Steve McQueen : This guy is smart for sticking with Fassbender

And I'm sure the other way around as well. Michael Fassbender is blowing up right now and both of McQueen's next two films are starring him. Looks like another awesome actor/director combo.

Fassbender signed on for Twelve Years a Slave too, and Fassbender is huge after X-Men. That speaks volumes to how great McQueen is to work with.

I love both

I agree, it's a perfect acting/directing combo which is exciting to say the least, like a Scorsese/Deniro partnership. I hope he continues to work with him.

If it wasn't for McQueen's 'Hunger', it would have taken me a long time to discover the sheer awesomeness that is Fassbender, the best actor of his generation.

After 12 Years a Slave, I hope he returns to making British films again. 12 Years a Slave will be his huge breakthrough, no doubt, we just need great directors of McQueen's caliber in the somewhat lame British movie industry.

---

12 Years a Slave will be his huge breakthrough, no doubt, we just need great directors of McQueen's caliber in the somewhat lame British movie industry.

---

Only if McQueen has abandoned his long drawn out "nothing" sequences, which some people seem to think is his signature. Sometimes things are not done in film by other directors because it is a fundamental faux pas.

Steve McQueen does things which are fundamental errors in film, and plays those mistakes off as "signatures." Audiences don't like to be bored (or at least wide ranging audiences) and Steve McQueen's 10 minute (or so it seems lb68ike an eternity) floor sweeping scene which had absolutely no connection whatsoever to either Bobby Sand's hunger strike or the horrendous battle between Ireland and the Brits, is one of those major film errors. The equally grating and long New York New York song of Shame is another one of those. I heard he has the same kind of "nothing" scene in 12YAS. And if he did that, it will just solidify further that he lacks the ability to understand how to bring an audience in. In my opinion, it is not things like this that do the trick. In film, it is a good story that bobs along and builds.

I read something somewhere (a very famous screenwriter and legend in Hollywood) that if you are going to dedicate any film time to an exchange where people are doing common ordinary human things for any period of time, like for instance, discussing sipping coffee or tea or an alcoholic beverage, that the "beverage" better turn out to be "poisoned" in the end. There are just some things you don't waste film space on. McQueen just wastes film space on boring things and to me it is a turn off. But I think there is a certain element of artsy fartsy crowds that just love to sit there and watch people drink tea and talk about their problems. Problems which never get resolved in the end. So, yes, there is a limited market for that nonsense. And, you are right, Fassbender does seem to idolize McQueen so he is apparently happy with not becoming a film acting legend.

And, by way of an off the wall example. Most children who have seen Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (a childhood classic) have loved it. Each and every scene in that movie (and other movies, i.e., the Exorcist in a different genre) is packed with events that relate and transition to the next event, as the movie bobs along. That is a fundamental rule of film making. No wasted film space, and cut out those scenes that just amount to "deadwood" and "don't move the film along."

But, McQueen and some other indie directors/film makers, seem to arrogantly think that "wide ranging" audiences want to be bored or irritated by their selfish camera tricks and nothingness scenes. Those types of things just wake people up from the dream of the film, cause them to disconnect from the story and characters, and refocus their attention on the director and what he is trying to do to entertain. In McQueen's case, he can't even do this at the end. He engages in this nonsense close to the beginning of the film, thereby siphoning interest for the rest of the film up front. Maybe arrogance of a controlling performance artist or just someone who lacks skill. I don't know.

That is my main objection with the likes of Steve McQueen. That and his111c Anti-American stance and statements as explanations (by him) as to why he or Fassbender did not win the big prize, i.e., Oscar (with Shame).

Yes, McQueen has enjoyed some indie recognition. And other directors like Lars Von Trier also have a bizarre, out of control and vigilante sort of internet bullying cult following as well. But, for these guys to think that creating films (for the masses) where there are huge plot holes, ambiguous endings, graphic sex and/or violence, negative emotions evoked, with nothing of inspiration or value but are instead just "watching people talk in a room" is going to skyrocket them into the annals of film making legends, pleaseDon't make me laugh.

I have said it before but Fassbender would have most likely gotten discovered by someone else had he just kept up with it. I think it is a mistake to credit McQueen for Fassbender's career as Fassbender would have been a successful actor regardless of him. And, to say that Fassbender/Mcqueen is like Scorsese/DiCaprio is laughable at best. Scorsese keeps his cameras still in his movies. And, if you have seen a movie like "Shutter Island," Scorsese does not take film space or film time for granted one bit. Nor does he arrogantly take his audience patronage for granted either. Scorsese packs his movies with information and thrill which pops from scene to scene building on itself. An effort which mesmerizes and holds people hostage until the credits roll. McQueen just films linear stories that really go no where.

Maybe 12YAS will be different. But, if McQueen's past is any indication of what his present or future is (especially his arrogance about how good he thinks he is) I sincerely doubt it. I anticipate he will take Solomon Northup's beautifully written masterpiece like 12YAS and make it in the worst way anyone could. And much differently than any other seasoned director would have done in an effort to bring in "wide audiences" instead of the McQueen/Fassbender small membership internet cult following. If Steve McQueen can take a classic like 12YAS and manage to create a film that turns people off, that will be an accomplishment (I suppose) in of itself.

