Export thread

So, I was having a discussion with a friend of mine about different mediums. In fact, after I finish making this topic, I'll likely make another one about that discussion.

Anyone, at one point, we were talking about how each entertainment medium has its own uptmost highpoint; the thing that most fans and many creators look at, sigh, and wish they could do it that good.

So it got me thinking about the different entertainment mediums and thinking of what each industry might consider its biggest. This is off the top of my head, of course, and totally open for debate.

Movies: Citizen Kane, first and foremost. Others, like Tarrantino and a film buff friend of mine might say Seven Samurai.

Comics: Watchmen, of course. Others might argue for Maus or maybe Contract with God.

Music: Calleja will love me for this, but I'm gonna go with The Beatles. The Rolling Stones might be in there, too.

TV: This one I'm stumped on. Avatar: The Last Airbender comes to mind, but it might be too new, along with being animated, which others might contest against. Babylon 5? Battlestar Galactica? I'm really not sure.

Books: Even though I hated it, I'm going to say Ulysses. The book is just WAY too smart. Something by Shakespeare, such as Halmet, could be a forerunner.

So, what do you guys think?

Citizen Kane isn't even the Citizen Kane of movies... it's become the catch-all term for "masterpiece" somewhat, but I think the film itself is one of the most overrated things in the entire world... purely a product of its era. It was awesome then... but it doesn't hold up to the test of time. Screen it to a modern audience and they'd fall asleep.

And a masterpiece has to be timeless! Shakespeare is read today more than it was read in his time. Citizen Kane is only watched by film buffs and historians now.

True, but Citizen Kane revolutionized the way movies were made. Almost everyone in the film industry knows that a number of now-common camera tricks were introduced in that.

Hmm. I should redefine my definition. I guess when I say the "Citizen Kane", it's not just the most loved or beloved, but the most studied and also created many previously unheard of techniques for that medium.

Ok movies and comics I havent had enough to say.

Music I have to agree the beatles. When picking music to listen to the beatles always seems to work for everyone no matter their main genre of music.

TV Airbender is my favorite show for sure. I definitely have heard arguments for I Love Lucy since it is still looked at today for great acting and comedy. Also Seinfeld seems to be a favorite with people too.

Books I havent read Ulysses so I cant say on that. I think The Adventures of Huckelberry Finn has to be up there because it is such a beloved book

ThatNickGuy said:

True, but Citizen Kane revolutionized the way movies were made. Almost everyone in the film industry knows that a number of now-common camera tricks were introduced in that.

Hmm. I should redefine my definition. I guess when I say the "Citizen Kane", it's not just the most loved or beloved, but the most studied and also created many previously unheard of techniques for that medium.

Click to expand...

That's not the same as looking at it, sighing, and wishing you had done it, dude.

Under your new definition, "Avatar" could be the new Citizen Kane in a few years, when 3D becomes the norm.

I consider Airbender exceptional because it was a good show despite working around a number of constrictions (making it comprehensible and interesting to a child audience). The way they worked around those restrictions DID produce some interesting quirks that made the show all the better, but in many cases the show really isn't as good as adult shows that didn't have those constraints in the first place.

I actively study a lot of TV shows, but I'm not really sure which shows are considered so good that they are actively studied by "professionals." LOST, for all its failings, did utilize a LOT of very interesting cinematic and scripting techniques. I consider it a work of art purely for the cinematography. There's a lot of other shows that I think are brilliant, (Dexter, Terminator, Pushing Daisies) but they are not brilliant in ways that necessarily should be emulated by other shows - they were good for a one time gimmick.

Battlestar Galactica is actually practically identical to LOST in terms of a) cinematography/acting/technical-know-how, b) the fact that it told a complete story, c) the specific way that story fell to shit in the end. I consider LOST better overall because of the nonlinear storytelling they did, but that's a gimmick, not something to emulate. BSG is marginally better at having a coherent plot for longer. (Then again, if you shaved 2 seasons off LOST, you're probably left with the same amount of coherence.)

Overall I think I'm gonna vote Battlestar Galactica.

Calleja said:

That's not the same as looking at it, sighing, and wishing you had done it, dude.

Under your new definition, "Avatar" could be the new Citizen Kane in a few years, when 3D becomes the norm.

Click to expand...

When I meant the sighing and such, I meant creators. And that's exactly how just about every filmmaker looks at Citizen Kane. How just about every comic book creator looks at Watchmen.

Avatar? No. Maybe as far as special effects, but not as a whole.

Calleja;414260][QUOTE=ThatNickGuy said:

True, but Citizen Kane revolutionized the way movies were made. Almost everyone in the film industry knows that a number of now-common camera tricks were introduced in that.

Hmm. I should redefine my definition. I guess when I say the "Citizen Kane", it's not just the most loved or beloved, but the most studied and also created many previously unheard of techniques for that medium.

Click to expand...

That's not the same as looking at it, sighing, and wishing you had done it, dude.

Under your new definition, "Avatar" could be the new Citizen Kane in a few years, when 3D becomes the norm.[/QUOTE]



I'd like to meet the filmmaker who wouldn't want to take credit for Citizen Kane.

Can't argue with Hitchcock. Hard to point down any particular movie aside from Psycho, but yeah. I'd put him up there with Welles in a heartbeat. Good call, Ames.

ThatNickGuy;414268][QUOTE=Calleja said:

That's not the same as looking at it, sighing, and wishing you had done it, dude.

Under your new definition, "Avatar" could be the new Citizen Kane in a few years, when 3D becomes the norm.

Click to expand...

When I meant the sighing and such, I meant creators. And that's exactly how just about every filmmaker looks at Citizen Kane. How just about every comic book creator looks at Watchmen.

Avatar? No. Maybe as far as special effects, but not as a whole.[/QUOTE]

Uh.. as in revolutionary new techniques? Like you mentioned in Citizen Kane?

Calleja said:

That's not the same as looking at it, sighing, and wishing you had done it, dude.

Under your new definition, "Avatar" could be the new Citizen Kane in a few years, when 3D becomes the norm.

Click to expand...

3D will never become a Norm, as long as the current technology prevents a sizable portion of the population from seeing it. If it's as high as 12% in the UK, it's likely going to become an issue in other markets as well.

It's just a fad. It'll pass eventually.

No, I'm not bitter because 3D glasses give me a headache!

Calleja said:

Uh.. as in revolutionary new techniques? Like you mentioned in Citizen Kane?

Click to expand...

Like I said, special effects. But not as a whole. For as big and fun and definitely gorgeous of a movie Avatar is, the story itself is a very basic (but well-paced) action flick. That's about it. Revolutionizing computer animation? Debatable, as Pixar continues to raise the bar with every new movie. I would say it might give something new to look at in the way of facial construction in computer generation, since the faces on the characters were fantastic. But again, the amount of things that Citizen Kane brought to the table for the first time? There's no comparison, aside from, as I said, Seven Samurai.

And I'm with Ash X. I hope to hell 3-D goes away.

I hope that 3D goes back to being a gimmick that actually gets exploited as opposed to this useless "immersive" thing that you don't even notice, except for the headache.

How to Train your Dragon ALMOST had 3D worth paying for. But it essentially was only one scene that really utilized it (where the Dragon is staring you in the eye). The flying scenes (in particular the end, with the humondo Dragon) were very disappointing.

This answer is impossible.

I can't believe they're still trying to put Avatar: The Last Airbender on the same boat as Citizen Kane, Shakespeare and The Beatles.

also, trying to dissect all art to find the ONE best thing, I think, really destroys a lot of the essence of those things. When it gets broken down into more manageable lists, that's a lot more interesting (and plausible) to me. There's no zenith to art; it fluctuates, gets reassessed and is re imagined through a cultural lens The cliche of a "Citizen Kane" is itself outdated. Hidnsight is 20/20, and we can make predictions...but who will ever know? Art, like culture, is not linear.

---------- Post added at 03:50 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:49 AM ----------

Calleja said:

I can't believe they're still trying to put Avatar: The Last Airbender on the same boat as Citizen Kane, Shakespeare and The Beatles.

Click to expand...

I just skimmed through the thread assuming weeaboo and sci-fi nerd junk was gonna get flung in there. If there *would* be a zenith, Avatar--the cartoon, not the shitty movie obviously--would be nowhere near Shakespeare.

---------- Post added at 03:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:50 AM ----------

also "I ain't hatin' I just heard better"

Well, hindsight is the point here, methinks.

---------- Post added at 10:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:54 PM ----------

Which is why I find it ridiculous they'd put a cartoon that, no matter how good, can't possibly have had any impact even NEAR to that of a Citizen Kane. Because of the timeline alone, even.

And I'm saying that even our hindsight is hindered by the cultural perception. Moby Dick was universally panned and a huge disgrace to Melville at the time.

Which, don't get me wrong, is not a validation for Avatar, just me pointing out one of the numerous examples of the absurdity of crowning a singular thing the top of its form. As for Avatar, though... I don't think it's nowhere near the best television of the decade, let alone the zenith of television. Not by a long shot.

I can't think of a "best" TV show. Even my favorites have a few crappy or even just "meh" episodes.

Actually, I think The Bible might be the holder of the book title.

In movies, Fantasia made people take feature-length cartoons seriously, The Wizard of Oz shoved color in everyone's faces, Star Wars redefined how effects were done at the time and since, The Works, even though it was never completed nor released, kicked off the whole CGI movement, Avatar will be the 3D fulcrum. Lots of stuff in there.

In popular music, there are plenty of linchpins. Don McLean's "American Pie," Led Zeppelin's "Stairway to Heaven," The Who's Tommy, "Thriller," etc.

TV had "M*A*S*H," "Dallas," "Star Trek," "The Simpsons," and more.

--Patrick

Calleja said:

I can't believe they're still trying to put Avatar: The Last Airbender on the same boat as Citizen Kane, Shakespeare and The Beatles.

Click to expand...

I'd probably put it in my top ten picks for Western Cartoons alone, but TV? Hardly. I mean, didn't Avatar borrow A LOT from other series, especially the works of Miyazaki and Osamu Tezuka (not to mention western works like Samurai Jack)? It's hard to be the "Citizen Kane" when your cribbing from other works. If I was going to give it to a cartoon, I'd probably give it to the Simpsons (or maybe the Flintstones) for setting the standard of what animated family comedy series IS. Everything since it (South Park, Family Guy, King of the Hill, etc.) is really just variations of the formula they established.

Been a lot of important shows over the years too. Do we give it to LOST for daring to be different in a sea of mediocrity? How about the Original Star Trek, for breaking gender and racial roles on TV, as well as showing that Syndication was a profitable way to extend the life of a series? Or All in the Family, for showing Americans the kind of people they were and basically taunting them for it even IF no one fucking got the joke at the time? And that's only counting AMERICAN Television... what do we pick if we put British shows like Blackadder, Monty Python, or Dr Who in the running? It's pretty hard to just pick ONE television series, especially considering we get hundreds each season.

PatrThom said:

Actually, I think The Bible might be the holder of the book title.

Click to expand...

I'd be iffy to pick a religious book. You could really make the same argument for ANY religious text. If you WERE going to pick a Bible though, I'd probably say the Gutenberg Bible for making books affordable the world over and giving people the ability to read passages that might be "skimmed over" during church, thus making faith a more personal experience.

I didn't really care for Samurai Jack all that much. I appreciated it's style and everything, but it always seemed weird to me that he would always end up fighting in his underwear and that made him stronger.

a bit?

Hm. Yeah, I really didn't know what to put for TV, which is why I was just throwing things out there. Star Trek might be a good example, but it was panned pretty harshly back then, too.

I'm leaning more and more towards I Love Lucy.

I think of Citizen Kane as the movie people point to when they want to name a good movie. Not necessarily the greatest movie ever, as that would be quite subjective and invites endless debate, but at least it's an easy enough benchmark for comparison. Sort of like when people say, "This movie is going to be the next Citizen Kane" or "I didn't go into this movie expecting Citizen Kane, I expected a brainless popcorn flick and that's what I got."

If that's the case, then for literature Shakespeare would probably the closest equivalent. For paintings it'd be something like the Mona Lisa. For television I'd actually pick the Simpsons, or at least for television animation.

For science fiction television, I think the Twilight Zone needs to be in this conversation. After all, it is pretty much the start of fantastic ideas on television. Before the Twilight Zone, the answer to a mystery could never be that "it was an alien", "they're from the future", "they're all dead", "it's an alternate dimension", etc..

You can not fault Citizen Kane for being dull to current audiences, blame the audience for not being able to follow a drama. The attention span deficit is a rather new problem.

Television is definately I Love Lucy.

There are like three or four different definitions floating around here. But I'm just gonna throw out my movies and TV ones anyways.

Movies: The Godfather
TV: The Wire

These are both my zenith things for TV and movies. They're my favorite, and the best. And in TV, nothing's come really close as a complete series.

Not to sound Ebert-ish, but it is going to be a long, long time before a cartoon hits the impact that live television shows have already had.

I haven't gotten around to The Wire yet . And I know I should, because it is pretty much universally critically acclaimed as one of the best television series of all time.

Gilman Chatsworth said:

Not to sound Ebert-ish, but it is going to be a long, long time before a cartoon hits the impact that live television shows have already had..

Click to expand...

I disagree, Pixar is already pumping out Best Picture contenders on a yearly basis. How long before they make an amazing animated TV show/miniseries on HBO?

Movies: Life Aquatic
Music: Neutral Milk Hotel
TV: Sports Night
Books: The Bedwetter: Stories of Courage, Redemption and Pee by Sarah Silverman

Wait, FFFFF easier answer: The Simpsons! It's first 10 seasons or so make it kind of pop up on "best" lists a lot, and it's one of the longest running shows PERIOD of all time.

The Lovely Boner;414498][QUOTE=Gilman Chatsworth said:

Not to sound Ebert-ish, but it is going to be a long, long time before a cartoon hits the impact that live television shows have already had..

Click to expand...

I disagree, Pixar is already pumping out Best Picture contenders on a yearly basis. How long before they make an amazing animated TV show/miniseries on HBO?[/QUOTE]

When they do I'll change my mind

---------- Post added at 02:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:39 PM ----------

also, shit, you're right. The Simpsons. It's funny that I overlooked that because it's such a part of my pop culture subconscious...Yeah, if it isn't anything else, it has to be the 90's era Simpsons.

---------- Post added at 02:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:40 PM ----------

Also, although In the Aeroplane Over the Sea is a fantastic album, no way that's the zenith of music. Music is a hella difficult one. If it wasn't the Beatles explosion, it has to be somewhere in the roots of rock n' roll itself. If, of course, you consider the subsection of rock n' roll the linear progression of music in its total.

I'm not terribly experienced with older TV, but I'll offer a couple shows up ...

The Simpsons - The longest running animation show in history at 20 years and counting. It spawned a feature-length movie, which was wildly successful. The show is not the gem it was in its hay-day, but I know I spent at least a decade of my life watching this show religiously.

Saturday Night Live - This nearly-35 year old weekly sketch comedy show will always make you laugh. It has also launched/started the careers of many, MANY comedians. SNL spawned almost a dozen spin-off movies based on the characters and sketches within the show, about half of which were successful and are popularly known (the biggest of which are the Blues Brothers, Wayne's World, Superstar, and A Night at the Roxbury).