute he signs up for a class that is not what a future doctor should be taking? If he gets cut off, what then for Neil, move to NYC and work with the Strasbergs and become one the pioneers in method acting? And why am I doing a what if on a 25 year old movie character?

  6. #66
    I'd probably vote differently every day of the week, but I went with Sean Maguire because of the deep humanity of the character Williams played, and how it feels reflective of the actor this past several days. Brilliant in his own way, hurt and sad down inside, wants to just turn it all off and stop struggling to engage, but his better angels force him to continue interacting with the world in some way when Will comes along. A teacher, helper, path clearer truly and deeply interested in the betterment of others and helping them as a way to help himself. The scene at the park where he calls out Will's sophomoric, callous, life is a big joke attitude as the transparent coping mechanism and stumbling block that it is, and describes his love for his deceased wife is brilliant and touching. Not just because of the dialogue, but also due to the way Williams make you 100% believe his character has the emotions he's describing seared into his being. He wasn't the big star in every scene in that film, but his character was integral. He personified pathos in much the way Robin Williams did throughout his career.

    Re: Dead Poets, I agree with many that it's certainly a flawed film. I think the critique Oly notes above, that Williams' portrayal and character development probably needed more screen time, may be right. That said, I think if one sees Todd (Ethan Hawke's character) as the PoV for the story, it makes more sense. He's the one who was well on his way to squandering his talents by following the rules into his own midlife crisis, alcoholism or whatever cliche you choose about a kid growing up in the emotionally stifling '50's, but probably ends up elsewhere by having known Keating. The trouble is it was difficult to tell if Neil, Todd, or even Knox are actually the lead because the direction gives them all equal attention, and it would appear in retrospect that Neil's the director's protagonist, but his story's given way too little screen time to justify suicide.

    I can never tell with that film if I would have enjoyed it more, or it would have resonated more, if it had been set in more historic terms. The story could easily have been cast as a harbinger of the social upheaval that was about to be unleased over the coming 10 years in American society. Keating was a symbol of individuality over group, questioning authority over doing what you're told, valuing enjoyment over adhering to duty, or whatever other framing of the '60's you prefer. Then again, I liked that it was something of a miniature and almost like a stage play, without making any overt pretensions known or setting it in larger context. But one of my frustrations with the movie is that it sets up all those contrasts without really exploring them deeply - instead of a vibrant discussion, it ends with the maudlin, pessimistic message that rebelling leads only to misery, that the institution always wins, and that adults are lame with only a couple of tragic exceptions. Perhaps a message that could make for an effective film, but it's not where the movie was going for the first 90 minutes or so.

    JE, for the record, I think it worth noting that Keating (if I recall correctly) was not aware that Neil was lying about his father's supposed OK'ing of doing Shakespeare, and he read them all the riot act and described some of the negatives that might accrue to them if they didn't dial the carpe'ing back a little bit. I never really saw the character as a hellraiser who just let a genie out of the bottle and revelled in it - he only wanted to be a great teacher by getting kids to self-actualize a bit, seeing the beauty in the world in their own way rather than just regurgitating what someone else told them. I thought the story was more about how the institution and "society" crushes the fledgling hopes and dreams of youth, than about glorifying the specific advice a teacher gave certain youth and then glossing over the fact that they ended up worse off in many cases.

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by NashvilleDevil View Post
    And why am I doing a what if on a 25 year old movie character?
    Yea, I like the movie but let's not over analyze it. It IS a work of fiction and the consequences to the students of following Mr. Keating's life advice (carpe diem) were obviously overdramatized to make the movie more profound to the viewers. This is hardly something new in movies or works of fiction.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    I wondered when this thread would become an evaluation of Dead Poets Society. The 25th anniversary is as good a time as any.

    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    Anyway, I am getting off point -- bottom line is that it takes a bit of a leap of logic to say that the impact of Keating's teachings were truly positive.
    I think you missed the point, in 1989 and 2014. (If possible, I'd give your wife DBR approval points for keeping you anyway.) One way to look at the film is to say that the students were being challenged by Mr. Keating and were encouraged to challenge themselves. The immediate results are appropriately mixed; despite the small sample size, you left out the positive effects on Todd and Knox. The long-term results should have some element of reward. Not to get too personal, but my ability to think critically is one of the better takeaways from my education.

    Remove Mr. Keating from the film and guess what happens? Charlie stays, Neil lives. Of course, there's now no conflict (aside from Neil giving up yearbook) and therefore no film.

    I enjoyed the film a great deal in 1989. I still appreciate it in 2014, but am less enamored of it. It's a strong representative in Peter Weir's filmography, just not my favorite.

