You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #79: Hitchcock wasn't going for "important" [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU
Nailzberg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-06-03 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #45
79. Hitchcock wasn't going for "important"
That's the difference. It doesn't matter what kind of movie you direct. The question is whether or not you do it well. Speilberg is hit or miss in that department. And the reason he is picked apart by the important film folks, is because what he strives for in his work. He made it his standard. He has to reach it. That isn't what Hitchcock went after, so it doesn't matter if he made "important films".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC