list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Movies 101 with Professor Richard Brown [TV Series] on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Movies_101_with_Professor_Richard_Brown_TV_Series/270599/default.aspx Title: Movies 101 with Professor Richard Brown [TV Series]
Year: 2005
Plot: While he was still teaching at New York University in 1970, Professor Richard Brown conducted a class called "Movies 101," in which classic films were exhibited and dissected. One evening, the scheduled film proved unavailable, whereupon Prof. Brown invited his Greenwich Village neighbor, comedian/director Mel Brooks, to engage in a question-and-answer session with the film students. From this grew a regular "interview" class at NYU, with Brown trading words with a different showbiz celebrity in each class. This was also the format followed by the weekly, half-hour AMC cable series Movies 101 With Professor Richard Brown, which debuted September 30, 2005. The first of the series' interviewees was Whoopi Goldberg; later subjects included Martin Scorsese, Liam Neeson, Jennifer Aniston, Sigourney Weaver, and Jeff Bridges. Those critics who carped that Prof. Brown's show was a rank imitation of James Lipton's Inside the Actors Studio were no doubt unaware that "Movies 101" had been up and running nearly a quarter of a century before Lipton ever set foot in front of a TV camera. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 4
Number of blog posts: 2
SpoutRating: 4
]]>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 22:33:14 GMTMovies 101 with Professor Richard Brown [TV Series]2005While he was still teaching at New York University in 1970, Professor Richard Brown conducted a class called "Movies 101," in which classic films were exhibited and dissected. One evening, the scheduled film proved unavailable, whereupon Prof. Brown invited his Greenwich Village neighbor, comedian/director <a href="/players/P____83158/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Mel Brooks</a>, to engage in a question-and-answer session with the film students. From this grew a regular "interview" class at NYU, with Brown trading words with a different showbiz celebrity in each class. This was also the format followed by the weekly, half-hour AMC cable series <a href=/films/270599/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Movies 101 With Professor Richard Brown</a>, which debuted September 30, 2005. The first of the series' interviewees was <a href="/players/P____27431/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Whoopi Goldberg</a>; later subjects included <a href="/players/P___110533/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Martin Scorsese</a>, <a href="/players/P____52070/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Liam Neeson</a>, <a href="/players/P_____1831/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jennifer Aniston</a>, <a href="/players/P____75144/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Sigourney Weaver</a>, and <a href="/players/P_____3197/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jeff Bridges</a>. Those critics who carped that Prof. Brown's show was a rank imitation of James Lipton's <a href=/films/232901/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Inside the Actors Studio</a> were no doubt unaware that "Movies 101" had been up and running nearly a quarter of a century before Lipton ever set foot in front of a TV camera. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide4Slightly Tagged (1-5)24http://www.spout.com/images/no_image.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Movies_101_with_Professor_Richard_Brown_TV_Series/270599/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/jscott/archive/2008/3/26/26634.aspxPost By: JScott
Post To: JScott Blog
Post Date: 3/26/2008 6:33:14 PM
Body: NYU Professor Richard Brown interviews Jennifer Anniston, Jennifer Connelly, Julianne Moore and Sigorney Weaver as part of an on-going series dedicated to sharing their experiences with his class. Each interview is about an hour long and focuses on their pre-cinema/television careers as well as previews their upcoming work (most of which was dated by the time I watched it.)The first interview in the set is Jennifer Anniston. I went in without a lot of "respect" for her body of work. No offense to her - I enjoy Friends and I think she is great as Rachel Green. I just never put a lot of faith in her talent. I learned however that at age 11 she had a painting hanging in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NYC. I am obviously not the most well versed person when it comes to her life but I also learned that her dad (John Anniston) is an actor on a Soap Opera and has been for years. I am sure many out there are aware of that nugget of information but I wasn't. I originally felt like Jennifer would be the odd-duck in this line-up of fairly well established film stars who experiment with different roles. I think after watching the interview and because of Brown's in-depth questioning I found myself most pleased with the Anniston segment. The conversation between the two was very eye opening and I think even dug deeper than I think she was expecting. The second interview was Jennifer Connelly who I felt was kind of boring. Even with top notch questioning she fell a little flat. She talks about her desire to work in film and how she was discovered but overall nothing all that interesting to note. I have long felt that she has been on a downward spiral since her days of singing with Bowie and dancing with muppets - I think this just about clinches it for me. If you ever get a chance to watch these interviews you can just pass this one up.I am a huge fan of Julianne Moore. She may be one of my top five living actresses. She came out about how her parents supported her through her wishes to become an actor but also strongly cautioned that she prepare herself for failure by getting a degree that could lead to a graduate program down the future. While it doesn't look like she will ever need to take her parents up on that advice it was well taken and could be useful for hundred of people out there struggling to do what they dream. Her interview is completely uninhibited and she talks frankly about her set affair with her now husband and how she will feel when her children stumble upon the fact that she had done some nudity in her films. Overall I would say she was the interview I was most hyped up for and it delivers unquestionable.Lastly we see Sigorney Weaver who obviously has a spectrum of work from Sci-Fi to Comedy to Drama. She is just about everywhere. She was a lot less intimidating and commanding as I thought. Perhaps I bought into the Ridley Scott persona a bit too much but she seemed to be just surprised and pleased with her career. She doesn't take it for granted or too seriously while at the same time seeming dedicated and well educated about it. Along with Anniston this interview changed my mind about the person involved because it opened up a human side of them and showed the struggles and hardships they went through to get where they are.For those of you interested in acting or the art of acting this would be an inciteful viewing for you. Well researched by Professor Brown and well recieved by the audience this is a winner that easily compares to Lipton's Inside the Actor's Studio which gets far more noteriety. I can't wait to watch the rest of the series.
]]>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 22:33:14 GMTJScottJScott Blog3/26/2008 6:33:14 PMNYU Professor Richard Brown interviews Jennifer Anniston, Jennifer Connelly, Julianne Moore and Sigorney Weaver as part of an on-going series dedicated to sharing their experiences with his class. Each interview is about an hour long and focuses on their pre-cinema/television careers as well as previews their upcoming work (most of which was dated by the time I watched it.)The first interview in the set is Jennifer Anniston. I went in without a lot of &quot;respect&quot; for her body of work. No offense to her - I enjoy Friends and I think she is great as Rachel Green. I just never put a lot of faith in her talent. I learned however that at age 11 she had a painting hanging in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NYC. I am obviously not the most well versed person when it comes to her life but I also learned that her dad (John Anniston) is an actor on a Soap Opera and has been for years. I am sure many out there are aware of that nugget of information but I wasn&#39;t. I originally felt like Jennifer would be the odd-duck in this line-up of fairly well established film stars who experiment with different roles. I think after watching the interview and because of Brown&#39;s in-depth questioning I found myself most pleased with the Anniston segment. The conversation between the two was very eye opening and I think even dug deeper than I think she was expecting. The second interview was Jennifer Connelly who I felt was kind of boring. Even with top notch questioning she fell a little flat. She talks about her desire to work in film and how she was discovered but overall nothing all that interesting to note. I have long felt that she has been on a downward spiral since her days of singing with Bowie and dancing with muppets - I think this just about clinches it for me. If you ever get a chance to watch these interviews you can just pass this one up.I am a huge fan of Julianne Moore. She may be one of my top five living actresses. She came out about how her parents supported her through her wishes to become an actor but also strongly cautioned that she prepare herself for failure by getting a degree that could lead to a graduate program down the future. While it doesn&#39;t look like she will ever need to take her parents up on that advice it was well taken and could be useful for hundred of people out there struggling to do what they dream. Her interview is completely uninhibited and she talks frankly about her set affair with her now husband and how she will feel when her children stumble upon the fact that she had done some nudity in her films. Overall I would say she was the interview I was most hyped up for and it delivers unquestionable.Lastly we see Sigorney Weaver who obviously has a spectrum of work from Sci-Fi to Comedy to Drama. She is just about everywhere. She was a lot less intimidating and commanding as I thought. Perhaps I bought into the Ridley Scott persona a bit too much but she seemed to be just surprised and pleased with her career. She doesn&#39;t take it for granted or too seriously while at the same time seeming dedicated and well educated about it. Along with Anniston this interview changed my mind about the person involved because it opened up a human side of them and showed the struggles and hardships they went through to get where they are.For those of you interested in acting or the art of acting this would be an inciteful viewing for you. Well researched by Professor Brown and well recieved by the audience this is a winner that easily compares to Lipton&#39;s Inside the Actor&#39;s Studio which gets far more noteriety. I can&#39;t wait to watch the rest of the series. http://www.spout.com/blogs/solafekxela/archive/2008/2/18/25265.aspxPost By: solafekxela
Post To: solafekxela Blog
Post Date: 2/18/2008 12:48:41 PM
Body: Movies 101 is the NYU Film Course long moderated by Professor Richard Brown. The “Leading Men” series includes some of the finest working actors, as well as Josh Lucas. Each interview covers nearly every aspect of the actors’ respective careers, from the good, to the bad, to the ugly. This, of course, excludes Lucas, whose interview can only go so far in trying to make the man seem bearably competent. George Clooney’s hour-long interview is first on the disc, and it is by far one of the most engaging. Clooney is, redundant as this sounds, naturally charming and charismatic. His great sense of humor is often overlooked, but Brown lets him run free, often chuckling at his subject’s one-liners. With this interview in particular, Brown’s knowledge about film really allows him to discuss in-depth the thought process that went into each film of Clooney’s. Now having directed his own films and having started a production company with good friend Steven Soderbergh, Clooney provides profound insight into the way Hollywood works. However, this does, to some degree, prevent him from really diving into the way he works as an actor. Much more time is spent discussing his work as a director, screenwriter, and producer. Perhaps this interview would fit better on a different disc. Still, the new information about Clooney’s childhood as well as his humility in discussing his work and aspirations make this well worth watching.Next is Josh Lucas, who can aptly be described as a poor man’s McConaughey. Comparing him to Clooney in terms of acting skills and personality is like comparing Martin Scorsese to Michael Bay. One is very personal and involved in his projects; the other is a complete sell-out. Thankfully, the interview is salvaged by Lucas’ own admission that he is by no means one of the greatest working actors. The discussion of his work in films like Poseidon and Glory Road just doesn’t have the same weight as that of the other actors on the disc. Though he is able to discuss with some intelligence his own philosophy on films and the meaning of those in which he has acted, the interview only highlights his own pomposity, since all the discussion is more about him than his acting. The line that best summarizes his incompetence is the following, “I don’t know how method-y I am.” I’m not sure Lucas knows what method acting is. Following Lucas is heavyweight Daniel Day-Lewis, whose recent performance in There Will Be Blood proved him the greatest, most daring actor working today. Day-Lewis is quite private, so just the privilege to interview him is an honor and undoubtedly a momentous occasion. The discussion mostly follows his limited but much acclaimed resume, and the talk of his early work is particularly fascinating. He exhibits a personality not often seen in his few available interviews, and their conversation about his experience with the Royal Shakespeare Company is quite engaging. I was most curious to hear about Day-Lewis’ recent work, largely because I am more familiar with it, and the interview provides decent insight. The focus on his relationship with Martin Scorsese is well-covered, as is his rationale for working so infrequently.The last interview on the disc is with Dennis Quaid, a largely overlooked but very talented actor. The film discussed in the most depth during the interview is The Right Stuff, undoubtedly one of Quaid’s greatest roles. His comments are candid, genuine, and informative, though he’s not naturally as engaging a speaker as the other interviewees. Some of the stories Quaid shares aren’t as relevant to the discussion as he may think, but they aren’t necessarily uninteresting. Since I’m naturally fascinated with Quaid, his work, and the decisions he has made, I really enjoyed hearing his thoughts as well as Brown’s perspective on his career. This interview is decidedly more focused on Quaid’s life than his specific acting methodology, and it is all the better for it. However, there is a fair amount of talk on Quaid’s early movie experiences, and it is so nostalgia-infused that it proves the most exciting part of the interview.
]]>Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:48:41 GMTsolafekxelasolafekxela Blog2/18/2008 12:48:41 PMMovies 101 is the NYU Film Course long moderated by Professor Richard Brown. The &ldquo;Leading Men&rdquo; series includes some of the finest working actors, as well as Josh Lucas. Each interview covers nearly every aspect of the actors&rsquo; respective careers, from the good, to the bad, to the ugly. This, of course, excludes Lucas, whose interview can only go so far in trying to make the man seem bearably competent. George Clooney&rsquo;s hour-long interview is first on the disc, and it is by far one of the most engaging. Clooney is, redundant as this sounds, naturally charming and charismatic. His great sense of humor is often overlooked, but Brown lets him run free, often chuckling at his subject&rsquo;s one-liners. With this interview in particular, Brown&rsquo;s knowledge about film really allows him to discuss in-depth the thought process that went into each film of Clooney&rsquo;s. Now having directed his own films and having started a production company with good friend Steven Soderbergh, Clooney provides profound insight into the way Hollywood works. However, this does, to some degree, prevent him from really diving into the way he works as an actor. Much more time is spent discussing his work as a director, screenwriter, and producer. Perhaps this interview would fit better on a different disc. Still, the new information about Clooney&rsquo;s childhood as well as his humility in discussing his work and aspirations make this well worth watching.Next is Josh Lucas, who can aptly be described as a poor man&rsquo;s McConaughey. Comparing him to Clooney in terms of acting skills and personality is like comparing Martin Scorsese to Michael Bay. One is very personal and involved in his projects; the other is a complete sell-out. Thankfully, the interview is salvaged by Lucas&rsquo; own admission that he is by no means one of the greatest working actors. The discussion of his work in films like Poseidon and Glory Road just doesn&rsquo;t have the same weight as that of the other actors on the disc. Though he is able to discuss with some intelligence his own philosophy on films and the meaning of those in which he has acted, the interview only highlights his own pomposity, since all the discussion is more about him than his acting. The line that best summarizes his incompetence is the following, &ldquo;I don&rsquo;t know how method-y I am.&rdquo; I&rsquo;m not sure Lucas knows what method acting is. Following Lucas is heavyweight Daniel Day-Lewis, whose recent performance in There Will Be Blood proved him the greatest, most daring actor working today. Day-Lewis is quite private, so just the privilege to interview him is an honor and undoubtedly a momentous occasion. The discussion mostly follows his limited but much acclaimed resume, and the talk of his early work is particularly fascinating. He exhibits a personality not often seen in his few available interviews, and their conversation about his experience with the Royal Shakespeare Company is quite engaging. I was most curious to hear about Day-Lewis&rsquo; recent work, largely because I am more familiar with it, and the interview provides decent insight. The focus on his relationship with Martin Scorsese is well-covered, as is his rationale for working so infrequently.The last interview on the disc is with Dennis Quaid, a largely overlooked but very talented actor. The film discussed in the most depth during the interview is The Right Stuff, undoubtedly one of Quaid&rsquo;s greatest roles. His comments are candid, genuine, and informative, though he&rsquo;s not naturally as engaging a speaker as the other interviewees. Some of the stories Quaid shares aren&rsquo;t as relevant to the discussion as he may think, but they aren&rsquo;t necessarily uninteresting. Since I&rsquo;m naturally fascinated with Quaid, his work, and the decisions he has made, I really enjoyed hearing his thoughts as well as Brown&rsquo;s perspective on his career. This interview is decidedly more focused on Quaid&rsquo;s life than his specific acting methodology, and it is all the better for it. However, there is a fair amount of talk on Quaid&rsquo;s early movie experiences, and it is so nostalgia-infused that it proves the most exciting part of the interview. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/see/MemberTagFilms.aspxsee
Number of films tagged: 31

Number of people who tagged: 31

Number of times used: 33

]]>Sat, 01 Nov 2008 05:00:15 GMT313133Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/no/MemberTagFilms.aspxno
Number of films tagged: 13

Number of people who tagged: 14

Number of times used: 14

]]>Fri, 06 Jun 2008 06:40:20 GMT131414Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/nyu/MemberTagFilms.aspxnyu
Number of films tagged: 2

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 2

]]>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 14:39:16 GMT222Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/evel/MemberTagFilms.aspxevel
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Thu, 15 Mar 2007 19:59:57 GMT111Tag