    Quote Originally Posted by throatybeard View Post
    I've seen a lot of Facebook "tributes" to Robin Williams quoting DPS. This is akin to posting a YouTube of the 18th-best roadrunner cartoon to "honor" Chuck Jones instead of, say, Rabbit of Seville or Bully for Bugs.
    I know that throatybeard goes through periods of late-night contrarian posting, and is certainly not alone in criticizing the film. But to criticize a public tribute? The poster is okay with it, most of the public is okay with it, and by all known accounts, Robin Williams would have been okay with it. It would be different if Robin Williams hated Dead Poets Society or had grown tired of hearing "Carpe Diem" shouted at him by strangers.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    It's very sad to see him lose his battle with depression. As someone who also suffers from depression (and who learned that depression doesn't necessarily go away once symptoms subside), it's personally sad to hear that he was well aware of his condition and knew the importance of treatment, but still could not overcome it. It's a sobering reminder that treating the disease (just like cancer or diabetes or heart disease) can be a lifelong commitment, and that letting yourself think it's completely behind you can result in tragedy.

    Hopefully Williams' death can result in some good in making people more cognizant of depression and other diseases affecting one's brain. The sooner folks understand that it can affect ANYONE, the sooner it will be treated with the same respect that diseases like heart disease or diabetes or cancer are treated. It's very sad to lose such an icon, but maybe something good can come from this loss.
    CDu, you have written many smart and well-reasoned basketball-related posts on these boards over the years. But it is this one, above all of those others, that will stick with me. I'd spork you if I could, but regardless, know that the sentiments you expressed here are undoubtedly shared by many. Great post.

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    My wife and I were just dating when Dead Poets came out. We were deeply in love but when the movie ended she swears she almost broke up with me on the spot because we walked out and I said, "That movie was so flawed!!!" Meanwhile, she and the rest of the audience had tears running down their cheeks.

    Want to know why I did not like Dead Poets at the time? Everyone who "followed" Keating's ideas ended up worse, much worse, for doing so.

    Neil (Robert Sean Leonad) kills himself
    Keating (Robin Williams) is fired
    Charlie, aka "Nwanda" (Gale Hansen), is kicked out of school

    The rest of the Dead Poets Society have black marks on their high school record and are last seen openly disobeying the headmaster of the school (which will likely impact their grades if not lead to suspensions and perhaps even expulsions).

    Is anyone who embraced the ideals of Keating's "Dead Poets Society" bettered by it?

    That is what I thought as I left the theater. Given the chance to think about the film a bit longer, I came to the conclusion that it is possible that some of these young men would be better off for their time with Keating, if not right away, then down the line as they grew into adults and had to deal with all the challenges of life. I would imagine that most teachers would say their ultimate goal is to create better people down the line, not just perfectly behaved and educated kids right now. So, in that light, I can see how Keating migt look at those young boys who are all in a ton of trouble and think that he had accomplished something special.

    Still, his two most ardent followers are dead and expelled. Not exactly a good outcome for either of them. Even if Nwanda turns into a fabulous person at whatever school he attends after being kicked out of Welton Academy, Neil is still dead. Can one argue that Neil was fated to kill himself as a result of his father's oppression? Perhaps. Was it better for Neil to truly live those few moments he was on stage than it would have been for him to suffer a lifetime of repressing his true nature? Maybe. But death is a pretty harsh outcome for a teenager, no matter how awful his home life may have been.



    Of course, the responsibility for knowing how far to take the "seize the day" attitude of the Dead Poets Society does not rest solely with Keating. Neil should have known there would be consequences for his performance in the play against his father's wishes. He is just months away from being free of his father's yoke by attending college (likely at one of the premiere schools in the country) so if he could have just held on a little longer, he could have had the life he wanted without having to worry about his horrible father. But, he chose suicide.

    Anyway, I am getting off point -- bottom line is that it takes a bit of a leap of logic to say that the impact of Keating's teachings were truly positive. The movie is about an attitude in life but the people who take that attitude are resoundingly punished for it. And that is why I have always had a bit of a problem with the film.

    That said, I think all of us in the audience see the value in the Keating philosophy and the "seize the day" way of approaching life. We watch the movie and sorta ignore how bad it turned out for everyone in the film because we know that if we acted that way in our life, it would be a largely positive change. So, the lesson we take from the film is in how it affects our view of ourselves, not in how the film actually depicts the impact of the philosophy on the characters in the story. That's ok, but I hope you can see why I still consider the film flawed in a pretty significant way.

    -Jason "Well, that took a long time and was awfully rambling at times. Sorry. Hope it made sense. Now you know why I voted for Good Morning, Vietnam " Evans
    I am just flabbergasted to read this take on the film. Is it tongue in cheek? Is this really what you took from the film"

    Can you possibly be serious when you write: "The rest of the Dead Poets Society have black marks on their high school record and are last seen openly disobeying the headmaster of the school (which will likely impact their grades if not lead to suspensions and perhaps even expulsions)."

    Wow ... black marks on their records! Impact on their grades!

    Is it possible o have misunderstood the point of the film any more than that? The film is a protest against the stupefying rigidity of the education those young men at receiving at Welton (and most American education). So what if their grades suffer -- or maybe -- horror! -- they get expelled from "Hell-ton" So what?

    The implication most of us got is that the young men who ended the movie standing on their desks had become (thanks to Keating) individuals with the courage and imagination to succeed in life. I'm sure the boys who remained seated (with their heads in their hands) would get their degrees, go on to college an become unproductive drones or the kind of narrow, bitter men like Neil's father.

    Yeah, Neil dies-- but neither Keating nor Keating's teaching killed him. Read the poetry they study-- nobody has celebrated life more than Walt Whitman. If Neil had really understood what Keating was teaching, he would have stood up to his father, not killed himself. He died IN SPITE on Keating, not because of Keating. Carpe Diem -- Seize the day (because tomorrow you may die ... not tomorrow you might want to kill yourself).

    And Charlie gets expelled -- so what? It's not like success in high school is a prerequisite for success in life. I can name dozens of great men off the top of my head who were failures in school. How about Walt Disney, expelled from Benton Grammar School in Kansas City? Or Sir Richard Branson, who dropped out of a prestigious British prep school. Or Bill Gates who dropped out of Harvard. There's William Randolph Hearst, expelled from Harvard for his hijinks (indeed, he is a 19th Century model for Charlie). Thomas Edison, who was pulled from school when a teacher told him mother that he was "addled". There's Albert Einstein, who was expelled from one school and flunked out of another. If you want to talk actors (as Neil wanted to become), we could go with Brando, Pacino, Bogart and Taratino -- all either flunked out of expelled from school. Winston Churchill was never expelled, but he was forced to repeat a form (grade level) an he did graduate from Winchester with the lowest possible honors.

    I could go on, but history is replete with famous me and women who succeeded in life, despite failure in school. I don't think it's much of a leap in logic to think the boys standing on their desks at the end would be successful.

    I don't understand the objection to Keating and Dead Poets. It's merely an updating of Vigo's 1933 masterpiece Zero de Conduite --another assault on a regimented, mindless boys school -- even down to starting the story through the eyes of a new arrival and having one sympathetic and inspiring teacher. Lindsay Anderson took the story to the extreme in 1968's "If ..." At least the rebels at Welton ended up standing on their desks -- not crouching on the roof, pouring machine gun fire and hand grenades down on he teachers, parents and fellow students below.

    And, Jason, I wonder at what you would take away from Robert Donat's Mr. Chips -- don't most of the students he reach ended up as cannon fodder in the two World Wars? Are they "bettered by it"?

    FWIW: I voted for The Fisher King in our poll -- but I've always been a sucker for Terry Gilliam's films.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Brookfield, IL
    I voted "Other" just because this particular Robin Williams performance I will mention may have indirectly lead to the creation of one of my favorite TV shows of all time: The Wire...

    I was a huge fan of Homicide: Life on the Street when it aired on NBC in the 90's. The TV show was based on book called "Homicide: A Year on the Killing Streets." The author of that book was David Simon who later went on to create The Wire for HBO.

    One of my favorite Robin Williams performances was a guest-starring role on an episode of Homicide named "Bop Gun" -- below is an article by Simon recalling his encounter with Williams during the filming of that episode.

    Simon goes on to say that Williams' acting performance -- and the related big TV ratings -- saved Homicide from cancellation after just 13 episodes. Homicide went on to air a total of 122 episode over 7 seasons on NBC. Without the success of Homicide, Simon likely would not have been given the chance to create The Wire for HBO.

    So, I say "Thank You" to Robin Williams for not only making me laugh for so many years, but for also being a reason -- in a long chain of events -- that a show like The Wire even came to be. Rest In Peace.

    http://davidsimon.com/robin-williams-a-brief-encounter/

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    There's Albert Einstein, who was expelled from one school and flunked out of another.
    Not to derail the conversation, because I otherwise agree with your post (and as an aside, I always viewed Neil's suicide as a failure of his father's rigidity, not Keating's teaching), but Albert Einstein was a prodigy and a brilliant student (particularly in math and science). His only truly bad subject was French - which is the principal reason he failed the university entrance exams he took 2 years early. The notion that he was a bad student is an urban legend. However, he did indeed clash with authorities in one school he attended over their rigid and rote education method, so he's perhaps not a bad example to use anyway.