I, for one, have confidence that McQueen has the ability to destroy even the legacy of Solomon Northup. Solomon, the Earthbound martyr chosen by God to go into hell so he could then emerge to fulfill his destiny of waking the world up to the diabolical institution which was American slavery in the 1800's. In my view, the story of Solomon Northup isn't that white men hurt him. The REAL story is that he was the one chosen by God among millions to act as the "catalyst" to end suffering and imprisonment for hundreds of thousands of suffering sentient beings on Earth. If McQueen's presentation of Solomon hits that concept right, I could end up praising the film. If I in fact see it. Hunger and Shame were wasted time. I don't know if I want to waste any more time on the likes of McQueen. At this point, I think I gave him plenty of chances, and I just don't feel I owe him much else.

To me, McQueen is just a performance artist. Not a good director at all. If he learns how to choose worthy topics, and stop with the wasted film space, my view on him could change. Just my opinion.

Lena

---

long drawn out "nothing"

---

Pretty much sums up each and every one of your posts.

---

long drawn out nothing

---

Pretty much sums up your life in general. And I bet if I put my list of reasons up against your list of reasons for our opinions about each otheronly one of us would have a good point. That being me.

But you already knew that. Didn't you?

Lena

---

Pretty much sums up your life in general

---

I think that applies to the person who wastes their time writing novels about people they supposedly hate. Your trolling is obvious and pathetic.

---

Not every artist creates to appease an audience

---

Hence the term "starving artist."

---

I for one

---

Exactly. You are just one. So, you get over yourself. By the way, it's called show "business" not show "art." So, if McQueen wants to be like the big boys and make any kind of real money in the "business" (which I believe he does) he better learn how to "appease" the "audience" who actually pays his bills.

There is a big difference between a Bale/Nolan $2 billion partnership and a Fassbender/McQueen $21 million partnership. Namely, $1.979 billion


Lena

---

If money matters that much to you I'll condescend and pity you

---

Do what you like, but last I checked I was not the "film industry." Money is important to pay the bills. But, most of mine goes to animal rescue and much of my professional time goes to pro bono legal services to the poor.

da0But, once again, a post written by me addressing public issues and public actions by public figures digressing to personal attacks against me (a non-famous person merely writing on a public board). A comment about how show business is a "for profit" business now morphs into a discussion about some alleged huge character flaw possessed by me.

A personal jab post directed at me and written by some random idiot poster because I simply pointed out that the film industry a/k/a "show business" is a business geared towards making money, and not merely a venue for people to offer their "artistic expressions" for their own benefit. Pathetic and sad response rarebithippie. But with a name like rarebithhippie, why am I surprised? Actually, I am not.

Lena

But rarebirthhippie,

What is it that you want from me? To get over myself? Will you not be satisfied in your "personal world" if I re5b4fuse to "get over myself?" What on Earth do I have to do with your world in the first place?

I never wrote my original post to insult you (personally) because, honestly, I didn't know who you were, and could quite frankly care less about you. Why is it that you continue to engage me personally in repeated attempts to convince me to "get over myself?" Are you feeling that you might succeed? I am 1 person out of 7 billion. But if you want to keep nipping at my heels, then go ahead.

It's honestly ridiculous how you and others like you on IMDB try to engage others in personal matches when someone makes a statement about a public figure about public issues. I can't imagine you are terribly educated. Especially, if you feel debates are won by attacking the debater rather than the issues. Not to mention that IMDB is not a "to win" sort of site. It is just where people go to express their opinions on public issues, public figures, public events and film. To that extent, do you honestly believe I started my day with the focus being trying to convince some dumb *ss poster named "rarebirthhippie" of anything? Or to even get approval from the same? Or to try to impress the 3,000,000 posters on IMDB to fill some sort of self-esteem void or something? I have no interest in impressing you, I assure you. No, seriously. I assure you.

Truly, it is bizarre when I see people lik16d0e you on boards like these. I guess the question I have for you (in response to your comment about me getting over myself) is this: "What's the matter, does your 'p*ssy hurt?" Honestly fella, if you are too lazy to change your moniker I doubt you are so spry as to do everything you have mentioned in your post. My guess is that you are lying. Very much so. But, more importantly, who cares? Why do you need to put me in my place? If you succeeded (for what reason you would try I have no idea), would you then get busy put the remaining 7 billion people in their place?

It's a battle you will not win, my friend. You are wasting your time. Let's say you succeed in destroying my credibility on IMDB (the term "credibility on IMDB just sending me into uncontrollable giggles" ) then what? You tee up your onslaught for the next fella who you disagree with?

It's a wee bit pathetic. Honestly, it's been fun chatting with you. But, I think I am done with you nipping at my heels.

Have a great day!

Lena

That's called formula films. You can set your clock after the beats in those scripts. And every wanna-be-screenwriter who wants to make those films learns that kind of writing. That produces Michael Bay type of movies. And before you protest; remember- Bay's movies make a KILLING at the box office, and rarely have scenes with long takes "where nothing happens". One can compare this kind of movies to the Hunger Game type of literature.

It is another matter to make films like Hunger, or Spring, Summer,Fall, Winter, and Spring where there are long takes of silence. But these are movies that speak without TALKING.

If you think it takes vast talent to make box office hits, then you clearly don't know anything about the film industry where Grown Ups 2 opened with 40+ million. In your world that makes Grown Ups a masterpiece? In your world The Godfather is a piece of sh** compared to Avatar (which I love), since the latter is the box office champ of the two.

Steve McQueen aspires to be a film-makers filmmaker. If he continues on his growing path then his legacy will be assured as an ARTIST. Look at the polls of the movies and movie-makers that people like Spielberg, Lucas, Scorsesi respect; It's Kurosawa, Bergman and the like. I like Nolans movies a lot. But on an artistic level he doesn't rank close to the top.

And since it isn't your money he's "wasting" , why do you care so much what he does with them?

---

In your world The Godfather is a piece of sh** compared to Avatar (which I love)

---

Oh my.I had no idea I thought the Godfather (one of my favorite movies of all time) was "sh*t" and the movie that I thought was the most hyped piece of nonsense (Avatar) was something that I actually loved.

I guess the lesson that I need to learn from your post Morpheos31 is that before I formulate an opinion in my "own mind" I need to first run it by you to make sure it is actually an opinion that I, in fact, hold.

And, I just love it when people say things like this:

---

and since it isn't your money he's "wasting", why do you care so much what he does with them?

---

Dingdingdingding911..I do believe we have spotted another human bully suffering from Celebrity Worship Syndrome. I guess the question I would have for you is, why do you care so much about what I said that you felt the need to write a post to try to shut me down? But, I guess that is all consistent with fanboys and fangirls trying to watch the backs of famous people. Famous people who would cringe in your presence scared to death of the zealousness and adoration of folks like you.

Amazing how a person like myself can go on a public board and state an opinion about a public figure and an industry like film, and then if the zealous crazed idol worshippers don't like the criticism, they immediately try to turn the discussion into a character expose on the poster (whom they disagree with).

I think I was clear that I don't want subpar directors like McQueen infiltrating the film industry and diluting the choices which we (the public) have when we go to the movies. I always chuckle when people take the position that the film makers that can't get "bums in the seat" (a quote from McQueen's muse, Fassbender, talking about the whole point of the making movies to himgoogle it), are supposedly brilliant and the guys that get bums in the seat are supposedly ignorant fools.

It's just another delusional elitist way of the not so smart people saying that, sure, they don't seem smart on the outside, but on the inside, they are raging geniuses. And the world, in all of its ignorance, is just not smart enough to cut through the outward dumb *ss appearance of those delusional ding bat elitists, to the hidden brilliance that lies beneath.

I do, however, find one thing very ironic. Walt Disney said he didn't make movies to make money, but instead, he made money so he could make more movies. Whereas a guy like McQueen, to me, is so desperate of cash and fame, that he will try to hit every emotional nerve there is looking for that hook to make him the cash and win him the adoration of the masses. Case in point: Shame, a sex romp film sold to the public as a social message on sexual addiction. Now he has 12YAS which I believe he put together to try to make it big, not because he has heartfelt feelings about the topic of slavery (in contrast to say a guy like Ryan Coogler with his touching film Fruitvale Station, or Spike Lee). The difference between Disney and McQueen? Disney brought the world wonderful stories that they have loved for generations while making billions of dollars. McQueen has brought to the world depressing incoherent pieces of nonsense and has made $21 million total. So, I guess that means that Disney was a hack, and McQueen a genius. At least in la la land where you live Morpheos31?

If you look at McQueen's bio on IMDB, his big epiphany growing up was the Irish people being mistreated by the Brits, not his revelation about American Slavery. But suddenly, McQueen's life long mission is to bring the horrors of American slavery to the world. Sorry, guy, I read McQueen's bio and I saw nothing that suggested American Slavery on film was his lifelong mission. What I saw was his film "Hunger" about Irish people was his lifelong mission. 12YAS, to me, is McQueen's desperate attempt to curry favor with the Academy (which just accepted him) as well as to try to win mainstream audience approval, and make bank at the box office, by bringing in people in America. That is, those same Americans he so recently insulted, and it is clear he holds in contempt.

Why are you so worried about what I say though? From what I have read, McQueen has recently won Oscars in every category there is with 12YAS. So, in the end, my opinion (as 1 movie goer out of 7 billion) holds no weight. Because it is McQueen's recent Oscar wins and smashing of all historical box office records for 12YAS that speaks louder than anything else, right?

Lena

I agreeand Fassbender is smart for sticking with McQueen.

"I do what I got to do with what I got." Utah in One Night at McCool's