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by gus View Post
    Not to derail the conversation, because I otherwise agree with your post (and as an aside, I always viewed Neil's suicide as a failure of his father's rigidity, not Keating's teaching), but Albert Einstein was a prodigy and a brilliant student (particularly in math and science). His only truly bad subject was French - which is the principal reason he failed the university entrance exams he took 2 years early. The notion that he was a bad student is an urban legend. However, he did indeed clash with authorities in one school he attended over their rigid and rote education method, so he's perhaps not a bad example to use anyway.
    What sort of student was Norman Einstein?

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    My wife and I were just dating when Dead Poets came out. We were deeply in love but when the movie ended she swears she almost broke up with me on the spot because we walked out and I said, "That movie was so flawed!!!" Meanwhile, she and the rest of the audience had tears running down their cheeks.
    I've never loved you more than I do now.

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    Also, Jason, cut your wife a little slack. I think you're about six-eight years older than I, so you and your wife were probably about 18, 19 in 1989. I loved that unbelievably stupid film when I was 12, turning 13 in 1989. Young people were supposed to be seduced by that film. It was marketing. It's an incredibly horrible distorting of English poetry. As Ebert said, it was directly marketed to teenagers. I love teenagers, but I'm not going to exalt them as arbiters of taste.

    If your wife still thinks it's a good film, I think you need to have a sit-down with her. But y'all are approaching fifty, and I bet she's come around.

    Unfortunately, now I'm 37, and I have some taste. And I'm embarrassed that I liked this film 25 years ago, even though I was a kid.

    It's not utterly irredeemable. There is one good scene. It's the scene where RSL comes into RW's office and asks advice about the play and whether he should go forward even though Kurtwood Smith's character is a raging, uh, terrible guy. The slow movement of Beethoven's Emperor Cto frames the discussion. I'm not going to go back and watch this again because that film is so bad that I fear I'll lose my last positive memory of it.

    Here's the slow movment of Emperor:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdOvxcFKUMg

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Quote Originally Posted by throatybeard View Post
    Also, Jason, cut your wife a little slack. I think you're about six-eight years older than I, so you and your wife were probably about 18, 19 in 1989. I loved that unbelievably stupid film when I was 12, turning 13 in 1989. Young people were supposed to be seduced by that film. It was marketing. It's an incredibly horrible distorting of English poetry. As Ebert said, it was directly marketed to teenagers. I love teenagers, but I'm not going to exalt them as arbiters of taste.

    If your wife still thinks it's a good film, I think you need to have a sit-down with her. But y'all are approaching fifty, and I bet she's come around.

    Unfortunately, now I'm 37, and I have some taste. And I'm embarrassed that I liked this film 25 years ago, even though I was a kid.

    It's not utterly irredeemable. There is one good scene. It's the scene where RSL comes into RW's office and asks advice about the play and whether he should go forward even though Kurtwood Smith's character is a raging, uh, terrible guy. The slow movement of Beethoven's Emperor Cto frames the discussion. I'm not going to go back and watch this again because that film is so bad that I fear I'll lose my last positive memory of it.

    Here's the slow movment of Emperor:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdOvxcFKUMg
    I've always loved the Emperor. That 2nd movement is one of my favorite pieces of music.

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by throatybeard View Post
    Young people were supposed to be seduced by that film.
    A film set at a boarding school marketed at teenagers? The horror.

    Dost thou protest a bit much here, throaty? It's not necessary to completely trash the subject of your misguided 12-year-old self's appreciation in order to disassociate yourself from that past opinion. There are a lot of movies out there that earn the judgment of "unbelievably stupid" a lot more than this one. It's not a great film, or even really an excellent one, but it's not Sahara either. Whether or not DPS watered down what Byron was really all about isn't really the point, is it? The point was that a teacher attempted to bring art to life a little bit for his students and use his English class as a vehicle for opening their eyes to the world. I'm sure about 2% of the audience knows enough about Whitman's work to be offended by potential misuse here the way you appear to be. It's not a movie about poetry per se, so it feels like the offense at bastardizing or misappropriation or whatever is a little overblown. And in any event, it probably got a lot of people more interested in or accepting of poetry than they otherwise would have been. I don't see that as a bad thing.

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Quote Originally Posted by Mal View Post
    A film set at a boarding school marketed at teenagers? The horror.

    Dost thou protest a bit much here, throaty? It's not necessary to completely trash the subject of your misguided 12-year-old self's appreciation in order to disassociate yourself from that past opinion. There are a lot of movies out there that earn the judgment of "unbelievably stupid" a lot more than this one. It's not a great film, or even really an excellent one, but it's not Sahara either. Whether or not DPS watered down what Byron was really all about isn't really the point, is it? The point was that a teacher attempted to bring art to life a little bit for his students and use his English class as a vehicle for opening their eyes to the world. I'm sure about 2% of the audience knows enough about Whitman's work to be offended by potential misuse here the way you appear to be. It's not a movie about poetry per se, so it feels like the offense at bastardizing or misappropriation or whatever is a little overblown. And in any event, it probably got a lot of people more interested in or accepting of poetry than they otherwise would have been. I don't see that as a bad thing.
    A good movie will take that 2% and turn it into 20%. A bad movie will capitalize off of that 2%.

    Like Throaty (can't believe I just called him that, as I knew him at Duke by another name), I am 37 too. I didn't like the movie when I was 12, and I haven't seen it since, but I do remember thinking the whole thing glorified suicide and gave the message that "seizing the day" brought little good to those that embraced it.

    I, for one, have enjoyed the protest.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Edouble View Post
    A good movie will take that 2% and turn it into 20%. A bad movie will capitalize off of that 2%.

    Like Throaty (can't believe I just called him that, as I knew him at Duke by another name), I am 37 too. I didn't like the movie when I was 12, and I haven't seen it since, but I do remember thinking the whole thing glorified suicide and gave the message that "seizing the day" brought little good to those that embraced it.

    I, for one, have enjoyed the protest.
    I'm kind of surprised the Dead Poets has turned out to be such a polarizing movie. I don't object to any of you who don't like it ... there are plenty of popular films I disliked (Avatar, for instance ... a scyfy ripoff of Dances With Wolves -- another popular film I disliked).

    But I'm baffled by the continued suggestions -- as Edouble makes -- that Dead Poets glorifies or glamourizes suicide. Neil's death is clearly a tragedy -- nobody celebrates it. All the negative impact on the other characters -- Keating and the students who support him -- are the results of that tragedy. Nothing in the poetry Keating teaches justifies suicide as a option.

    As for the use of Walt Whitman's poetry -- I don't see how it's distorted at all. I can't claim to be a Whitman expert, but I have read Leaves of Grass since I was 15 and take a grad course in his work at Duke. Ol' Walt celebrates life in any and every form. And while Carpe Diem was not his motto -- the whole seize the day philosophy is the antithesis of suicide. I don't know, maybe they studied Sylvia Plath and that encouraged Neil's suicide ... but that didn't make it into the movie. What we get instead is this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyUTDJ72q9k

    You tell me THAT is encouragement of suicide?

    BTW: I now the haters have largely taken over this thread, but I remind you, Dead Poets remains one of the most popular movies of its era -- with positive reviews from the great majority (82 percent) of critics and high marks from the audience (92 percent positive on Rotten Tomatoes). If you haven't seen it, don't let the haters dissuade you from giving it a look. I can offer the strong endorsement by Ted Moseby and Barney Stinson from How I Met Your Mother. They celebrate Dead Poets in the episode "Robin 101". And while Barney might be a shallow, materialistic boob, Ted was a much more intellectual character, fond of quoting Dante in the original Italian and known to debate film theory with the likes of Peter Bogdanovich (in the episode "Robots vs. Wrestlers").
    Last edited by Olympic Fan; 08-20-2014 at 07:32 PM.

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    I'm done with this DPS argument. Its acolytes are so devoted that there's no point in the rest of us using reason.

    Edouble, do please PM me who you are. I think I know from house FF, but that might be a miscalculation.

    BTW, you know what looks like an unbelievably horrible movie from the trailers (although that may be unfair--haven't seen it, and won't) aimed at teenagers? This new "If I Stay" business.

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 63
    Last Post: 01-20-2011, 09:17 PM
  2. ESPN Poll...vote for coach K
    By moonpie23 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 05-13-2010, 10:44 PM
  3. If you voted in the first MOTM poll, re-vote!
    By Jumbo in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-22-2009, 10:12 PM
  4. Duke Still With 1 Vote in Coaches Poll
    By blazindw in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-05-2008, 08:18 PM
  5. Greatest Coach Ever Poll- EVERYONE VOTE!!
    By BlueintheFace in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 02-05-2008, 03:38 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •