28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[Raiders]

:|

That's what you get for liking Red Road.

[dreamdead]

Showed my students the first half of Last Life in the Universe today, since I'm stealing Reverseshot's thematic here (http://reverseshot.com/legacy/summer05/lastpunch.html) and teaching in combination with P.T. Anderson's Punch-Drunk Love. So far, so good. Despite some of Pen-ek's slow pace audibly getting to the kids, they were receptive to the first half. We'll see how they fare on Friday when Pen-ek switches out the sisters at the drop of a coin. I'm thinking I should flag that moment as a necessary moment for them to think about...

[Pop Trash]

Interesting. You might be harsher than our dear Israfel.:lol:
Yeah but I think Rowland rates on a different scale than most where a "50" is the mean number for "good" and the films go up or down from there depending on their quality. Correct me if I am wrong Rowland.

[Rowland]

Yeah but I think Rowland rates on a different scale than most where a "50" is the mean number for "good" and the films go up or down from there depending on their quality. Correct me if I am wrong Rowland.Yeah, 50 is basically passable, which is to say there is more that I like about the film than I dislike.

[Rowland]

Horton Hears a Who! (Jimmy Hayward & Steve Martino, 2008) 43

There are many worthy elements here I'd like to start by recognizing upfront. The animation in the jungle segments of the narrative is fairly generic as these things go, but Who-ville is dynamically wrought, taking with it most of the picture's best visual gags, which aren't really all that funny, but the milieu is at least visually stimulating in its Escher-ian surreality and sometimes even clever without crossing over into the vulgar excesses of recent Seuss adaptations. There are also a few stirring setpieces here, including the sequence in which Horton's blustery attempt to cross a rustic wooden bridge has disastrous repercussions for the Mayor of Who-ville's concurrent dentist visit, and the climax accrues an unexpected degree of emotional power in spite of its ideological stickiness. Furthermore, it's worth noting how complex the narrative is here, respecting its young audience enough to follow adjacent plot threads in two radically different environments, affecting one another in increasingly convoluted ways, all while cutting to the credits at the mercifully scant 80-minute mark. Oh yeah, and there is a demented interlude satirizing popular anime that is fun, even as it coheres to no internal logic whatsoever.

So why the hatin'? I'll start with the small potatoes. To begin with, the lead voice actors deprive the film of a Seuss-ian verisimilitude, as Jim Carrey, Steve Carrell, and, in a minor role, Seth Rogen, all too obviously play their roles as their popular comic personalities, failing to convincingly lose themselves in the roles and thus diminishing the appeal of the characters and our immersion into the narrative on a visceral level. This is further compounded by a preponderance of lame pop culture references, the most egregious being a social networking website entitled Who-book. These points logically lead into the fact that most of this simply isn't particuarly funny, as loads of mediocre slapstick and the likes of Carrey performing celebrity impersonations (including, of all people, Henry Kissinger), compiled with unnecessary story beats obviously incorporated to pad out the running time without being given satisfying payoffs, result in an oddly flat viewing experience, barring the few moments I referenced earlier.

This all leads up to the kicker, being a sneaky ideological bent glorifying conservative morality through the picture's extrapolations of the original text. What was originally a sweet allegory extolling the virtues of steadfast tolerance has been hideously twisted into nothing less than a tract espousing Conservative America's most delusional persecution complex, that being the neurotically paranoid, insecure, and hypocritical notion that they are somehow an oppressed minority. I know, it maybe sounds like I'm the headcase, but seriously, this attitude is slathered all over the piece. Where most critics see the "person is a person, no matter how small" thesis of the original being effectively carried over, with some global warming commentary thrown in for topicality, I see a picture insidiously paying tribute to the right wing's fanatically anti-liberal/atheist agenda while even managing to defend George W. Bush! Everything from blatant, mean-spirited parodies of atheists to the suggestion that a leader (complete with a giant "W" adorning his office) characterized as an ineffectual idiot who alleges to hear the word of a Higher Power should be trusted without question, lest their world be subsumed by powers (like Global Warming) they cannot possibly hope to understand or control (not even by a hare-brained scientist caricature), against the protests of his legislative body. Umm... yeah.

So, in spite of some successful elements, the whole leaves a rather nasty after-taste for the reasons described. As one of the last death spasms of the Bush era, a reflexive means of legacy protection, this is an interesting artifact, but it's such a tonal and ideological muddle, besides being a mediocre cornball comedy on its surface level, that I can't recommend it.

[Qrazy]

This all leads up to the kicker, being a sneaky ideological bent glorifying conservative morality through the picture's extrapolations of the original text. What was originally a sweet allegory extolling the virtues of steadfast tolerance has been hideously twisted into nothing less than a tract espousing Conservative America's most delusional persecution complex, that being the neurotically paranoid, insecure, and hypocritical notion that they are somehow an oppressed minority. I know, it maybe sounds like I'm the headcase, but seriously, this attitude is slathered all over the piece. Where most critics see the "person is a person, no matter how small" thesis of the original being effectively carried over, with some global warming commentary thrown in for topicality, I see a picture insidiously paying tribute to the right wing's fanatically anti-liberal/atheist agenda while even managing to defend George W. Bush! Everything from blatant, mean-spirited parodies of atheists to the suggestion that a leader (complete with a giant "W" adorning his office) characterized as an ineffectual idiot who alleges to hear the word of a Higher Power should be trusted without question, lest their world be subsumed by powers (like Global Warming) they cannot possibly hope to understand or control (not even by a hare-brained scientist caricature), against the protests of his legislative body. Umm... yeah.

Alternatively, he hears something others don't see/recognize (doesn't have to be God, could be the threat of global warming itself) and does his damnedest to avert disaster rather than maintaining the status quo (which would be a conservative perspective). The point is that they all get together to do something about the 'threat' (i.e. global warming) and recognize it's real rather than doing nothing... and it turns out their voices can be heard and that it wasn't too late to avert disaster. Via your reading you'd have to replace the threat with the threat of terrorism and I just don't see much evidence for that being a reasonable reading of the film. Furthermore you're completely ignoring the second narrative of Horton and the kangaroo. The Kangaroo is the least tolerant voice in the film, it is her unwillingness to engage in anything other than a strictly enforced status quo which causes all the problems in the first place.

The W adorning his office is just ironic happenstance given that the book was written some time before either of the Bushes took office.

What were the parodies of atheists? I don't recall.

[Bosco B Thug]

Sexy Beast was awesome and had even more avant garde flair than Birth. A bit hyper, not into "cool" kineticism, and the final heist act of the picture was my least favorite act of the film, but otherwise...

Jonathan Glazer. Best, most promising [young] (American) director among any of those listed in that "Any new directors?" thread that happened not too long ago.

ALSO: Tobe Hooper's very first film, the experimental, avant-garde feature length Eggshells, was screened (http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/Issue/story?oid=oid%3A754199) at the SXSW Film Festival last week! And it's in the process of restoration and scheduled for home video release by next year. This makes me very happy.

[Boner M]

Weekend:

Outback (aka Wake in Fright... need to finish the novel first, tho)
Summer Hours
Samaritan Girl
The Soft Skin

[Mara]

I put off seeing Sweeney Todd for a really long time just because I'm so attached to the source material. So, I guess I was pleasantly surprised by how well it actually worked. Depp had the vocal chops for his part, but (unfortunately) Bonham-Carter did not. She also played as straight what was written as a brilliant comic character, which I found disappointing.

Has Burton figured out that people will remain your friends even if you don't cast them in every single production?

[Mara]

By the way, I've seen Sweeney Todd onstage three times, and the absolute best was a local production in Michigan, where I grew up. They didn't have the money or resources of other, larger productions, but they made up for it by giving the front three rows blood splatter tarps.

Good times.

[dreamdead]

Jack Conway's controversial 1933 film the Red-Headed Woman presents us with the disquieting possibility that men cannot resist a sexually aggressive woman, regardless of the man's ideals or pragmatic realization of an affair's fatalistic consequences. With Jean Harlow as Lilian/Red, we view this aggressive woman work her way up the economic ladder, seducing whomever she needs to in order to climb the next materialistic step. Yet while these ideas are fascinating to view in the context of the times, and they're working off a script by Gentlemen Prefer Blondes' Anita Loos and an uncredited F. Scott Fitzgerald, there's never time paid to humanizing Lilian, which makes all of the vice and debauchery she engages in for naught, as there is no emotional identification. Instead, she is portrayed as such a primal creature that there are never emotional stakes, which limits any depth or resonance that the film can dip into.

We'll see if Babyface cures this issue at all next week.

[Sycophant]

Wurkund:

Duplicity
Gomorrah
Kikujiro (for the millionth time)

[Spinal]

Weekend:

Rachel Getting Married
The Innocents

[Raiders]

Weekend:

Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist
Mother and Son
Prince and Princesses

[Sycophant]

Going for a theme weekend, Raiders?

[Raiders]

Weekend:

Rachel Getting Married
The Innocents

Duuuuuude. I expect eight more stars in that signature.


Going for a theme weekend, Raiders?

No. Just sort of happened. I probably won't see all three this weekend anyway.

[Watashi]

Weekend:

Monsters vs. Aliens
Freddy vs. Jason
Alien vs. Predator

[balmakboor]

I was reading some comments about "Sick: The Life & Death of Bob Flanagan, Supermasochist" over at imdb. Seems that the British folks didn't get quite the same experience.

From the BBFC:
"To obtain this category cuts of 3m 42s were required.
Cuts required to two scenes showing strong sado-masochistic activity (asphyxiation, the piercing of the skin of the penis, the insertion of a large metal ball into the rectum, the hammering of a nail through the tip of the penis) which would be highly dangerous if copied and which are likely to encourage imitation in viewers with an existing interest in sado-masochistic activity. Cuts made in accordance with the terms of the Video Recordings Act 1984 which requires the Board to have special regard to harm which may be caused to viewers or to society through the actions of viewers ."

Umm, I don't think there's much chance that I'd try to imitate many things in the movie. Of course, I'm not a supermasochist either.

[Sycophant]

Wats, Eagle vs. Shark is conspicuously missing from your weekend.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I watched It's Alive last night, and I was genuinely surprised. I was expecting something schlockier and more self-aware, but the film believes in its premise and commits to the drama that would come from a woman giving birth to a mutant monster baby. The sympathetic main couple and killer Herrmann soundtrack bolster the film even further. This is the most focused film from Cohen I've seen, and it's easily my favorite of his works.

[MadMan]

Sexy Beast was awesome and had even more avant garde flair than Birth. A bit hyper, not into "cool" kineticism, and the final heist act of the picture was my least favorite act of the film, but otherwise....Your rating for it is exactly the same as mine (only I converted it to the 100 scale recently). I agree that the heist really is quite weak, and I felt that the movie really tried too hard to be a psychological picture. Still Ben Kinglsey's frightening, manic performance and Ray Winstone's world wary persona made up for much of what felt like dead weight. Winstone needs more recognition as a good actor btw, and also I didn't realize when I saw the movie that Ian McShane was in it.

Rowland's review almost makes me want to see Horton Hears a Who. Almost.

[Grouchy]

I was reading some comments about "Sick: The Life & Death of Bob Flanagan, Supermasochist" over at imdb. Seems that the British folks didn't get quite the same experience.

From the BBFC:
"To obtain this category cuts of 3m 42s were required.
Cuts required to two scenes showing strong sado-masochistic activity (asphyxiation, the piercing of the skin of the penis, the insertion of a large metal ball into the rectum, the hammering of a nail through the tip of the penis) which would be highly dangerous if copied and which are likely to encourage imitation in viewers with an existing interest in sado-masochistic activity. Cuts made in accordance with the terms of the Video Recordings Act 1984 which requires the Board to have special regard to harm which may be caused to viewers or to society through the actions of viewers ."

Umm, I don't think there's much chance that I'd try to imitate many things in the movie. Of course, I'm not a supermasochist either.
I think if person X finds pleasure in hammering a nail through his penis, then person X is gonna hammer a nail through his penis anyway, whether he sees it on a movie or not.

There's always the internets.

[MadMan]

I watched It's Alive last night, and I was genuinely surprised. I was expecting something schlockier and more self-aware, but the film believes in its premise and commits to the drama that would come from a woman giving birth to a mutant monster baby. The sympathetic main couple and killer Herrmann soundtrack bolster the film even further. This is the most focused film from Cohen I've seen, and it's easily my favorite of his works.When I saw it last Halloween, I too was pleasantly surprised. Its Frankenstein type elements coupled in with 70s fears of man made destructive elements creating some type of super monster do result in a really engaging, creepy, and well made movie. I also heavily dug the ending, which contains a decent amount of surprises, and the best kill in the film, where the baby murders the milk man and the milk is seen spilling out of the truck.

[balmakboor]

I watched It's Alive last night, and I was genuinely surprised. I was expecting something schlockier and more self-aware, but the film believes in its premise and commits to the drama that would come from a woman giving birth to a mutant monster baby. The sympathetic main couple and killer Herrmann soundtrack bolster the film even further. This is the most focused film from Cohen I've seen, and it's easily my favorite of his works.

I like it a lot as well. I quite possibly liked II & III even more. I blind bought the set with all three movies for $9.00 at Best Buy a while back.

[megladon8]

Red was disappointing, but what hurt it so much was that there was a superlative movie in there, and with a few edits it could have been brought out and I would have said it was one of the best films of its year.

Unfortunately, it features a horrendous subplot involving a reporter, and her character is completely unnecessary. If I were to upload the DVD onto a computer and edit all of her scenes out, it would not hurt the film at all - it wouldn't even seem like anything was missing. She was used to force catharsis, and this betrayed the rest of the film.

Brian Cox' performance was wonderful, and again, cutting these reporter scenes out would have strengthened it so much.

It's such a shame when a film that could have been so good is messed up so badly.

[soitgoes...]

My weekend perhaps:

Eros Plus Massacre
Magnet of Doom
Sympathy for the Underdog
Red Psalm
Thieves Like Us

[Rowland]

Alternatively, he hears something others don't see/recognize (doesn't have to be God, could be the threat of global warming itself) and does his damnedest to avert disaster rather than maintaining the status quo (which would be a conservative perspective). The point is that they all get together to do something about the 'threat' (i.e. global warming) and recognize it's real rather than doing nothing... and it turns out their voices can be heard and that it wasn't too late to avert disaster. Via your reading you'd have to replace the threat with the threat of terrorism and I just don't see much evidence for that being a reasonable reading of the film.Your reading appears to be the most common, but the corollaries with a voice in the sky, an ineffectual leader being the only one to hear the voice, the need to convince his constituents to avert a potential apocalypse at the expense of his democratic government, this all smacks of neoconservative agenda to me. The allegory is admittedly rough around the edges, but so is the film as an ideological whole.
Furthermore you're completely ignoring the second narrative of Horton and the kangaroo. The Kangaroo is the least tolerant voice in the film, it is her unwillingness to engage in anything other than a strictly enforced status quo which causes all the problems in the first place.
This is actually where the atheist parody comes into play, that being the antagonist kangaroo character. I recall a line something along the lines of “If you can’t see it, hear it, or feel it, it doesn’t exist," which sounds to me like the precise sort of ignorant caricature many less tolerant Christians apply to us secular, progressive-minded individuals. She can't stand how Horton is suggesting the possibility that there may be life beyond what we can immediately perceive, making her crude atheist strawman a fascist villain. How dare you teach our children anything beyond the established laws of science, she seems to argue. Sounds awfully familiar... so Horton, like the Mayor of Who-ville, is essentially preaching the faith, and in the end they're both proven correct. Oh yeah, and the eagle hired by the kangaroo to shut Horton up is a Russian! Commie! :lol:

I may be reading too much into this, in fact it's very likely that I am, but this all stuck out to me like a sore thumb, so that an already mediocre movie became vaguely uncomfortable on an ideological front. And I didn't even touch the gender politics...

[Rowland]

Red was disappointing, but what hurt it so much was that there was a superlative movie in there, and with a few edits it could have been brought out and I would have said it was one of the best films of its year.

Unfortunately, it features a horrendous subplot involving a reporter, and her character is completely unnecessary. If I were to upload the DVD onto a computer and edit all of her scenes out, it would not hurt the film at all - it wouldn't even seem like anything was missing. She was used to force catharsis, and this betrayed the rest of the film.

Brian Cox' performance was wonderful, and again, cutting these reporter scenes out would have strengthened it so much.

It's such a shame when a film that could have been so good is messed up so badly.The reporter subplot alone did it for you? I agree that her presence padded out the length and eased the thorny moral issues, but I was more annoyed by the increasingly contrived nature of the narrative in the second half, the graceless southern redneck caricatures, and the blatantly stacked nature of the conflict. I could have done without the Freudian motivation introduced with Cox's almost laughably melodramatic backstory as well, but that would deprive the film of one of its most intense scenes.

[Qrazy]

Your reading appears to be the most common, but the corollaries with a voice in the sky, an ineffectual leader being the only one to hear the voice, the need to convince his constituents to avert a potential apocalypse at the expense of his democratic government, this all smacks of neoconservative agenda to me. The allegory is admittedly rough around the edges, but so is the film as an ideological whole.

Something tells me you also found Ratatouille Ayn Randian...

Anyway, the similarities are certainly hilariously ironic. But the book was written 50 years ago, and there's no evidence that the film is pushing the parallels of 'The Mayor of Who' as Bush anymore than it is simply adapting the narrative of the original. It's true they added the addition that Whoville doesn't believe the mayor just as the jungle residents don't believe Horton but I think this adds another layer of interest and complexity to the proceedings. It emphasizes the dual limits of perspective. It isn't just the intricacies of the very small that are hard to accept but the very large as well. This to me says more about the value of being open minded in many ways, perhaps even more so in terms of physics and astronomy than about blind faith in a creator. Horton makes clear that he is not a God but just a person as well.

Furthermore, 'A person's a person no matter how small' seems fairly anti-war to me, undermining an attack Iraq/Iran reading of the film.

Also I don't recall, how is the democracy of Whoville threatened?


This is actually where the atheist parody comes into play, that being the antagonist kangaroo character. I recall a line something along the lines of “If you can’t see it, hear it, or feel it, it doesn’t exist," which sounds to me like the precise sort of ignorant caricature many less tolerant Christians apply to us secular, progressive-minded individuals. She can't stand how Horton is suggesting the possibility that there may be life beyond what we can immediately perceive, making her crude atheist strawman a fascist villain. How dare you teach our children anything beyond the established laws of science, she seems to argue. Sounds awfully familiar... so Horton, like the Mayor of Who-ville, is essentially preaching the faith, and in the end they're both proven correct. Oh yeah, and the eagle hired by the kangaroo to shut Horton up is a Russian! Commie! :lol:

I feel you're really reaching here. You're assuming the kangaroo represents a stereotype of something there's little reason to believe it represents. The kangaroo represents close-minded people everywhere. She could be religious or atheist, the point is that she believes so strongly in her own beliefs at the expense of others. It's her dogmatism, authoritarianism, her petty jungle rules and fear mongering (sounds more Bushian to me) that causes problems.

But I do think you're on to something in a sense. Both sides of the equation (conservative/liberal) can read themselves into both the heroes or the villians of the tale and that's just the point. The film is about tolerance from both sides.


I may be reading too much into this, in fact it's very likely that I am, but this all stuck out to me like a sore thumb, so that an already mediocre movie became vaguely uncomfortable on an ideological front. And I didn't even touch the gender politics...

Dr. Larue may be bumbling but she's also a valuable scientist and the smartest at the staff of Who University. She tells The Mayor that Whoville is in danger of being destroyed and she's right! So the scientist is on The Mayor's side.

[Winston*]

Also, Don't forget that the elephant is the symbol of the Republican party. Propaganda'd!

[Dukefrukem]

God it's been so long since I watched Hellraiser. So much gore... I can't wait for the new one.

[Qrazy]

Interesting side note...

"The book (most notably Horton the Elephant's recurring phrase "a person's a person, no matter how small") has found its way to the center of the recurring debate, in the United States, over abortion. Several pro-life groups have adopted the phrase in support of their views. Geisel himself did not approve of these groups co-opting the phrase, nor does his widow, Audrey Geisel, who "doesn't like people to hijack Dr. Seuss characters or material to front their own points of view." [5] According to Geisel biographer Philip Nel, Geisel threatened to sue a pro-life group for using his words on their stationery."

[Rowland]

Something tells me you also found Ratatouille Ayn Randian...Not really, though the reading is certainly valid. Moreover, Ratatouille is so much better made than this that any other comparisons are void.

Anyway, the similarities are certainly hilariously ironic. But the book was written 50 years ago, and there's no evidence that the film is pushing the parallels of 'The Mayor of Who' as Bush anymore than it is simply adapting the narrative of the original. It's true they added the addition that Whoville doesn't believe the mayor just as the jungle residents don't believe Horton but I think this adds another layer of interest and complexity to the proceedings. It emphasizes the dual limits of perspective. It isn't just the intricacies of the very small that are hard to accept but the very large as well. This to me says more about the value of being open minded in many ways, perhaps even more so in terms of physics and astronomy than about blind faith in a creator. Reasonable enough, and if I ever see this again, I'll try to be more open-minded. But it just felt so off to me, and so obviously so that I'm amazed how very few picked up on it as well. As for the reasoning that the book didn't say anything like this, I'd contend that the movie has been too dramatically embellished for that to work.
Horton makes clear that he is not a God but just a person as well. This simply makes the notion of an omnipotent God easier for children to accept. :P

Furthermore, 'A person's a person no matter how small' seems fairly anti-war to me, undermining an attack Iraq/Iran reading of the film.Yeah, I don't think it explicitly functions as a pro-war allegory, but rather it speaks to the notion of a "trust The One" sort of faith, with persecution and immanent apocalypse as its key emotional bullet points. Granted, the fact that both of them manage to prove their existence to the other's world muddies the waters, but this speaks to me more as a necessary conclusion to sing the virtues of giving yourself over to the voice. If I'm not mistaken, the Whos in Whoville only hear Horton's voice after their world has become so discombobulated that they crawl to the Mayor for guidance.

Also I don't recall, how is the democracy of Whoville threatened?It isn't exactly threatened, but we're shown how Whoville has a noble aristocratic history, and that the current Mayor is comparatively unaccomplished, so that even his own governing body ridicules him, that is until he hears the call and appeals to the populace to ignore their dissent and listen solely to him.

I feel you're really reaching here. You're assuming the kangaroo represents a stereotype of something there's little reason to believe it represents. The kangaroo represents close-minded people everywhere. She could be religious or atheist, the point is that she believes so strongly in her own beliefs at the expense of others. It's her dogmatism, authoritarianism, her petty jungle rules and fear mongering (sounds more Bushian to me) that causes problems. Fair enough, but that line still irked me. I recall getting this vague impression in other ways, but they allude me now.

But I do think you're on to something in a sense. Both sides of the equation (conservative/liberal) can read themselves into both the heroes or the villians of the tale and that's just the point. The film is about tolerance from both sides. An interesting interpretation, I could see that.

Dr. Larue may be bumbling but she's also a valuable scientist and the smartest at the staff of Who University. She tells The Mayor that Whoville is in danger of being destroyed and she's right! So the scientist is on The Mayor's side.Sure, but only because she admits to having no idea why the weather patterns are going out of whack, all the while bumbling around like a fool. The rest of the Whoville populace is presented as merely being ignorant, too complacent in their ways, too caught up with their who-phones and who-books to notice the state of the world around them, which come to think of it is rather incisive. The trendy references don't seem quite so pandering anymore.

Otherwise, the antagonistic female kangaroo is the only major female character in that part of the plot, and she's represented as a domineering harpy. I believe there was also a female toddler animal, who was the most spaced out of the bunch. On the Whoville side of things, you have the harebrained female scientist, the wife who has no significant role, and a joke about how he has an endless sea of virtually identical daughters whose issues he only cares enough about to literally spend a few seconds with each daughter per day, via the admittedly clever clockwork device.

Good discussion. :)

[Qrazy]

Not really, though the reading is certainly valid. Moreover, Ratatouille is so much better made than this that any other comparisons are void.

Fair, it is better. My problem with Randian readings of Bird's work isn't so much with the reading itself (just as one could do a Freudian or Marxist reading), but with the condemnation by association I've seen from time to time.


Yeah, I don't think it explicitly functions as a pro-war allegory, but rather it speaks to the notion of a "trust The One" sort of faith, with persecution and immanent apocalypse as its key emotional bullet points. Granted, the fact that both of them manage to prove their existence to the other's world muddies the waters, but this speaks to me more as a necessary conclusion to sing the virtues of giving yourself over to the voice. If I'm not mistaken, the Whos in Whoville only hear Horton's voice after their world has become so discombobulated that they crawl to the Mayor for guidance.

Well yeah but that's true of a global warming allegory as well. For a long time people were all like global who? But now they're all like ah fuck me we's a gonna die.


It isn't exactly threatened, but we're shown how Whoville has a noble aristocratic history, and that the current Mayor is comparatively unaccomplished, so that even his own governing body ridicules him, that is until he hears the call and appeals to the populace to ignore their dissent and listen solely to him.

True.


Sure, but only because she admits to having no idea why the weather patterns are going out of whack, all the while bumbling around like a fool. The rest of the Whoville populace is presented as merely being ignorant, too complacent in their ways, too caught up with their who-phones and who-books to notice the state of the world around them, which come to think of it is rather incisive. The trendy references don't seem quite so pandering anymore.

Right but everyone in the entire movie is bumbling about like a fool. That just sort of goes hand in hand with slapstick antics.


Otherwise, the antagonistic female kangaroo is the only major female character in that part of the plot, and she's represented as a domineering harpy. I believe there was also a female toddler animal, who was the most spaced out of the bunch. On the Whoville side of things, you have the harebrained female scientist, the wife who has no significant role, and a joke about how he has an endless sea of virtually identical daughters whose issues he only cares enough about to literally spend a few seconds with each daughter per day, via the admittedly clever clockwork device.

It's true there isn't a strong female presence in the film but I don't think it's significantly more dismissive or condemning of it's female characters than it is of it's males. The villian monkeys and vulture are all males for instance. Also the wife is given a few genuine moments where her affections are tested.


Good discussion. :)

Agreed.

[megladon8]

The reporter subplot alone did it for you? I agree that her presence padded out the length and eased the thorny moral issues, but I was more annoyed by the increasingly contrived nature of the narrative in the second half, the graceless southern redneck caricatures, and the blatantly stacked nature of the conflict. I could have done without the Freudian motivation introduced with Cox's almost laughably melodramatic backstory as well, but that would deprive the film of one of its most intense scenes.


I agree completely - Jen and I were talking about how unnecessary the backstory for Cox' character was.

I would have found it a much more interesting film if any mention of his family were erased, and if the audience was made to feel conflicted about his actions.

At one point he asks "have I gone too far?" I would have made the film to make it feel like, yes, maybe he has gone too far.

People love dogs, and a lot of people would rather see 10 people killed on screen than one dog killed. So to be able to make the audience feel that his actions in seeking justice/revenge/whatever were too extreme, that would have been neat.


On a totally unrelated note...


Purchased tickets tonight to see tomorrow night's 12:10 showing of Videodrome at the IFC Center. Can't flippin' wait.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Batman Forever was on TV a few minutes ago. It's bizarre to think that fourteen years ago, it was one of my favorites. I attribute that to my still-irrational love of Batman.

That Tommy Lee Jones performance is some kind of something...

:|

[megladon8]

Love for Batman is never irrational.

[EyesWideOpen]

Batman Forever was on TV a few minutes ago. It's bizarre to think that fourteen years ago, it was one of my favorites. I attribute that to my still-irrational love of Batman.

That Tommy Lee Jones performance is some kind of something...

:|

It's not great by any means and that Jones performance is awful but I still prefer it to either of Burton's films.

[Sycophant]

A warning to all y'all. Next time I catch one of you decrying the state of Hollywood and how all it makes is stupid bullshit and how it needs to die, I am going to go through the Match Cut archives and put together a list of your posts celebrating recent Hollywood releases from "the system" (including stuff from co-financing arms) and all of your frothing, drooling, and otherwise damp anticipation for major Hollywood projects from the Upcoming Film Emporium.

Anyone that I suspect is just trying to get my goat and get me to do a bunch of work will be ignored.

Specific bemoaning of individual products and maybe even trends will be tolerated. It's hypocritical damnation of the entire city/industry that I'm after.

Because, my friends, HOORAY FOR HOLLYWOOD!

[Spun Lepton]

Love for Batman is never irrational.


It's not great by any means and that Jones performance is awful but I still prefer it to either of Burton's films.

See Meg? It can be incredibly irrational.

:P:lol:

[Dead & Messed Up]

...otherwise damp anticipation...

Eww.

[Qrazy]

Specific bemoaning of individual products and maybe even trends will be tolerated. It's hypocritical damnation of the entire city/industry that I'm after.

Because, my friends, HOORAY FOR HOLLYWOOD!

One can despise the system and not hate every film that comes out of it.

[Sycophant]

Eww.

Seriously. Have you read one of our Upcoming Film Emporium threads? It's all about who's quickest to... y'know.

[MadMan]

On the whole I like blockbusters. Just that as of late (read: the past couple of years) too many of them coming out have appeared to be quite awful. Also I've never hated Hollywood; after all, many great films have come out of the studio system. I'm just worried that the decade will close out poorly. I feel that the 90s kind of spoiled us with one great year after the next. Except for 1990: that year was pretty weak.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Seriously. Have you read one of our Upcoming Film Emporium threads? It's all about who's quickest to... y'know.

I only go in to offer my skepticism of whatever horror remake is coming up next.

[B-side]

The Good, the Bad, the Weird was a blast. It wears its influences on its sleeve and cranks up the over-the-top action. The characters are exaggerated archetypes of the Western, more to the point, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, which it's clearly a Korean re-imagining of. It doesn't take itself very seriously at all and manages to blend the serious and the funny quite well. It also excels in the visual department and manages some rather nifty camera work.

[balmakboor]

I finally finished my review of "Milk":

As any movie I’ve seen. anxiously trying to get in the “closet.” he the children” crusade. the first openly gay words and appearance is power of the gay touching moments in the of 50 and is narrated only to be played in its skillful mix of he’s picked up along period detail as well an activist and hiding at one point in seat in 1977.

from pathetically sad, francisco. and at the w. bush) as well, his about columbine), “last pick-up scene between the event of his that included building entire movie.

it is other. it’s unbearably experimentation with longer necessary. his this all leads to his milk and smith that unable to deal with the francisco supervisor than with scott smith of milk’s life.

there “milk” is the movie gus after several failed is a tragic figure and, mainstream. but every an actual glad it fell apart. the before reaching the age politician after george national anti-gay “save clips and the using flashbacks as van sant was born to entanglements with but he isn’t the relationships have hirsch) is crushed by and three have killed with a contemporary “I’ve had four lovers chronicles milk’s in the end, sadness with jones even “elephant” (loosely “zodiac” in its elected to a san tells the true story of and after much suffered, none more so sadness that motivates political career anything van sant could kurt cobain), and the builds as he realizes, leads to the most themselves.” they were politician with the enormous purchasing place in the fabric of the way has found a “twinkie defense” sad. looking about, that he bryant. she appears shame of having to live entirely via stock film archival footage and will be dead from an relationship with cleve is growing sadness in more into the margins days” (loosely about evocation of 1970s san re-created. villain.

“milk” evokes close-ups that caress temptation to cast her assassin’s bullet marvelous sean penn), cinema.

the movie demonstrating the assassination. there is closet.

milk’s sadness a time and place with harvey milk (a has become a part of the actors as lovingly there, the movie decade of material.

after a have been great, we’ll park;” van sant has assassination.

I’m not it made for much of his campaigns for city and career. he once came starring robin make. and he has been as they caress each so despises. and his brilliant “paranoid where hiding is no more frightening than wants to create a world this story. it is spoiling anything. the state assembly seats – milk’s political exhilarating turn of the year as a returned to the never know. but I’m fellow supervisor dan it ranks right up with dan white (josh brolin stretching his head and sagging as milk’s distinction of being bryant with her smith pushed more and movie makes clear from close with a production movie opens with a wafting through the surges. and he blames resisted. her actual man elected to office. have possibly movie, captured in it all on milk. white williams. that might white, a staunch an air of sadness alliances by conservative, and anita aspirations. he says, political gamesmanship sad later as we watch milk records a tape – subtly artful trick time is now perfect for actress was wisely van sant to tackle this the very “machine” he center of it all is the (james franco). the community – he was jones (an amazing emile in his second great the beginning that milk “art” films like movie’s beast – anita

I've been reading some of William S. Burroughs' novels lately and found an online "Burroughs cut-up" generator. Since Van Sant is a huge fan of Burroughs, I thought running this review through it would be appropriate. And yes, some of Burroughs' writing reads pretty much like this.

[Rowland]

I couldn't stand Burroughs back when I tried reading a few of his novels several years ago. Kerouac was a bit more tolerable, but still not my cup o' tea.

[Bosco B Thug]

I put off seeing Sweeney Todd for a really long time just because I'm so attached to the source material. So, I guess I was pleasantly surprised by how well it actually worked. Depp had the vocal chops for his part, but (unfortunately) Bonham-Carter did not. She also played as straight what was written as a brilliant comic character, which I found disappointing. It's definitely a tragedy regarding the altered characterization the Lovett character undergoes, so much so that I'm totally all for another film version ASAP with daffy Mrs. Lovett in place. Nevertheless, no two ways about it, I love Burton's Sweeney Todd and find it vastly underappreciated, and Depp and Bonham Carter give two of the most brilliant and daring performances of 2007.


I watched It's Alive last night, and I was genuinely surprised. I was expecting something schlockier and more self-aware, but the film believes in its premise and commits to the drama that would come from a woman giving birth to a mutant monster baby. The sympathetic main couple and killer Herrmann soundtrack bolster the film even further. This is the most focused film from Cohen I've seen, and it's easily my favorite of his works. A recent viewing kind of convinced me its a bit unfocused, but I think I just wasn't in the right mood to go with the flow of Cohen's really really schlocky genre elements. I agree the drama around it all is superb and focused, although I think I'd call Q his most focused... just because its more satirical (rather than dramatic) tone and themes befits Cohen's style more.

Have you seen It's Alive 2 and 3? It's a great trilogy; 3 isn't good, per say, but it's a gas! A very perceptive gas, though, of course.


Your rating for it is exactly the same as mine (only I converted it to the 100 scale recently). I agree that the heist really is quite weak, and I felt that the movie really tried too hard to be a psychological picture. Still Ben Kinglsey's frightening, manic performance and Ray Winstone's world wary persona made up for much of what felt like dead weight. Winstone needs more recognition as a good actor btw, and also I didn't realize when I saw the movie that Ian McShane was in it. Umm, well, I don't think so, I think I'd personally give it more of a 78, 79 if I was working on the 100 scale. Those gradations count for a lot, you know. ;)

Winstone's awesome in this film, he just plays really likable here. Kingsley and McShane, though, they're messed up just for acting these people.

[balmakboor]

I couldn't stand Burroughs back when I tried reading a few of his novels several years ago. Kerouac was a bit more tolerable, but still not my cup o' tea.

I dunno though. Stuff like the following has a weird sort of poetic quality:

"josh brolin stretching his head and sagging as milk’s distinction of being bryant with her smith pushed more and movie makes clear from close with a production movie opens with a wafting through the surges."

Isn't it true that you can throw any kind of jibberish at the human mind and it will work overtime to make sense of it?

Actually, Burroughs' writing makes more sense than that. His cut-ups aren't done randomly like the computer program that re-wrote my review. He cut things up and pasted them together with a purpose, drug influenced as it was. I do find my focus wandering a lot when I read something like Naked Lunch or The Soft Machine though.

[Rowland]

Eh, I only found Sweeney Todd a slight, if pleasantly morbid, entertainment, but not much else. It's middle-tier Burton in my book. Personally, I wish he'd go back to making crazy shit as nuttily inspired as Beetlejuice. Sweeney Todd may have been outre by the standards of mainstream cinematic musical, but it has nothing on the delirium of that early picture.

[balmakboor]

Eh, I only found Sweeney Todd a slight, if pleasantly morbid, entertainment, but not much else. It's middle-tier Burton in my book.

Yeah. If it wasn't for the wonderfully morbid moments, it would've been a complete bore.

[lovejuice]

Eh, I only found Sweeney Todd a slight, if pleasantly morbid, entertainment, but not much else. It's middle-tier Burton in my book.
i think of it not as a burton's movie, but sondheim's. it works wonderfully for me in fact.

[Kurosawa Fan]

i think of it not as a burton's movie, but sondheim's. it works wonderfully for me in fact.

I loved it, but I'm not a fan of Burton's work in general, and I have no experience with the play.

[Bosco B Thug]

Eh, I only found Sweeney Todd a slight, if pleasantly morbid, entertainment, but not much else. It's middle-tier Burton in my book. Personally, I wish he'd go back to making crazy shit as nuttily inspired as Beetlejuice. Sweeney Todd may have been outre by the standards of mainstream cinematic musical, but it has nothing on the delirium of that early picture.
Outside of maybe Beetlejuice and Pee Wee's Big Adventure, which are only so good in the spirit of irreverence, Sweeney Todd might just be my favorite. Ed Wood and Edward Scissorhands are just too cloyingly Burton-y despite their both trumping 'Todd' in the bite of their social undercurrents. 'Todd' wins out due to it trumping those two in thematic/dramatic tightness and for probably being Burton's most atypical work.


i think of it not as a burton's movie, but sondheim's. it works wonderfully for me in fact. I find Sondheim's original vision is very much lost in Burton's adaptation. The fact that I'm okay with that is testament to the film's awesomeness. :P

[balmakboor]

Has anyone read anything by Alain Robbe-Grillet like Jealousy? I started reading about him after reading about Last Year at Marienbad.

[Qrazy]

Has anyone read anything by Alain Robbe-Grillet like Jealousy? I started reading about him after reading about Last Year at Marienbad.

No, but I would like to see some of his films as director, particularly L'immortelle.

[Raiders]

The Innocents (Clayton, 1961) ***1/2
I'll take it.

[Grouchy]

Burroughs is the goddamn King, but I'm sure glad he never got around to writing film reviews.

http://jdiff.ticketsolve.com/i/photos/0002/0196/THe-Housemaid-01_large.jpg

There are strange films, and then there is Kim Ki-Young's The Housemaid. I've only seen two Korean films from a decade other than the '00s, including this one (from 1960), and they were both shamelessly melodramatic and featured insane overacting. However, the other one was so bad I don't remember what it's called. This one I'll remember forever. It's about this happy family where the father is a piano teacher who desperately tries to stop his female students from falling in love with him and ruining their careers and their lives when he rejects them. But he does fall for a moment of lust with his housemaid (I would have too), a moment of lust that unchains a series of events that will eventually destroy absolutely everything. The crowning moment comes when we see another family, played by the exact same actors, including the housemaid, reading about the events we've just seen on the paper. Then the piano teacher turns his face on the audience and delivers an amused moral speech that has to be seen to be believed. Seriously speaking, there is some impressive camerawork on display, and I suspect that if more of the original material had survived (although it's been restored, you can tell there's missing footage here and there) it would be more coherent. There are lots of unintentional laughs at crucial moments, but somehow, if you enter into the film's language, you can still enjoy it at its core dramatic level. The actress who plays the housemaid (on the pic I just posted) is amazingly sexy and scary. If you get a chance to see this Korean Tales from the Crypt episode, don't miss it.

Saw Rushmore too. I'd have to rewatch Royal Tenembaums, but so far I'd say this is my favorite Wes Anderson film. The chemistry and verbal banter between Schwartzman and Murray is unmatched, and the musical choices are both appropriate and satiric. I don't know if it's better than Tenembaums, but I do know that it finds a better balance between constant comedy of the Anderson variety and serious drama. Max Fischer is a great and very complex character - completely oblivious to everyone but himself, and incapable of seeing the image he projects on others. Plus, this is just really fucking funny stuff.

[Grouchy]

Actually, Burroughs' writing makes more sense than that. His cut-ups aren't done randomly like the computer program that re-wrote my review. He cut things up and pasted them together with a purpose, drug influenced as it was. I do find my focus wandering a lot when I read something like Naked Lunch or The Soft Machine though.
I think Burroughs would have been friggin' terrified if he ever heard of the cut-up computer program.

[megladon8]

The Zombie Diaries was OK. Certainly doesn't warrant its very low score on IMDb.

Similar to Romero's Diary of the Dead, it tells the story of a zombie outbreak from the point of view of a handheld video camera. But what's really neat is that the story is told from three different perspectives, and it's not until later in the movie that we see that all three groups of people were using the same camera, and we discover how it passed hands through a rather shocking twist.

But the film is hampered by some terrible acting and a few instances of mind-numbing stupidity, which even the most inept individual would comment on being ridiculous.

One of the groups of people have survived for more than a month living on a farm, then going out during the day and killing any zombies that have wandered on the property so they can sleep at night. In order to keep the zombies from being attracted to the smell of their rotting brethren, the group regularly burns the corpses in large piles. Fine, right? But why did they need to do these burnings at night? With one flashlight? And have everyone spread out across a field? WHAT THE HELL WERE THEY THINKING???

It really was an OK movie, and I'd say in some ways it was better and more ambitious than Diary of the Dead. But, like Romero's film, it also has some huge flaws that just cannot be ignored.

I'd probably rate the two films about the same.

[dreamdead]

The Zombie Diaries was OK. Certainly doesn't warrant its very low score on IMDb.

Similar to Romero's Diary of the Dead, it tells the story of a zombie outbreak from the point of view of a handheld video camera. But what's really neat is that the story is told from three different perspectives, and it's not until later in the movie that we see that all three groups of people were using the same camera, and we discover how it passed hands through a rather shocking twist.


You are far kinder than I (http://match-cut.org/showpost.php?p=131843&postcount=23416). This film infuriated me because it wants to revel in the grotesque and shock, yet it never realizes that it first must humanize the danger. And while the multiple groups idea is the start of an interesting angle, such an idea is relegated to the side since any real emotional take, something that the best horror films posses for me, is negated by the purposely realistic take on not exploring character psychology. There's never a sense that these characters are anything but vessels that will die; there's no life behind them. And that makes all the difference.

[megladon8]

The funny thing is I agree with everything you said there, as well as most of what you said in your linked write-up, but I still kind of enjoyed it.

I guess because the majority of zombie films are so awful, one that is merely "average" (or even mediocre) seems wonderful to me :lol:

[Scar]

Speaking of zombie movies, I gave Day of the Dead another spin today. I definately like it more then I did in the past.

Since we're nitpicking zombie movies, heres one from Day, and surprise surprise, it has to do with guns.

So, you got a soldier boy methodically shooting zombies in the head with a pistol (1911 .45). He runs out of ammo and grabs his M-16. So, what does he do? He fucking sprays the zombies with the entire clip, not registering one single head shot. People, people, people. Bring that rifle up to your should and do some melon popping!

[Milky Joe]

there “milk” is the movie gus after several failed is a tragic figure and, mainstream. but every an actual glad it fell apart. the before reaching the age politician after george national anti-gay “save clips and the using flashbacks as van sant was born to entanglements with but he isn’t the relationships have hirsch) is crushed by and three have killed with a contemporary “I’ve had four lovers chronicles milk’s in the end, sadness with jones even “elephant” (loosely “zodiac” in its elected to a san tells the true story of and after much suffered, none more so sadness that motivates political career anything van sant could kurt cobain), and the builds as he realizes, leads to the most themselves.” they were politician with the enormous purchasing place in the fabric of the way has found a “twinkie defense” sad. looking about, that he bryant. she appears shame of having to live entirely via stock film archival footage and will be dead from an relationship with cleve is growing sadness in more into the margins days” (loosely about evocation of 1970s san re-created. villain.

This paragraph is perfect.

[balmakboor]

This paragraph is perfect.

:)

I've always been fascinated by the mind's ability to make sense of things.

You know like:

I've aaylws been fsanictead by the mndi's atilbiy to mkae snese of tihgns.

In college, my roommate and I would always watch the TV with the sound off and listen to random selections of music. And, you know what? No matter what music we played and no matter what TV show we were watching, they always went together like they were made for each other. Because of that, I've never gotten very excited about things like the synchronization of The Wizard of Oz and The Dark Side of the Moon.

You're right though. That passage from my Burroughs-ized review happens upon a lot of truth about Milk.

[dreamdead]

Y'know, on one hand Tokyo Gore Police strikes me as a profoundly dumb mind check on society's willingness to watch really horribly cinema so long as it's gory. On the other hand, it satisfies all of those requirements exponentially well, so that any commentary against the film must first acknowledge how ludicrous the entire premise is, so that the film saves its own out for how horrible it is. It is not a good film, not by any stretch of the imagination, but it is serviceable group fare, so long as the bloodlust is the only ingredient you want and not quality cinema or story or direction or acting or anything save for a bloodier and sub-Blade Runneresque visual design.

[Raiders]

Michel Ocelot's Princes and Princesses is a study in repetition, and I just wasn't enchanted enough to bear it. To be sure the animation is magnificent, going beyond Reiniger and having fully movable characters and speech (multiple techniques were involved). Each story is damn near exactly the same; boy faces challenge and/or must overcome obstacle to get to princess/queen. Rinse and repeat. There is no build up to any particular segment. Just the quick dash of cliched ideas and off to the races. The framing story was useless and though Ocelot managed to make each segment feel like an actual fable, the film never gained any momentum. It was simply a series of starts and stops. The post-modern slant Ocelot provides gives the film an air of irreverence as does the often tongue-in-cheek slapstick Ocelot employs. But, few if any of the elements seem likely to stick with me and it was at best a pleasant diversion. Maybe it is in the wholly unpretentious attitude and the episodic, carefree structure where the film finds its charm. But, color me very disappointed.

[Watashi]

So I saw The Piano, and I don't want to sound dumb, but...

did Ada really die at the end of the film? I immediately thought of The Occurrence at Owl Creek during the ending with her escaping death as a "dream". I don't know if this is the right interpretation, but it's what I got out of the film.

[Boner M]

Quickies on my recent viewings:

Summer Hours - Assayas gives real estate porn a good name, or at least a better one.

Outback - The director of Rambo and Weekend at Bernie's may have somewhat flattened the vivid grot of the novel's (Kenneth Cook's Wake in Fright) prose, but the study of outback machismo and aggressive hospitality comes across as clearly as ever.

La Rupture - Some have complained about the last act's turn for the absurd, but that was the point when this entry from Chabrol's golden age went from intriguing to thrilling, for me.

The Year My Voice Broke - Noah Taylor standing alone in the community hall at his school's prom, decked out in a Brando-ca-The Wild One outfit, after his date is stolen from him by his best friend = most devastating single image in the history of Australian cinema?

Crime & Punishment - As a Dostoevsky virgin, I'm not sure how much of this adaptation's success can be credited to its source novel or Kaurismaki, but I'm pretty sure that our protagonist's guess of "spiders... or something" as what the afterlife consists of belongs entirely to the latter.

A Christmas Tale - Desplechin's style is just on the verge of seeming like a shtick, but there's less shtickiness here than in Kings and Queen.

Rolling Thunder - How did I not know that Schrader wrote this until the credits started? Not hard to tell from the proceedings, which a prime example of exploitation with real emotional gravitas.

Choke - A remarkable testament to David Fincher's talent.

Driller Killer - Less a horror film than a cruddy DIY missive from the punk era, that feels like any of the Taxi Driver montages extended to feature length; and just as simulatenously fascinating and gruelling as that implies.

[dreamdead]

So I saw The Piano, and I don't want to sound dumb, but...

did Ada really die at the end of the film? I immediately thought of The Occurrence at Owl Creek during the ending with her escaping death as a "dream". I don't know if this is the right interpretation, but it's what I got out of the film.

I don't read it as a death, no. Rather, she contemplates the possibility of subsuming her desires and ambitions to the sea, much like the object that she has identified with for so long. And though that contemplation rings with the ultimate sacrifice, she decides instead to keep her life and move on without it. Though the film does serve as a feminist critique of the limitations inherent to women in this time period and locale, it is ultimately affirming in the possibility for women to transcend their initial prospects, which would include shedding the piano.

[Qrazy]

Inagaki's Whirlwind was a frustrating experience. Inagaki is clearly a master of light and some of his imagery here is absolutely breathtaking (although certainly not always). The film's intricate plotting and compelling character arcs (usually) makes for a rewarding experience as well. However, the problems with the film are threefold. Much of the effects work is rather poor. The opening battle and the final tornado aren't very well put together and some of the sword fighting suffers from that old samurai film dilemma, the 'sword obviously never making contact with the victim's body effect'. Also the editing, particularly in the opening of the film is abrupt and unbalanced. Finally the film's biggest problem is with it's melodrama and character motivations. At times the larger than life melodrama works in the film's favor and by and large character motivations are consistent. Unfortunately about two or three major plot shifts hinge directly upon absurd about faces which don't make a lick of sense. Much like the film's problematic editing these shifts are abrupt, incongruous and leave a sour after taste for a film with much more potential.

Oh and the film's gender politics are crapola. Just when you think they've introduced a strong female character they undercut her with one of those absurd character shifts. Also when male characters are looking to rescue a female, searching and calling their name the women are so helpless they can't even cry out for help. They just stand around looking desperate. Ugh.

[dreamdead]

Tsukamoto's Gemini is interesting, though largely for its formal conceits of more modern-styled music juxtaposed against turn of the 20th century Japan. The whole Japanese doppelganger syndrome has started to become a tad bit overdone from my viewing, admittedly I'm only recalling K. Kurosawa's films and this one, but I know there've been more. While incredibly low-fi, Tsukamoto arrives at a queasy and alienating sense of psychological dislocation between Yukio and Sutekichi, so that there's always a trace of doubt and uncertainty as to how Tsukamoto has positioned truth and the subjectivity of it here. An intriguing film, but A Snake of June remains my favorite between these two and Vital.

[Sven]

Check this movie out. (http://www.apple.com/trailers/independent/afterlastseason/)

[Qrazy]

Check this movie out. (http://www.apple.com/trailers/independent/afterlastseason/)

Thanks digital revolution!

*kills self*

[balmakboor]

Recent viewings:

King Corn - Covers the same territory as Super Size Me only with a very different approach. After discovering that, thanks to junk food, their bodies are largely made or corn; two buddies move to Iowa and raise one acre of corn so they can trace what happens from planting through it becoming part of their bodies. They learn a lot and so did I. It is light and informative and engaging. Very skillfully made doc.

The Business of Being Born - This is cut from the same cloth as another recent popular doc, Sicko. It can best be described as the birthing documentary for granola types. It is anti-doctors and big medicine and pro-mid wives and natural delivery. I found it very well made and engaging. So did my wife who has thought about it and talked about a great deal since last night. I've thought about it a great deal as well, especially its depiction -- often nightmarish -- of the history of birthing during the 20th century.

I Like Killing Flies - Now, this I won't compare to anything. It is a character portrait of a Greenwich Village restaurant owner and amateur philosopher. It is a wonderful example of how documentaries can give you characters with richness and contractions that you rarely find in fiction. Especially amusing is his policy of never serving parties of five.

Tales of the Rat Fink - A fun, fast-paced and very creative portrait of Ed "Big Daddy" Roth. An inspiration to Brian Wilson, Matt Groeing, Jay Leno, and Tom Wolfe; Roth was a custom car artist, Mickey Mouse hater, and innovator of placing designs on t-shirts and car kits for kids. Constructed out of mostly found footage and still photos and narrated by John Goodman, it makes very clever use of animation. Still photos are brought to vivid life by cutting them up and giving the three dimensions and creative movement. It's a cool approach that gives a whole different spin on the techniques usually seen in films by guys like Ken Burns.

[balmakboor]

Check this movie out. (http://www.apple.com/trailers/independent/afterlastseason/)

Checks to see if it's April 1st yet. Nope, you're a few days too earlier with this.

[Qrazy]

Who wants to rank/rate DeMille's filmography. I've been meaning to see The Greatest Show on Earth for a long time now.

[soitgoes...]

Who wants to rank/rate DeMille's filmography. I've been meaning to see The Greatest Show on Earth for a long time now.
The Cheat (1915) - 7.0
The King of Kings (1927) - 5.5
The Greatest Show on Earth (1952) - 2.5
The Ten Commandments (1956) - 5.0

[Qrazy]

The Cheat (1915) - 7.0
The King of Kings (1927) - 5.5
The Greatest Show on Earth (1952) - 2.5
The Ten Commandments (1956) - 5.0

Oof... um... yeah.

[megladon8]

Seeing Videodrome on the big screen was freaking awesome. I loved that they used what looked like an older print of the film - the occasional dirt, scratches and burns on the image really made it feel like I had stepped through a time warp :)

But yeah, this would battle Dead Ringers for being my favorite Cronenberg. I could probably switch back and forth between the two every day.

Videodrome is brilliant. Sex, love, politics, religion, terrorism, addiction, societal implications of all the above and how they're affected by technology...it's incredible.

I love it.

Unfortunately there was freaking Dr. Giggles sitting in the same row as us. This guy was an idiot. He was laughing through the whole movie the same way a 15 year old would laugh at Harold & Kumar. It was very distracting, because he seemed to be almost trying to project his obnoxious laugh through the whole theatre.

I was able to tune it out after about 20 minutes, but still...what a prick.

Anyways, I look forward to further weekend midnight movies at the IFC Center!

[Sven]

If it means anything at all, I greatly enjoyed The Greatest Show On Earth.

[Raiders]

If it means anything at all, I greatly enjoyed The Greatest Show On Earth.
Ew.

[Qrazy]

If it means anything at all, I greatly enjoyed The Greatest Show On Earth.

I have a soft spot for epics so DeMille should be up my alley. The only thing I've seen is The Ten Commandments about 15 years ago so I can't really recall how good it was per se.

[Qrazy]

Ew.

You don't like it either or you're just teasing?

[Raiders]

You don't like it either or you're just teasing?

I found it rather wretched, but then again my fervent anti-Heston attitude probably increased my vitriol more than it may have otherwise been.

Truth be told, DeMille ain't my kinda guy anyway.

[transmogrifier]

Role Models started well, but it peters out well before the end. It's like as if they had the premise and the characters, and forgot to write a plot. Jane Lynch FTW BTW.

[Grouchy]

But yeah, this would battle Dead Ringers for being my favorite Cronenberg. I could probably switch back and forth between the two every day.
Same here. Luckily, none really forces us to choose.

http://www.bafici.gov.ar/home09/photobase/films/encarnaaao_do_demonio_1.jpg

So I finally saw the latest Zé do Caixao (Coffin Joe in English) film, The Devil Incarnate. I can only say - wow. Way to close a trilogy. If I had to evaluate the three films, I'd probably say the most grounded and realistic one is the original, and this one the wildest, most blatantly surreal - it even has a scene where an Asian girl emerges from the insides of a pig. Without revealing much else, the script cleverly retcons the ending from This Night I'll Possess Your Corpse (apparently restoring a proposed idea that was cut by Brazilian censorship), so that Coffin Joe, far from dead, is now a prisoner in a mental ward about to be released. Writer/director/actor Mojica Marins ups the scales with each new over-the-top scene and his 100% home made FX are somethig to be admired, particularly during such beautiful-looking and delirious scenes as Joe's LSD inspired journey through hell and the many scenes involving wire-hanging and piercing. There are tons of violence in this movie, almost enough for critics to label it "torture porn", and it's even worse because the editing of these scenes is usually natural and slow paced. The ending appears to show the definitive death of the character and at the same time a new way in which his evil will be spread. Overall, this was a huge pleasure to watch on the big screen and a professional work of love. It was also a blast and an honor to see Mojica Marins, now 70 years old, introducing the movie for the festival audience in typical Coffin Joe voice and not even allowing the translator to cut into his speech. It's a shame I wasn't informed that he was giving a Q&A after the film in another room.

That was yesterday. And today, I watched Kirikou and the Wild Beasts. I probably would have enjoyed it more if I had watched the original film before, which I have scheduled for tomorrow. Overall, it was nice to see traditional animation being used by a modern filmmaker. The short stories that make up the film are amusing. I look forward to seeing if I find Kirikou and the Sorceress any more mind blowing than this, though.

Igor was pretty much a waste of time, made even worse by the fact that the copy was dubbed. Yeah, some jokes work, others don't, the plot is tired as all hell. Did the writer of American Dad script this, or the producers just made that trivia up?

More tomorrow.

[Boner M]

Role Models started well, but it peters out well before the end. It's like as if they had the premise and the characters, and forgot to write a plot. Jane Lynch FTW BTW.
Also, humor at the expense of medieval role play games is the height of shooting-fish-in-barrel-dom.

[Watashi]

Also, humor at the expense of medieval role play games is the height of shooting-fish-in-barrel-dom.
It worked in The Cable Guy.

[SirNewt]

haven't seen greatest show but I might like it

The Sign of the Cross - 3
Cleopatra - 3
The Ten Commandments - 4

[balmakboor]

I just watched Videodrome again for the first time in over 20 years. Wow. It was pretty darn great. A re-watch was certainly overdue.

[Ezee E]

No problem with the medieval games as they properly set it up as being weird, but still okay when it's all said and done. Wasn't completely overdone.

Jane Lynch FTW indeed. Too bad she'll never lead a movie methinks.

[Qrazy]

haven't seen greatest show but I might like it

The Sign of the Cross - 3
Cleopatra - 3
The Ten Commandments - 4

Something tells me that you mightn't as well.

[Derek]

Something tells me that you mightn't as well.

I don't know, his scores do add up to a perfect 10.

[Boner M]

Arrived a 1/2 hour late for the Samaritan Girl screening. Was free, so I didn't mind catching the rest of the film from there. Seemed to have missed out a lot of the plot, but I can't imagine a lot of the scenes I saw seeming less silly in their proper context. Never really establishes any sort of tone either, apart from stern self-importance. Ending is nice, I suppose. Won't rate this one, but I'm not really compelled to rewatch the portion that I missed, or any more of Kim's films.

[transmogrifier]

Arrived a 1/2 hour late for the Samaritan Girl screening. Was free, so I didn't mind catching the rest of the film from there. Seemed to have missed out a lot of the plot, but I can't imagine a lot of the scenes I saw seeming less silly in their proper context. Never really establishes any sort of tone either, apart from stern self-importance. Ending is nice, I suppose. Won't rate this one, but I'm not really compelled to rewatch the portion that I missed, or any more of Kim's films.

Watch:

Spring, Summer etc.
3-Iron
Samaritan Girl

Avoid at all costs:

The Coast Guard
Address Unknown
Bad Guy

[Boner M]

I've seen the 'watch' ones; liked Spring and the first half of 3-Iron but not the rest. Hated The Isle and sorta remember liking Time. Will definitely avoid the 'avoids'.

[dreamdead]

Kim got me into Korean cinema with Spring...., but I'm hesitant to say that any of his works resonate now. Even as the people at Koreanfilm.org pay homage to the strengths of his work, they nonetheless construct the idea that these are films specifically designed for arthouse exportation, which is a slight problem for me in terms of seeing them as reflective of Korean concerns. The man puts out films at a rate like Woody Allen and so he's likely to hit a masterpiece at some point, but I haven't seen it yet.

Would much rather have the formal intelligence of someone like Lee Chang Dong or Hong Sang-soo, as they both have a stronger grasp of gender and politics dynamics, which stop their films from becoming so myopic.

[dreamdead]

Baby Face finally gives the pre-code sex pictures a good name. Whereas something like The Red-headed Woman was fashioned around a primal and animalistic sexuality, here Stanwyck and the director posit instead a sexuality framed around cunning and intelligence. Some of that sensibility comes from the overt references to Nietzsche and the master/slave dichotomy that is espoused in the Will to Power texts that's shown on screen. Yet some of it is simply the idea that Stanwyck conveys an intelligence that Harlow never did, as there's a quiet contemplation beneath her black widow persona. Additionally, the relationship between Lily Powers and her maid Chico allows for a dynamic of racial equality that similarly empowers the feature, as the gender atrocity is covertly linked to the racist atrocities. And even if the film ends with Lily experiencing love and not a final emphatic denotation of the will to power, it nonetheless offers a full range of emotions rather than confiding Lily's character into a static temptress. Good stuff, at the end of the day.

[Sven]

moralistic, but worth a look

Are you implying that moralism is something to avoid?

[Spinal]

Are you implying that moralism is something to avoid?

I am going by this definition: "Marked by a narrow-minded morality."

And yes.

[Sven]

I am going by this definition: "Marked by a narrow-minded morality."

And yes.

Certainly. I guess I typically define "moralism" as "functioning on a moral theme or center" (my definition). Compare to, like, "political" or "existential." It seemed to me like you were opposing things with a moral foundation, which didn't strike me as very Spinal.

[Spinal]

Certainly. I guess I typically define "moralism" as "functioning on a moral theme or center" (my definition). Compare to, like, "political" or "existential." It seemed to me like you were opposing things with a moral foundation, which didn't strike me as very Spinal.

Understandable. Not sure that I know of another word that conveys the same idea more clearly. Judgmental perhaps? But even that doesn't quite cover the appeal to a shallow-minded moral base.

[Qrazy]

Understandable. Not sure that I know of another word that conveys the same idea more clearly. Judgmental perhaps? But even that doesn't quite cover the appeal to a shallow-minded moral base.

Self-righteous maybe.

[Qrazy]

Has anyone seen Jodorowsky's Tusk or The Rainbow Thief? I just procured The Rainbow Thief.

[Watashi]

Okay, I need to immediately put James Gray on my "must watch anything he does now" radar. He's 2 for 2 so far. Two Lovers is fucking fantastic.

I'll get to his previous two films real fast.

[Qrazy]

Any thoughts on films I might watch this weekend?

A Silent Duel
The Rainbow Thief
Il Boom
Ashes of Time Redux
Portrait of Jennie
Flame and Citron
Distant
Pierrot le Fou
Michael the Brave
Ceddo
The Devil and Daniel Webster
Devil's Backbone
Silent Light
The Cyclist
Little Girl Who Sold the Sun
Britannia Hospital
Marooned in Iraq
Morning Patrol
The Pied Piper
Swept Away
The Stolen Airship
The Organizer
America, America
Cairo Station
Never on Sunday
The Spies (Clouzot)
La Chienne
The Cloud-Capped Star
Yaaba
Moolaade
White Dove
A Time for Drunken Horses
The Devils
Rien Ne Va Plus
Finnegans Wake
These are the Damned
Letters from a Dead Man
After the Rain
Truly Madly Deeply
Love and Honor
A Tale of Two Sisters
The Good, the Bad and the Weird
Hitokiri
Tora-San
Angel-A
Whatever Happened to Baby Jane
Birdman of Alcatraz
Brief Crossing
Casualties of War
Oedipus Rex
Trouble Every Day
Samurai Banners
Glory
In America
Khrustalev My Car!
Kramer vs. Kramer
The Swamp
Nine Queens
Peter Pan
Places in the Heart
Berlin Alexanderplatz
Humanity and Paper Balloons
Shivers
The Atomic Submarine
Floating Clouds

[Spinal]

Any thoughts on films I might watch this weekend?

The Devil and Daniel Webster
A Tale of Two Sisters
Brief Crossing
Trouble Every Day


I'd recommend these, with Trouble Every Day being the most unusual and exciting of the bunch.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I just watched Heat for the first time. I'm gonna let it digest...

[The Mike]

I just watched Heat for the first time. I'm gonna let it digest...

Pfft. Never watch a movie you are not prepared to review in 30 seconds flat when you feel the heat comin' round the corner.

[MadMan]

Speaking of zombie movies, I gave Day of the Dead another spin today. I definately like it more then I did in the past.Good. I'll still defend it as being one of the best horror movies ever made, although after revamping my Top 20 again it dropped out.


Since we're nitpicking zombie movies, heres one from Day, and surprise surprise, it has to do with guns.

So, you got a soldier boy methodically shooting zombies in the head with a pistol (1911 .45). He runs out of ammo and grabs his M-16. So, what does he do? He fucking sprays the zombies with the entire clip, not registering one single head shot. People, people, people. Bring that rifle up to your should and do some melon popping!One can attribute that to him reacting in panic. Or the fact that he was a dumbass :lol:


Umm, well, I don't think so, I think I'd personally give it more of a 78, 79 if I was working on the 100 scale. Those gradations count for a lot, you know. ;)Heh, so you'd actually rate it higher than me then. Yey for random numbers! One of the reasons why I use the 100 scale.


Winstone's awesome in this film, he just plays really likable here. Kingsley and McShane, though, they're messed up just for acting these people.I don't know if they're messed up for playing those roles, although granted both of their characters are not nice people (unlike Winstone, who I have only seen him in one movie playing the bad guy). Kingsley clearly dug deep into the realm of the insane to play a captivating madman, that's for sure.

The Ten Commandments(1956) is one of my favorite movies. And I'm an unapologetic fan of Charlton Heston :P

[soitgoes...]

Any thoughts on films I might watch this weekend?

Portrait of Jennie
Pierrot le Fou
The Devil and Daniel Webster
Devil's Backbone
La Chienne
Moolaade
A Tale of Two Sisters
In America
Kramer vs. Kramer
Humanity and Paper Balloons
Floating Clouds

Yes!

[Qrazy]

Yes!

Thoughts on Kramer vs. Kramer?

[Qrazy]

I'd recommend these, with Trouble Every Day being the most unusual and exciting of the bunch.

Nice. It's also about time I got around to The Devil and Daniel Webster.

[megladon8]

I just watched Heat for the first time. I'm gonna let it digest...


Can't wait to hear.

I re-discovered it last year. It was amazing. One I'm dying for a good BluRay release of.

[soitgoes...]

Thoughts on Kramer vs. Kramer?
The film is all about Streep and Hoffman. Both give great, real performances that ring very true. Being from a family that split, when I was about the age of the boy in this film, probably made this even more affecting, personal. Still, see it for the performances.

[Qrazy]

The film is all about Streep and Hoffman. Both give great, real performances that ring very true. Being from a family that split, when I was about the age of the boy in this film, probably made this even more affecting, personal. Still, see it for the performances.

K, I do love me some early Hoffman. I also have Places in the Heart from Benton. I'd also like to see his first Bad Company and maybe Nobody's Fool for Paul Newman.

[lovejuice]

The film is all about Streep and Hoffman. Both give great, real performances that ring very true. Being from a family that split, when I was about the age of the boy in this film, probably made this even more affecting, personal. Still, see it for the performances.
at first i thought you were talking about doubt. :P

[soitgoes...]

at first i thought you were talking about doubt. :P
:lol:

[Dukefrukem]

Watched Chronicals of Riddick tonight for the hell of it. Is the Riddick universe one of the coolest sci-fi universes around? I'd say yes. Pitch Black was great, Dark Fury added a bit more backstory and introduced characters in CoR, but my latest viewing tonight really put into perspective just how much information you are given in 2 hours. We learn Riddick is a Furian. We learn his race was wiped out, becauase it was fortold that one Furian would end the reign of the Necromancers by the Elementals. The Necromancers were the ones who wiped out the Furians... and it pieces together characters from Pitch Black, Dark Fury, Escape from Butcher Bay... and hopefully new the Riddick game and two new movies will add even more to this universe. CoR really is an awful movie. But I enjoyed the viewing tonight. Does that make sense? Some of the logic is absurd but it makes me more excited for the new movies. If I'd have to give it a grade... I'd give it a bloated 75...

[Qrazy]

Revolutionary Road - You are the most beautiful thing of them all... a man! And the first time I felt truth was when you made love to me! ... Clearly this screenplay was written by an utter moron. That issue aside, by the second half the film is able to build up enough dramatic inertia to move things briskly along. At times the acting is nuanced and rather moving, other times much less so. When the film branches out and focuses on other couples aside from The Wheelers it becomes a more layered experience if not a particularly successful one. It would have been nice had the Wheelers kids actually played a significant role in the film since the dissolution of a family has drastic repercussions for the children. Personally I think Mendes has talent, but he's squandering it horribly and his next film doesn't look like an improvement.

Oh and there's also a lot of premature ejaculation in this movie.

[SirNewt]

Any thoughts on films I might watch this weekend?

A Silent Duel
The Rainbow Thief
Il Boom
Ashes of Time Redux
Portrait of Jennie
Flame and Citron
Distant
Pierrot le Fou
Michael the Brave
Ceddo
The Devil and Daniel Webster
Devil's Backbone
Silent Light
The Cyclist
Little Girl Who Sold the Sun
Britannia Hospital
Marooned in Iraq
Morning Patrol
The Pied Piper
Swept Away
The Stolen Airship
The Organizer
America, America
Cairo Station
Never on Sunday
The Spies (Clouzot)
La Chienne
The Cloud-Capped Star
Yaaba
Moolaade
White Dove
A Time for Drunken Horses
The Devils
Rien Ne Va Plus
Finnegans Wake
These are the Damned
Letters from a Dead Man
After the Rain
Truly Madly Deeply
Love and Honor
A Tale of Two Sisters
The Good, the Bad and the Weird
Hitokiri
Tora-San
Angel-A
Whatever Happened to Baby Jane
Birdman of Alcatraz
Brief Crossing
Casualties of War
Oedipus Rex
Trouble Every Day
Samurai Banners
Glory
In America
Khrustalev My Car!
Kramer vs. Kramer
The Swamp
Nine Queens
Peter Pan
Places in the Heart
Berlin Alexanderplatz
Humanity and Paper Balloons
Shivers
The Atomic Submarine
Floating Clouds

haha! I've seen like three of those. This is why I love match-cut.

[SirNewt]

The film is all about Streep and Hoffman. Both give great, real performances that ring very true. Being from a family that split, when I was about the age of the boy in this film, probably made this even more affecting, personal. Still, see it for the performances.

Plus it's a Hollywood film that affirms the position of the father rather than undermining it. Kind of rare.

[Ezee E]

I love Kramer Vs. Kramer until the last few scenes.

[Scar]

One can attribute that to him reacting in panic. Or the fact that he was a dumbass :lol:


I would've attributed it to this if they hadn't been so methodical with the pistol.

[Grouchy]

Chelsea on the Rocks is a documentary about a famous hotel which patronized artists (ranging from William Burroughs to rockstars like Janis Joplin and Jerry Garcia) and which, due to me being an ignorant, I'd never even heard of. The problem is that I could sort of see (and Wikipedia confirmed it) that the subject was much larger than what Abel Ferrara managed to show. Still, I think his intention was clearly to make a propaganda piece to stop the new ownership from taking over the place and making it a luxury hotel for tourists. Ferrara succesfully depicted, through interviews with the notorious long-term residents, the ambient of bohemia and general disorder that the Hotel Chelsea famously represented. By far the weakest parts were the reenactments - that girl definitively didn't look like Janis and the Sid Vicious scenes were too over-the-top, although they did cause me to want to see Sid and Nancy soon. Milos Forman and Ethan Hawke were by far the most entertaining persons interviewed. I don't regret seeing it.

http://www.africanfilm.com/images/films/kirikou_2.jpg

Kirikou and the Sorceress was very impressive. I wish I had seen it before Wild Beasts, because that sequel doesn't make sense if not as an expansion of this film. In fact, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense if it can't stand on its own - period. The original film, however, is brilliant. This is what filmmaking for children should always be like. A story that can be seen by people of all ages, but not made for retards. The characters, as broadly defined as they are, are brilliant and I wonder if the cartoonists didn't find some inspiration from Henri Rousseau (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Rousseau)'s jungle paintings - yeah, I know it mentions that on the link, but that's because, er, I added it. The music was also fabulous and catchy. I think I'm gonna buy this film if I ever find it and try and spread it into as many people as possible.

Finally, I saw all 3 and a half hours of Mother and the Whore. A French film with some New Wave leanings and constant dialogue, and I wasn't even bored! Probably becasue the dialogue was brilliant. The movie was followed by a short Q&A with the actress who plays Veronike, and one of the most surprising things she said was that every single word was scripted by Jean Estauche. Zero improvisation overall for a long-ass film that consists entirely of meandering dialogue. It's obviously a very generational story, a depiction of how the French youth acted, dressed and talk in the convoluted '60s, but at it's heart, it's a moving anti-love story. I don't think Alexandre (the Jean Pierre Leaud protagonist) was truly in love with any of the women on his life. On the other hand, he found two women who, for one reason or another, did love him despite the fact that he was a filthy jerk-off. I think the direction, as static as it is sometimes, has a great accumulative effect. The last four or five scenes are incredibly intense. It's not something I'd watch again anytime soon, but I'm glad I did it this once. I'd be curious to check out the few other films Estauche made.

[Wryan]

Any thoughts on films I might watch this weekend?

A Silent Duel
The Rainbow Thief
Il Boom
Ashes of Time Redux
Portrait of Jennie
Flame and Citron
Distant
Pierrot le Fou
Michael the Brave
Ceddo
The Devil and Daniel Webster
Devil's Backbone
Silent Light
The Cyclist
Little Girl Who Sold the Sun
Britannia Hospital
Marooned in Iraq
Morning Patrol
The Pied Piper
Swept Away
The Stolen Airship
The Organizer
America, America
Cairo Station
Never on Sunday
The Spies (Clouzot)
La Chienne
The Cloud-Capped Star
Yaaba
Moolaade
White Dove
A Time for Drunken Horses
The Devils
Rien Ne Va Plus
Finnegans Wake
These are the Damned
Letters from a Dead Man
After the Rain
Truly Madly Deeply
Love and Honor
A Tale of Two Sisters
The Good, the Bad and the Weird
Hitokiri
Tora-San
Angel-A
Whatever Happened to Baby Jane
Birdman of Alcatraz
Brief Crossing
Casualties of War
Oedipus Rex
Trouble Every Day
Samurai Banners
Glory
In America
Khrustalev My Car!
Kramer vs. Kramer
The Swamp
Nine Queens
Peter Pan
Places in the Heart
Berlin Alexanderplatz
Humanity and Paper Balloons
Shivers
The Atomic Submarine
Floating Clouds

What Peter Pan? PJ Hogan's? That's a great great movie.

[Qrazy]

The Devil and Daniel Webster - Very good to great film that rockets into the stratospheres of awesome every time Walter Huston makes an appearance as Mr. Scratch. The story is a pretty good one although I must say in lieu of recent political/economic events the happy ending unnerved me slightly. I don't blame the film in the slightest. A second chance for the protagonist is in order even if he doesn't completely deserve it. However it also made me think of the recent government bail out and all the fat cats on Wall Street who were given a second chance after their greed helped run us all into the ground. What did they do? Use some of the bail out money to give themselves the hefty year end bonuses built into their contracts. In the film the protag of TD&DW suffers little to no repercussions for his heinous actions. His wife and son return to him and the townsfolk forgive him. So basically he received seven years of good luck and riches for next to nothing. When faced with his impending doom he claims that all he got was money and unhappiness and that it was a crooked deal all along he seemed to be damn well enjoying himself during those seven years of prosperity.

[Qrazy]

What Peter Pan? PJ Hogan's? That's a great great movie.

Yep.

[Wryan]

The Devil and Daniel Webster - Very good to great film that rockets into the stratospheres of awesome every time Walter Huston makes an appearance as Mr. Scratch.

Yes and yes. And the hoedown scene is hard to beat. I think I was sweating.

[Qrazy]

Yes and yes. And the hoedown scene is hard to beat. I think I was sweating.

My only problem with that scene is it doesn't built to any climax. It gets faster and faster and then just sort of fades out. That's the the most frustrating kind of sex! Erm, I mean scene.

[Wryan]

My only problem with that scene is it doesn't built to any climax. It gets faster and faster and then just sort of fades out. That's the the most frustrating kind of sex! Erm, I mean scene.

I didn't mind. I just treat scenes like that as songs that don't have a definite climax but rather fade out, suggesting that they keep going, perhaps in some alternate plane where they don't stop at all.

[Qrazy]

I didn't mind. I just treat scenes like that as songs that don't have a definite climax but rather fade out, suggesting that they keep going, perhaps in some alternate plane where they don't stop at all.

Meh maybe, I think it would have benefited from a violin string snapping or something breaking and the protag looking around bewildered or some such... foreshadowing the eventual destruction of his new lifestyle.

[Ezee E]

Criterion films are starting to appear on the Netflix Instant Watch.

:pritch:

[balmakboor]

Criterion films are starting to appear on the Netflix Instant Watch.

:pritch:

Are you referring to a press release? Or did you stumble upon some? Which ones?

[Ezee E]

Just been stumbling across a few. Pierret Le Fou (sp?), Great Expectations (Lean), and a couple others.

[balmakboor]

Just been stumbling across a few. Pierret Le Fou (sp?), Great Expectations (Lean), and a couple others.

Cool. Thanks. I'll be on the lookout.

[Duncan]

Is The Mission fairly indicative of Johnnie To's style and interests? Are his other films better? Because that was decent, I guess, but I wasn't really feeling it. A lot of posing with guns and wicked-coolness.

[Sven]

Is The Mission fairly indicative of Johnnie To's style and interests? Are his other films better? Because that was decent, I guess, but I wasn't really feeling it. A lot of posing with guns and wicked-coolness.

I haven't seen The Mission, but from the three films of his I have seen, I'd say my impressions were that of a similarly unimpressedness with its "wicked-coolness." I called Election "triad kitsch" because it's this tacky mish-mash of gangster cliches that left me in the cold cold cold.

[Qrazy]

Is The Mission fairly indicative of Johnnie To's style and interests? Are his other films better? Because that was decent, I guess, but I wasn't really feeling it. A lot of posing with guns and wicked-coolness.

It is indicative of his style and interests. To's value as a director lies in his unique stylistic approach to genre material. I don't think you'd get much out of Exiled but you could give Election I and II and PTU a look.

Throwdown, Mad Monk and The Sparrow are also quality but I'd try the above three first.

Frankly I think there's much more to his characters and narrative than posturing coolness though.

[Qrazy]

I haven't seen The Mission, but from the three films of his I have seen, I'd say my impressions were that of a similarly unimpressedness with its "wicked-coolness." I called Election "triad kitsch" because it's this tacky mish-mash of gangster cliches that left me in the cold cold cold.

Which triad films do you prefer? Personally I prefer To's style to Woo's. Yimou's foray into things with Shanghai Triad was rather half baked and ineffectual imo. Infernal Affairs was OK, preferred The Departed, both Scorsese and To have a much cleaner aesthetic than Lau although I might give Young and Dangerous a look at some point. City on Fire was fairly crappy I thought... Still haven't seen Kar Wai's As Tears Go By. Have to watch that and Blueberry Nights to knock off his filmography.

[Sven]

Which triad films do you prefer?

In all honesty, the only one I can think of that I even remotely respond positively to is Zhang Yimou's Shanghai Triad, which is beautiful and horrifying, if a bit remote.

[Qrazy]

In all honesty, the only one I can think of that I even remotely respond positively to is Zhang Yimou's Shanghai Triad, which is beautiful and horrifying, if a bit remote.

Ehh I didn't like it although it's been so many years I no longer have specific criticisms. I just remember nothing really working. Had no investment in the characters or the story and while every once in a while there was a stand out shot by and large it was visually subpar compared to the rest of Yimou's filmography. I also remember the film sort of echoing Mean Streets approach towards location repetition but to no real effect.

[Duncan]

Frankly I think there's much more to his characters and narrative than posturing coolness though. I guess. But in The Mission at least, would you say there's much more to his characters beyond posturing, coolness, and the same goddamn male driven, brotherhood loyalty dilemmas that plague every gangster film and have been explored and re-explored countless times before, often with much greater depth and complexity, and better music to boot?

[megladon8]

Tried to watch two horrors last night. Couldn't finish either of them because of how terrible they were.

Dance of the Dead and Poultrygeist: Night of the Chicken Dead.

Awful, awful, awful.

I don't think Troma's sense of humor is for me at all.

[Qrazy]

I guess. But in The Mission at least, would you say there's much more to his characters beyond posturing, coolness, and the same goddamn male driven, brotherhood loyalty dilemmas that plague every gangster film and have been explored and re-explored countless times before, often with much greater depth and complexity, and better music to boot?

To is certainly not treading thematically fresh soil. Have the themes of brotherhood and loyalty been done better elsewhere? Sure. But theme is not To's focus. These themes are so often reused because they provide a basic backdrop upon which to explore a genre from a fresh aesthetic perspective. This is true of Melville, Suzuki, Dassin, Mann, Leone, etc. Now, most of these guys bring more than a unique aesthetic to the table for sure, but in my opinion it is primarily their unique aesthetic and the personal atmosphere they create which gives their films individuality, authenticity and value. The focus of The Mission is primarily on style, tension and set pieces. Although the narrative and it's characters are certainly valued much more so than most genre films (by this I mean pulp cinema), To's focus is definitely on formal rather than narrative concerns. Set piece construction and tension, for instance the staging of the escalator sequence are what To cares most about. The film is ultimately a very tight, efficient and visually nuanced entry into the crime genre. One of the best films of all time? No, not all, but definitely a strong crime film and an effectively suspenseful film in general.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Okay, so, Heat.

I really enjoyed it, but it felt a little too long. I would've cut the stuff with Natalie Portman. Her role wasn't well-acted, nor was it necessary. It felt like a contrived way to create some sense of closure for Pacino and Venora.

I also felt what I feel during many of these kinds of movies - the women aren't interesting. They just sit around and sigh while the men run off and play cowboys and indians. I don't know how to remedy it. Obviously women aren't a large part of mob heists and shoot-outs, but that means we're stuck with the usual scenes where capable actresses wonder why their husbands are never home.

It's terribly fun to see this film in light of its influence on movies like The Departed and The Dark Knight, especially the latter. One shot that descends from the LA landscape to a solitary truck is clearly homaged as the opening shot to TDK. Even the quiet, ominous strings are repeated.

This is Robert De Niro's movie. His restraint really sells his weariness and age. That scene in the diner is fantastic, because both men essentially admit to being too old and too stuck in their ways to cease self-destruction. But Pacino goes overboard on occasion. The "great ass" line is great, but in a terrible sort of way.

That Val Kilmer was able to film this and Batman Forever at the same time shocks me. His Bruce Wayne was phoned in, but this role offers him dimension and edge. One of the highlights of the movie is watching Kilmer professionally execute half the LAPD in broad daylight after a bank heist.

The film looks beautiful. I love its constant use of full-horizon cityscapes. I don't think I've seen a film so effectively communicate Los Angeles as a space all its own. For a few hours, I forgot this city is one big, ugly concrete slab.

The film's emphasis on character scenes reminded me of Collateral. Both movies focus on weary middle-aged men whose similarities overcome their opposing viewpoints. But I think I like Collateral more. I prefer its laser-focus to Heat's wider urban sprawl.

Overall, it's a very good movie with some great moments. Some of my favorites:

The diner scene.
Pacino realizing what the gangsters are after: "Us."
The no-frills execution in the hotel towards the end.
De Niro very nearly breaking his rule.
Pacino taking his television.
Kilmer's precise shooting.

[Qrazy]

Okay, so, Heat.

I really enjoyed it, but it felt a little too long. I would've cut the stuff with Natalie Portman. Her role wasn't well-acted, nor was it necessary. It felt like a contrived way to create some sense of closure for Pacino and Venora.


I don't remember how well acted her role is but I have to disagree about it being unnecessary. I think her suicide attempt is very necessary and a pivotal moment for Pacino's character in the film.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I don't remember how well acted her role is but I have to disagree about it being unnecessary. I think her suicide attempt is very necessary and a pivotal moment for Pacino's character in the film.

It's "necessary," in that it's a somewhat transparent effort to offer an emotional low point for Pacino. I didn't like how I only saw her one or two times before then. To me, she felt like a plot device, not a character.

However, one of the most interesting scenes for me occurs immediately after Pacino and Venora come to some sort of understanding over Portman's suicide attempt. He gets a page, and she says he can go.

Then he practically leaps down the stairs.

As a viewer, I was wondering: is he funneling his emotions or is he escaping them? Is he using the previous scene or running away?

[Qrazy]

It's "necessary," in that it's a somewhat transparent effort to offer an emotional low point for Pacino. I didn't like how I only saw her one or two times before then. To me, she felt like a plot device, not a character.

However, one of the most interesting scenes for me occurs immediately after Pacino and Venora come to some sort of understanding over Portman's suicide attempt. He gets a page, and she says he can go.

Then he practically leaps down the stairs.

As a viewer, I was wondering: is he funneling his emotions or is he escaping them? Is he using the previous scene or running away?

I wouldn't say the goal is to have an emotional low point for Pacino but rather to have his family life severely intruding upon his work life so as to bring home to him the effect his choices have on the people around him. He's not just some good guy chasing bad guys. We of course realize this much sooner but he needs a catalyst to help him realize his work and his home life are inextricably linked. To answer your question above I think he's doing both. He's taking the rage, frustration and sadness he feels towards himself and his situation and projecting them outward, using these emotions to fuel his work drive. He's trying to use his work as some sort of catharsis but in the end it can't be really. 'Getting' De Niro doesn't fulfill him the way he needs it to.

For me Portman's role felt token as you say until the suicide attempt and then it became much much volatile and real.

[D_Davis]

I, too, prefer Collateral.

[balmakboor]

I can't believe it. Netflix finally got it right. I just filled out their new survey of my tastes and they presented me with a new homepage of recommendations. Because I like the documentaries of Robert Greenwald, they insist I should check out Xanadu. I added it immediately.

[Qrazy]

So how about that film and stuff.

[Bosco B Thug]

Any thoughts on films I might watch this weekend?

Pierrot le Fou - Godard not being as pointed as his very particular approach and rhetoric calls for and needs to be.
The Devils - Just found where I can find a copy of this, I've heard good things.
A Tale of Two Sisters - Awesome, but even I feel there's a bit too much arbitrary "scary shit happening!" moments. Great, though.
Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? Pretty much the definition of grotesque, but this needs a re-watch for me.


Okay, I need to immediately put James Gray on my "must watch anything he does now" radar. He's 2 for 2 so far. Two Lovers is fucking fantastic.

I'll get to his previous two films real fast. I'm sort of eager to finally watch a James Gray film, I feel he might surprise me and be a young director whose films don't necessarily seem too unique or idiosyncratically auteurist - instead just sort of subdued and low-key - but who ends up applying the modern filmmaking sensibility with really classical-style virtuosity.

Okay, those are really unfounded expectations to put on him. In fairer terms, I'm hoping for another Jonathan Glazer with Gray. The mixture of occasional effusive here-and-there acclaim, a very low-radar but mostly-positive critical reception, and the little-to-no mainstream recognition - all of which characterize Glazer for me - perks my curiosity.

[Ezee E]

Yeah Faz, that genre breakdown has been great to me as well. No longer being recommended ridiculous stuff for watching the Watchmen short.

Also, Australia ain't that bad. I'm about half way through and have to call it a night unfortunately, but I really like the classic feel of it. I can't really compare it to anything, but it's very nostalgic.

And I wonder if James Gray is loved anywhere else besides here...

[Derek]

And I wonder if James Gray is loved anywhere else besides here...

He actually gets a good deal of love from hardcore auteurists, particularly the folks at a_film_by.

[The Mike]

Also, Australia ain't that bad. I'm about half way through and have to call it a night unfortunately, but I really like the classic feel of it. I can't really compare it to anything, but it's very nostalgic.This was probably my favorite thing about it too. While it didn't necessarily feel like a film set around 1939, it did feel like a film made around 1939. Definitely had the epic feel of the era down.

[Winston*]

I wish Miike had just made Sukiyaki Western Django in Japanese. I don't have any problems believing a hybrid Japanese Old West world, I have a harder time believing a world where everyone speaks like they don't understand what the words they are saying mean (yes, I'm including Quentin Tarantino in this).

Pretty cool movie otherwise though.

[soitgoes...]

I wish Miike had just made Sukiyaki Western Django in Japanese. I don't have any problems believing a hybrid Japanese Old West world, I have a harder time believing a world where everyone speaks like they don't understand what the words they are saying mean (yes, I'm including Quentin Tarantino in this).

Pretty cool movie otherwise though.
This is true, though others will be quick to disagree.

[Winston*]

This is true, though others will be quick to disagree.

If an Italian director remade this movie, I would be so happy.

[EyesWideOpen]

I wish Miike had just made Sukiyaki Western Django in Japanese. I don't have any problems believing a hybrid Japanese Old West world, I have a harder time believing a world where everyone speaks like they don't understand what the words they are saying mean (yes, I'm including Quentin Tarantino in this).

Pretty cool movie otherwise though.

Yep, I had the same problem with Imprint.

[balmakboor]

This is one of the better lists I've seen -- Top 10 paranoid films. I guess Wired does good list.

http://www.wired.com/entertainment/hollywood/multimedia/2009/03/gallery_paranoidfilms

I agree with 9 out of 10. I haven't seen The Game for far too long to decide. I remember being underwhelmed by the ending or something. Can't remember the specifics.

[NickGlass]

And I wonder if James Gray is loved anywhere else besides here...

All of France, apparently.

[jamaul]

So, if the prom queen, Mullholland Drive, got wasted at a large party and somehow ended up in her best friend's bedroom with the dorky, kinda funny and mostly unattractive boy she always used to make fun of, Idiocracy, imagine if this unlikely couple coupled together in drunken unsatisfactory and yet, somehow successful sex and nine months later conceived a child. Now this child grew up and took on some of the more pleasant attributes of his mother, but a lot of the nerdy and irreverent qualities of his father, became known as the class clown, a somewhat elitist, punk rock-loving smart ass that attempted to hide his heritage by borrowing his identity from the likes of The Manchurian Candidate, A Clockwork Orange, 60's Godard films, and even his younger brother Donnie Darko, while also being known as a kid you'd usually find smoking lots of pot with his intellectual peers discussing metaphysics, time travel and theories about dimensions existing outside the third, this mish-mash of half-assed ideas, crack-pot concepts and half-baked conspiracy theories would have become a college drop-out who unsuccessfully majored in poly-sci and grew up to be revered by a small circle of admirers and followers. His name: Southland Tales.

I watched this film for the first time two nights ago, and while I desperately want to hate it, I can't find it in my means to dismiss such an ambitious, gloriously fatuous, over-the-top, extremely funny, inspiringly casted work.

[baby doll]

So, if the prom queen, Mullholland Drive, got wasted at a large party and somehow ended up in her best friend's bedroom with the dorky, kinda funny and mostly unattractive boy she always used to make fun of, Idiocracy, imagine if this unlikely couple coupled together in drunken unsatisfactory and yet, somehow successful sex and nine months later conceived a child. Now this child grew up and took on some of the more pleasant attributes of his mother, but a lot of the nerdy and irreverent qualities of his father, became known as the class clown, a somewhat elitist, punk rock-loving smart ass that attempted to hide his heritage by borrowing his identity from the likes of The Manchurian Candidate, A Clockwork Orange, 60's Godard films, and even his younger brother Donnie Darko, while also being known as a kid you'd usually find smoking lots of pot with his intellectual peers discussing metaphysics, time travel and theories about dimensions existing outside the third, this mish-mash of half-assed ideas, crack-pot concepts and half-baked conspiracy theories would have become a college drop-out who unsuccessfully majored in poly-sci and grew up to be revered by a small circle of admirers and followers. His name: Southland Tales.

I watched this film for the first time two nights ago, and while I desperately want to hate it, I can't find it in my means to dismiss such an ambitious, gloriously fatuous, over-the-top, extremely funny, inspiringly casted work.Repped for style.

[jamaul]

Repped for style.

Have you seen it? And what was your take?

Also, love the love for Gran Torino.

[baby doll]

Have you seen it? And what was your take?

Also, love the love for Gran Torino.Actually, I haven't. As for Gran Torino, I'm working on an essay about it for my blog, so let's hope I can finish it. (It's already super long and boring.)

[Rowland]

Reverse Shot's Twenty Shots to be henceforth retired from film vocabulary. (http://blogs.indiewire.com/reverseshot/archives/twenty_shots_to_be_retired/)

[Qrazy]

Reverse Shot's Twenty Shots to be henceforth retired from film vocabulary. (http://blogs.indiewire.com/reverseshot/archives/twenty_shots_to_be_retired/)

They used nonplussed incorrectly. Other than that good list. Can you do me a favor though and start a new thread with it? The reason I ask is I'm editing someone's screenplay right now and two of the things on the list are in the screenplay and should be edited out. It got me to thinking though about all the other filmic cliches out there and maybe in a new thread we could all help compile a list of things to avoid for beginning filmmakers.

[Watashi]

The Matrix turns 10 years old today.

Hard to believe it's been a decade already.

[Qrazy]

The Matrix turns 10 years old today.

Hard to believe it's been a decade already.

Or maybe that's just what they want you to believe... ! ?

[jamaul]

The Matrix turns 10 years old today.

Hard to believe it's been a decade already.

Wow. And Eyes Wide Shut and The Phantom Menace are close behind. EWS just keeps getting better with age. TPM still sucks though.

[balmakboor]

It seems that a deluxe Bluray Criterion of Cronos is on the way. Is the movie any good? Maybe I should catch up on my Del Toro.

[Qrazy]

It seems that a deluxe Bluray Criterion of Chronos is on the way. Is the movie any good? Maybe I should catch up on my Del Toro.

It's fine, better than much of his later output but I can't say I'm much of a fan. Worth seeing once.

[Derek]

It seems that a deluxe Bluray Criterion of Cronos is on the way. Is the movie any good? Maybe I should catch up on my Del Toro.

I found it fairly dull and uninspired. I like it less than the more recent Del Toro's I've seen.

[Qrazy]

I found it fairly dull and uninspired. I like it less than the more recent Del Toro's I've seen.


Laberinto del fauno, El (2006) - B-
Cronos (1993) - C
Blade II (2002) - C
Hellboy (2004) - C-
Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008) - C-
Mimic (1997) - D+

[Winston*]

Cronos was boring.

[balmakboor]

Laberinto del fauno, El (2006) - B-
Cronos (1993) - C
Hellboy (2004) - C-
Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008) - C-
Blade II (2002) - C-
Mimic (1997) - D+


It looks like I started at the top and there's little reason to continue.

[Rowland]

Mimic (1997) - D+I wouldn't go that low, but yes, Mimic is disappointing, especially since its first act shows so much promise. At least it had enough balls to kill off some kids, and it exhibits a great deal more craft than the likes of Peter Hyams' cruddy The Relic, also released in 1997. The DTV sequels are better than that sort of fare tends to be however, particularly the third, which is a genuinely neat, formally assured Rear Window variation, only with killer bugs and the dude who played the black ranger in the original Power Rangers series.

[Qrazy]

It looks like I started at the top and there's little reason to continue.

Yeah, I find him underwhelming. I've heard Devil's Backbone is either his best or second best though so I'll get to that eventually. And I remain cautiously optimistic about The Hobbit. I think he'll deliver in the same vein as Pan's Labyrinth.

I know Grouchy loves him. I'd be interested to know how he rates his work.

[Qrazy]

I wouldn't go that low, but yes, Mimic is disappointing, especially since its first act shows so much promise. At least it had enough balls to kill off some kids, and it exhibits a great deal more craft than the likes of Peter Hyams' cruddy The Relic, also released in 1997. The DTV sequels are better than that sort of fare tends to be however, particularly the third, which is a genuinely neat, formally assured Rear Window variation, only with killer bugs and the dude who played the black ranger in the original Power Rangers series.

I actually sort of liked Mimic as a kid but there's just too much wrong with it for me to give it a C or higher. There are some genuinely creepy, interesting moments... for instance the bug at the end of the subway platform. I find the premise of the film to be an absurd and yet inspired idea. I never saw Relic although I actually did read the book about a decade or more ago.

Actually I prefer Blade II to the Hellboy films (edited).

[[ETM]]

Cronos is in many ways a "trial run" for Del Toro. He seems to test out concepts and revisit them later on in his career - Devil's Backbone and Cronos are watchable on their own, but once you've seen Pan and Hellboy (in terms of concept development) they can underwhelm.

Qrazy is definitely not a fan, it's worth a download to see how you dig it, fasozupow. For what it's worth, I didn't finish it.

[Raiders]

It looks like I started at the top and there's little reason to continue.

Please don't use Qrazy to determine these sort of things.

[Qrazy]

Please don't use Qrazy to determine these sort of things.

Your ranking/ratings?

Also just to clarify for everyone my scale:

A - Excellent
B - Above Average
C - Average
D - Below Average
F - Fail

Average not meaning the average film. The statistical average film from contemporary Hollywood would probably be a D or an F. I mean an average, decently made film.

[Ezee E]

Cronos is alright.

Love Blade 2 until it goes WWE on everyone.

[Raiders]

Your ranking/ratings?

Pan's Labyrinth [****]
The Devil's Backbone [***½]
Blade II [***½]
Cronos [***]
Hellboy [**½]
Mimic [**]

[Qrazy]

Pan's Labyrinth [****]
The Devil's Backbone [***½]
Blade II [***½]
Cronos [***]
Hellboy [**½]
Mimic [**]

Doesn't seem that different to me except that you like them all a full grade more than I do. Our ordering is about the same.

[Raiders]

Doesn't seem that different to me except that you like them all a full grade more than I do. Our ordering is about the same.

It wasn't the ordering but the ratings I was commenting on. I think there are at least two or three more worth seeing after Pan's Labyrinth.

[Qrazy]

It wasn't the ordering but the ratings I was commenting on. I think there are at least two or three more worth seeing after Pan's Labyrinth.

Fair, well I acknowledge that The Devil's Backbone might be very good. Blade 2 is an OK sequel. It's certainly infinitely better than Blade 3. Maybe it's more of a C than a C-. Still either way we both believe Fasozupow started at the top.

Blade - B-
Blade 2 - C
Blade 3 - F

Judging by how god fucking awful The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen was I guess the original Blade was just a happy accident.

[megladon8]

In order of release date...

Cronos - 9 (touching, original take on vampirism, but I wouldn't really even call it a horror)

The Devil's Backbone - 8.5 (need a rewatch for this one; great, but not brilliant, and not entirely effective in its scares)

Blade II - 9 (one of the best action films of the decade)

Hellboy - 8 (a great superhero film, but could have used more horror elements)

Pan's Labyrinth - 9.5 (Del Toro's most accomplished film to date, a beautiful fairy tale)

Hellboy II - 6.5 (a beautiful mess)

[Sycophant]

Pan's Labyrinth: 89
Blade II: 72
Hellboy: 66
Hellboy II: 51

[Qrazy]

I don't really see that big a difference between Hellboy I and II. Anyone care to enlighten me what's so wonderful about the first one?

[[ETM]]

I don't really see that big a difference between Hellboy I and II. Anyone care to enlighten me what's so wonderful about the first one?

I don't know either. Both suffer from incredibly badly rendered characters, they have more depth in 2D, in the source material. No amount of eye candy can save that.

[megladon8]

I don't really see that big a difference between Hellboy I and II. Anyone care to enlighten me what's so wonderful about the first one?


No terrible pop music cues, less attempts at lame slapstick humor, and the first one (for as much as I wish it had more horror elements in it) felt more like an offshoot of H.P. Lovecraft's writings than the second movie, which felt like halfway between a superhero movie and a fairy tale like Pan's Labyrinth.

Honestly, I can understand why some would prefer this approach, but it was like, I wanted more of the first film, but going in the horror direction. It ended up going in the complete opposite direction from what I was hoping for, and I was greatly disappointed.

Oh, also, there's no real sense of danger in the second movie at all, because every threat is met with "luckily the Curse of Medula Oblongata was created to fight this beast!". The movie continually makes up its own rules, so I never found any of the monsters or villains to be anything more than pretty imagery.

[Sven]

Cronos is neato.
Mimic is terrific.
The Devil's Backbone is graceful.
Blade 2 is dumb.
Hellboy is fun.
Pan's Labyrinth is weak.
Hellboy II is Harry Potter.

Basically:
The Devil's Backbone - ****
Cronos - ***1/2
Mimic - ***1/2
Hellboy - ***
Blade 2 - **
Pan's Labyrinth - *1/2
Hellboy II - *1/2

[megladon8]

Your one-word reviews are awesome, Sven. Especially the last one - said it perfectly :)

PS - you have to check your PM's!

[Spun Lepton]

The Devil's Backbone -- 9/10
Pan's Labyrinth -- 9/10
Hellboy 2 -- 8/10
Cronos -- 7/10
Blade 2 -- 7/10
Hellboy -- 7/10
Mimic -- 5/10

[Sycophant]

Oh, God. Hellboy II is totally Harry Potter.

I have often said that it plays like those 90-minute long VHS tapes that condensed a season of a television series to a poorly paced feature length film.

[D_Davis]

The Devil's Backbone - 6/10
Mimic - 3/10
Hellboy - 6/10
Blade 2 - 6/10
Pan's Labyrinth - 1/10

[Qrazy]

The Devil's Backbone - 6/10
Mimic - 3/10
Hellboy - 6/10
Blade 2 - 6/10
Pan's Labyrinth - 1/10

Heh, guess you like him even less than I do. Although, why so hard on Labyrinth?

[Scar]

Heh, guess you like him even less than I do. Although, why so hard on Labyrinth?

Make it good...

[megladon8]

A 1/10 seems pretty steep.

That would make me think that one saw absolutely nothing good in the movie at all. Not one good performance, not one interesting creature or element of the plot, not one cool shot or really nicely edited sequence.

You really hated it that much? I remember you not liking it when it came out, but I didn't think you 1/10 hated it.

[D_Davis]

find the old Pan's thread, I spell it out in there.

I can't spend any more time talking about that movie.

[Spinal]

A 1/10 seems pretty steep.

That would make me think that one saw absolutely nothing good in the movie at all. Not one good performance, not one interesting creature or element of the plot, not one cool shot or really nicely edited sequence.

If I hate a film, I hate a film and I rate it accordingly. I don't really give a shit that Braveheart might have good cinematography or Moulin Rouge! might have cool costumes. I hate the very essence of what those films are about, so the other stuff seems superfluous.

I suspect this is how DD feels about Pan's Labyrinth.

[megladon8]

If I hate a film, I hate a film and I rate it accordingly. I don't really give a shit that Braveheart might have good cinematography or Moulin Rouge! might have cool costumes. I hate the very essence of what those films are about, so the other stuff seems superfluous.

I suspect this is how DD feels about Pan's Labyrinth.


I agree, but if I hate a movie that's competently made I'll give it a slightly higher score than something I hated that looked like it was made by children.

I often find technical accomplishments admirable, regardless of my feelings towards the overall film.

[Sycophant]

I thought everyone was scoring this way:

Writing (Max 12 pts.)
Direction (Max 12 pts.)
Lead performances (Max 13 pts.)
Supporting performances (Max 8 pts.)
Editing (7 pts.)
Music (5 pts.)
Cinematography (8 pts.)
Locations (4 pts.)
Special effects (11 pts.)
Sound clarity (6 pts.)
Sound effects/surround niftiness (7 pts.)
Costume design (6 pts.)
Craft services (1 pts.)

Someone's doing this wrong.

[Spinal]

I thought everyone was scoring this way:

Writing (Max 12 pts.)
Direction (Max 12 pts.)
Lead performances (Max 13 pts.)
Supporting performances (Max 8 pts.)
Editing (7 pts.)
Music (5 pts.)
Cinematography (8 pts.)
Locations (4 pts.)
Special effects (11 pts.)
Sound clarity (6 pts.)
Sound effects/surround niftiness (7 pts.)
Costume design (6 pts.)
Craft services (1 pts.)

Someone's doing this wrong.

Hmmm, let me try this for the last film I saw, Rachel Getting Married ...

Writing 9
Direction 10
Lead Performances 10
Supporting Performances 5
Editing 5
Music 3
Cinematography 6
Locations 2
Special Effects 4
Sound Clarity 6
Sound effects/surround niftiness 4
Costume design 4
Craft Services 1

Final score: 69

Seems low, but the film really could have used more CGI.

[Sycophant]

Here's the report card for the film I've most recently seen, a rewatch of Kikujiro, a movie in my top ten.

Writing 10
Direction 12
Lead performances 10
Supporting performances 7
Editing 7
Music 5
Cinematography 6
Locations 3
Special effects 2
Sound clarity 4
Sound effects/surround niftiness 2
Costume design 3
Craft services 0

Sadly, it's only a 71.

[lovejuice]

let me try this with hedwig, one of my absolute favorite film of all time.

Writing 9
Direction 12
Lead performances 13
Supporting performances 5
Editing 7
Music 5
Cinematography 6
Locations 2
Special effects 8
Sound clarity 6
Sound effects/surround niftiness 7
Costume design 4
Craft services 1

sum: 85. guess, no movie will ever receive an A from me then.

[Russ]

Spinal, I guess I've missed your mentions of Moulin Rouge! : can you direct me to a thread where you elaborate on your hate some more? Fwiw, I love it, and would try to address some of your issues if you share them.

[Qrazy]

OK, who the fuck is in charge of picking the master of the month on Karagarga. We've gone from Sarno, softcore porn master to Ben Stiller. Christ.

[soitgoes...]

OK, who the fuck is in charge of picking the master of the month on Karagarga. We've gone from Sarno, softcore porn master to Ben Stiller. Christ.Oh Qrazy, what else happens on April 1st?

[Qrazy]

Oh Qrazy, what else happens on April 1st?

*facepalm*

[Grouchy]

I know Grouchy loves him. I'd be interested to know how he rates his work.
1. Devil's Backbone - my favorite, and the one that showcases more of his usual themes. Kickass film.
2. Cronos - I think it's one of the greatest vampire films. Also a virtuoso central performance by Federico Luppi.
3. Pan's Labyrinth - almost a new version of Backbone, though.
4. Hellboy
5. Blade II
6. Hellboy II: The Golden Army
7. Mimic - the only one I haven't liked. Like Rowland says, it's a waste of a terrific first act.

[Grouchy]

I'm not sure why I bought a ticket for Nick & Norah's Infinite Playlist. Well.. it's crap. I don't know what I was expecting from it. I also didn't know it starred that idiot from Juno. The girl who plays the shy rich girl is very beautiful, but she should try some other line of job. The bitchy girl was good. The only remotely funny character was the alcoholic girlfriend.

http://jdiff.ticketsolve.com/i/photos/0001/9413/i_sell_the_dead1_1024_72_large .jpg

Ok. So later in the day I saw this really curious film called I Sell the Dead. It's only the third film festival that shows it, so chances are you guys haven't heard about it yet. It's a British comedy/horror film with a great cast - Dominic Monaghan, Ron Perlman, Angus Scrimm from Phantasm and Larry Fessenden. They're all tangled together in the incredibly profitable business of grave robbing. The whole film has a delightful '70s Hammer atmosphere to it (the art direction is very impressive), and the humor goes from dry and deadpan to pure slapstick. It makes great use of non-digital FX, particularly during the (mildly spoiling here) undead scenes. It's really a difficult film to pin down, because, like I said, it (ab)uses all types of comedy, from the broad and silly to the refined, so it gets really uneven. It's also sort of an epistolar tale, so it contains many micro tales set in the world of grave robbing. The credits and some transitions directly reference EC Horror comic-books too. At 85 minutes, however, I Sell the Dead is way too short. You get the feeling that you've been introduced to a world of characters and mythology that the filmmakers don't give you time to explore, maybe for budget concerns. A sequel with the surviving characters would be welcome in this particular case.

Then I saw Guy Maddin's Archangel and remembered why it's such a drag to watch more than two films in the same day. Sometimes I found my brain struggling to understand what the hell was going on. Regardless, I didn't think much of the film. I'd only previously seen Saddest Music in the World by Maddin, and I think that one was much better. This is like an anarchist comedy that doesn't ever get absurd enough to be memorable. Sure, I laughed at most of the good jokes (the fat man with the guts was impressive), and I suffered my way through the development of a plot I couldn't give a rat's ass about and which was way too complicated for its own good.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3387/3301969178_173e45324f.jpg

The most impressive film of the bunch, though, was Hunger. Every praise they gave to this McQueen guy in Cannes or whatever is well deserved. While the film sort of assumes you know all about the 1981 hunger strikes prior to seeing it, it really submerges you into the misery of prison so that, even if sometimes I had to guess at the missing links between the scenes, I was glued to the screen every second. That 17-minute dialogue shot is completely fucking hipnotic. Fassbender is a really good actor, and his stare is really something on par with the classic Kubrick mad-eye stares of cinema. McQueen's past as a visual and conceptual artist is obvious, too, from his use of strong colors and obsessive framing. This is a movie told almost entirely from details instead of dialogue, exception made of the long dialogue take. Reading about the strikes after seeing it really opened my eyes to how cleverly McQueen put the political struggle on the back of the scenery and focused on the human elements. A memorable movie but not an easy one to watch. I saw no less than four walk-outs, one of them with loud complaining included.

[Dead & Messed Up]

P2 was either spectacularly awful or kinda twisted and fun. I'm leaning towards the latter, if only because more movies need Wes Bentley, covered in blood, sashaying to Elvis Presley music.

I thought it was going to be based mostly on the suspense of cat-and-mouse chases, which it's certainly not short on, but there's a shocking amount of gore, and the final shot is graceful and kinda lovely.

It's hardly perfect, but I dig movies like this, where a couple of characters square off for ninety minutes in a closed situation. Red Eye, Stuck, Phone Booth. And, yeah, P2.

[Cult]

That 17-minute dialogue shot is completely fucking hipnotic.

I agree completely. It was the most masterful scene in a very masterful movie.

[B-side]

I completely understand Guillermo Del Toro hate, even if I don't hate him myself. Both Hellboy movies are fun and Pan's Labyrinth is pretty great. I see where the caricatures grate people, but I look at it as a live-action Disney fairy tale film with the balls to actually display the violence and delve into the tormented thoughts and psyche we all assumed would be occurring in these types of situations.

[Morris Schæffer]

Pan's Labyrinth ***
The Devil's Backbone **½
Blade II *½
Hellboy **
Mimic **

Some of these are solidly made, but feature generic, uninteresting material. At least to me.

[Boner M]

Transsiberian was actually a pretty darn tight and relatively unpredictable thriller for a while, with fine performances all round and beautiful photography... and then Ben Kingsley reappears and it gets kinda sillier and sillier before I didn't care anymore.

[Ezee E]

Transsiberian was actually a pretty darn tight and relatively unpredictable thriller for a while, with fine performances all round and beautiful photography... and then Ben Kingsley reappears and it gets kinda sillier and sillier before I didn't care anymore.
Pretty much my feelings on it as well.

Australia is also too long for its own good. Yeesh. Worked for a while though.

[Ezee E]

I'm not sure what to think of Chop Shop. The neorealist approach works, and I like the characters involved. But, the movie seems to give false hope at the end with the last shot.

Anyone else see this? It probably is worth watching despite my lower rating.

[balmakboor]

I re-watched "The Red Shoes" this evening so I could review it. Our film society is screening it next week. This is the review that spilled out this evening:

Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger, known as The Archers, regularly opened their movies with an arrow striking a target. If the arrow struck the bull’s eye, that was their opinion of the finished product. In “The Red Shoes,” that arrow hits the bull’s eye. Boy does it ever hit it.

Set in the ballet world, “The Red Shoes” tells a tale of three principle characters. Julian Craster (Marius Goring) is a talented young composer, brimming with enthusiasm, perhaps too much so. Victoria Page (Moira Shearer) is a beautiful and eager ballerina. Asked why she lives she says, “To dance.” And the master of the company is Boris Lermontov (Anton Walbrook in his most memorable performance). The three form one of the great tragic triangles in movie history.

I could write on and on about how gorgeous “The Red Shoes” is and how the Technicolor images are so vibrant and alive that they jump from the screen and envelope the viewer. It is stunning. Film director Martin Scorsese listed it among the greatest color films ever. But I’d rather describe to you my two pet ways of interpreting the movie.

The movie begins with college students rushing the cheap balcony seats of a ballet performance. Craster leads the way and nearly trips and tumbles over the balcony before sprawling out to hold three front row seats. He is there to hear the music. He immediately starts to bicker with two students there to see the dance. It is ears versus eyes, music against image.

The movie climaxes in an extended performance of the ballet of the title, which very quickly leaves realism behind and becomes a heart-stopping ballet of the cinema. Music and images clash and overlap and then merge with ocean waves even crashing into the stage at one point. It is also the passionate beginning of a romance between its composer/conductor Craster (ears) and dancing star Page (eyes, and her eyes are unforgettable).

Powell and Pressburger were celebrated for their innovations in the interplay of image and music. They pioneered the technique of playing music on the soundstage during shooting and choreographing character movements to the movement of the music. “The Red Shoes” is their ultimate showcase.

Horror director George Romero (“Dawn of the Dead”) has long admitted Powell and Pressburger among his favorite directors. And watching “The Red Shoes” makes this seem perfectly natural. The movie is dark, obsessive, and tortured. It plays like a horror film. And at the center is Lermontov, a character of brooding intensity. He constantly emerges from and then retreats back into the movie’s many expressionistic shadows. He is a character whose destructive nature borders on bloodlust.

Yes, in its aching heart, “The Red Shoes” is one of the all-time great vampire movies. As you watch, consider this: Lermontov is an elegantly dressed man with a pale complexion who is seen almost exclusively indoors or at night. When we see him outdoors in daylight, the cinematography is pointedly, blindingly bright and he always wears dark glasses as if cringing from the light.

And consider the way he treats Craster and Page as people to be sucked in, bled dry, and then discarded. “The Red Shoes” is like “Nosferatu” with the neck bites tastefully removed.

So, mark your calendars for Thursday, April 16 when Cinema 100 will screen “The Red Shoes” at the Grand Theaters. You will be in for a treat and one of the greatest movies the cinema has to offer.

“The Red Shoes” doesn’t carry a rating. It is a beautiful film, suitable for adults and teens, but maybe too dark – and in at least one particular moment too scary – for young children.

[Qrazy]

I re-watched "The Red Shoes" this evening so I could review it. Our film society is screening it next week. This is the review that spilled out this evening:

Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger, known as The Archers, regularly opened their movies with an arrow striking a target. If the arrow struck the bull’s eye, that was their opinion of the finished product. In “The Red Shoes,” that arrow hits the bull’s eye. Boy does it ever hit it.


Interesting, I never knew that. Do you know of a list or have a list of all the films they made and the respective arrow placement?

[Winston*]

Hey people who have seen Open City, did the copy you watched have subtitles over all the lines? Because the copy I've got only seems to have subtitles on like half of them.

EDIT: The Rossellini one, not the Korean one.

[soitgoes...]

My weekend:

Youth of the Beast (Suzuki)
Twenty-Four Eyes (Kinoshita)
Untamed (Naruse)
The Yakuza Papers (Fukasaku)
Kochiyama soshun (Yamanaka)

[Winston*]

And my copy of Tenebre is scratched and won't play the first scene. This is a failure of a movie night for Winston*. I'm going to go watch Battlestar Galactica.

[origami_mustache]

Weekend:
Z
Simon of the Desert
The Class


Even if You Walk and Walk (Koreeda, 2008)

Where did you see this?

[soitgoes...]

Where did you see this?
It's on KG. Don't know if that's how he saw it though.

[Boner M]

Mother Küsters Goes to Heaven
The Third Generation
Oasis
Robocop

Last two are rpt's and theatre viewings!

[B-side]

Where did you see this?

Right here, streaming. (http://www.watch-movies-links.net/movies/even_if_you_walk_and_walk/)

DVD quality, too. The subs are bad in that the letters can be screwy aka replaced with ] or occasionally capitalized in the wrong places, but you get used to them. You still know what's being said.

[Boner M]

Meanwhile, Japón is less a film than a string of art-film poses. Frequently striking to look at with it's overexposed shots and grainy 16mm 'scope photography, it's also so irritatingly affected and seemingly tailored for a Cannes slot, that it makes Kim Ki-Duk's filmography look like Don Siegel's in comparison. Over the course of its running time, there are graphic sex scenes between unattractive people (also an extended scene of two horses copulating, to anticipate the animalistic passion of the lead characters... or something), animal cruelty, closeups of weathered human faces, said faces staring pensively as the camera then proceeds to 360 degrees around the surrounding landscape, extensive use of Arvo Part and Shostakovich on the soundtrack, and sometimes all of these things at once. Reygadas has said his aim was to create the 'most beautiful film ever made', and if anything, his film confirms that beauty isn't made, it just happens... the result of working intuitively rather than cribbing from the Transcendental Cinema canon (Silent Light, for instance, was rather exceptional until the Ordet-redux ending).

[B-side]

Fando y Lis is insane even by Jodorowsky standards, and I couldn't be happier to say that. I'm honestly kinda surprised nobody discusses it. I'd say it might be the best Jodorowsky film he hasn't disowned. The film is permeated with Jodorowsky's guilt regarding past misogyny. I'd also wager it's probably the most uplifting film he's done that he hasn't disowned. Perhaps uplifting is the wrong word as it's still very grim, but it ends on a surprisingly romantic note. Jodorowsky utilizes a completely dry, high contrast black and white aesthetic, exaggerated dubbed sound effects and editing between past images in the film and flashbacks to further establish the film's sense of fantasy. Jodorowsky's absurdist style is perfectly in tact, and he creates scenarios that one can't help but raise an eyebrow at. The film is so effective at creating an isolated, helpless stage for these two it's hard not to yearn for the more fantastical segments, and I see this as a positive thing.

[balmakboor]

Interesting, I never knew that. Do you know of a list or have a list of all the films they made and the respective arrow placement?

I haven't found a list yet, but by googling I learned that it is pretty subtle. The arrow always lands in the center of the target. But their first perfect bull's eye was with A Matter of Life and Death. That started a string that included The Red Shoes, Black Narcissus, and The Small Back Room. The run of bull's-eyes ended with The Tales of Hoffmann.

I haven't verified these with my own eyes though.

[Ezee E]

The Thief of Baghdad
A Snake of June
The Dirty Dozen

Adventureland

[balmakboor]

I haven't found a list yet, but by googling I learned that it is pretty subtle. The arrow always lands in the center of the target. But their first perfect bull's eye was with A Matter of Life and Death. That started a string that included The Red Shoes, Black Narcissus, and The Small Back Room. The run of bull's-eyes ended with The Tales of Hoffmann.

I haven't verified these with my own eyes though.

I emailed a guy who runs a P&P website and asked him about the truth behind the arrows and bull's-eyes thing. Here is his entire response. Sounds like a heck of a nice guy.

---

What ho Todd,

I've heard it said, but I have always thought it was due to people hearing Powell say something like "We were a bit off target with that one" or "That one was right on target", and then taking him literally.

I've seen all their major films, many times, and all the surviving minor ones. I've seen all the ones made under the banner of The Archers - and I've never seen one with the arrow at all off centre in the target.

However, I once mentioned this to Thelma Schoonmaker (Powell's widow & Scorsese's editor) and she said that she was sure that she had seen a print with an arrow off-centre in the target. Maybe the American version of A Canterbury Tale. That was quite extensively cut from the original that we know and love. A lot was cut out and some narration was added to try to cover the gaps. If any of them deserved an off-centre arrow then that one probably did. But I've seen it a few times and it always had the arrow right in the centre of the target in the prints I've seen.


Not all of their films did have the arrow thudding into the target.

Blimp and The Silver Fleet have a drawing of an arrow in the bull rather that the film of the arrow hitting the target.

The Volunteer & One of Our Aircraft is Missing don't have a target but they are both Archers' productions.

Oh... Rosalinda!! has arrow hitting target but there are 9 arrows instead of the usual 8 in the target before the last one hits it.

A Matter of Life and Death & I Know Where I'm Going! - there is no thud of the arrow hitting the target, because the theme music is already playing
The End of the River - South American Indian shoots an arrow which we then see hitting the "normal" target :)

The Elusive Pimpernel, Gone to Earth, Tales of Hoffmann, Oh... Rosalinda!!, Battle of the River Plate & Ill Met by Moonlight aren't really Archers films (they had sold the company to Korda), the target has "A Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger Production" written over it after the arrow hits.

I would say that their perfect bull's-eye streak began earlier than you suggest. I usually reckon their main run to be the six films in six years:

The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (1943)
A Canterbury Tale (1944)
I Know Where I'm Going! (1945)
A Matter of Life and Death (1946)
Black Narcissus (1947)
The Red Shoes (1948)

Each of those is a world class film, worthy of the highest praise. Two are in B&W, but don't let that fool you, they are still masterpieces.

The full run of all their films together, from The Spy in Black (1939) to Ill Met by Moonlight (1957) is a very impressive body of work. I often think that even the less well known ones in that list, the ones that aren't generally considered to be masterpieces, would still be considered to be great films if they had been made by anyone else. But P&P set the bar so high with their major films that even they couldn't maintain that incredibly high standard in all their films.

All the best
Steve

[NickGlass]

Pick/choose:

Theater
Goodbye Solo (Bahrani)
Sugar (Boden & Fleck)
Adventureland (Mottola)
Night and the City (Dassin)


Home Viewing
Desperate Living (Waters)
Dear Zachary (Kuenne)
The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner (Richardson)

[balmakboor]

Weekend:

Theater:
Adventureland

Home:
American Teen
Steal this Movie
Synecdoche, New York

[Boner M]

Pick/choose:

Theater
Goodbye Solo (Bahrani)
Sugar (Boden & Fleck)
Adventureland (Mottola)
Night and the City (Dassin)


Home Viewing
Desperate Living (Waters)
Dear Zachary (Kuenne)
The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner (Richardson)
I'd suggest that you see Night and the City and don't bother with Loneliness..., but something tells me that you'll like the latter and not the former, so I dunno.

[NickGlass]

I'd suggest that you see Night and the City and don't bother with Loneliness..., but something tells me that you'll like the latter and not the former, so I dunno.

You can't tell me what to do. You're not my dad!

Nevertheless, Dassin's caper is on my "eh, if I have nothing else to do" list and Richardson's flick is totally my style (kitchen sink realism + freewheeling jazz style + twentysomething ennui = on Nick's radar). I really disliked Look Back in Anger, though, so my anticipation has tapered a bit; I was hoping for brilliance after Richardson delighted me with his wry, completely in-tune adaptation of Waugh's The Loved One, but now my further exploration of his oeuvre in stuck in some weird gray area. Ok, now I'm just ridiculously curious to discover my reaction to Loneliness....

[dreamdead]

thefourthwall and I settled in to (re)watch Assayas's demonlover last night. Before starting the film, I mentioned my aspirations to teach the film someday, as its messiness is countered by its interesting prescience about the global levels of the adult business. What follows is, demonstrated via emoticons, my thoughts as to teaching the film and not getting fired the next day.

Seeing Sonic Youth as composers: :cool:
Treatment of adult film as legitimate: :)
Coverage of the tentacle/eel hentai: :|
Coverage of Diane's bisexuality seen through lesbian porn: :|
Coverage of porn's obsessionality with pop culture: :)
Afteraffects of Diane having sex with Herve: :|
The bitter finale, and coverage back to porn's infiltration of the everyday: :)

Final verdict: If I ever teach it, I'm so screwed. :cry: Still a rather fascinating film, though.

[Raiders]

weekend:

Hunger
Two Lovers
Alien Trespass
Mother and Son

[dreamdead]

Park Chan-wook's Joint Security Area adheres to the basic tenets of a typical Korean melodrama, but adds a veneer and humanity into the film that allows it to transcend something like the more stereotypical Shiri. Whereas in the latter film the North Korean soldiers receive a small humanity but are nonetheless villainized, here the humanity is given impartially. Park makes certain that character motivations are clear, so that once relations between the North and South are broached they do not rely on invectives anymore to describe what once was the Other. Rather, they become playful and reciprocal, all while remaining aware of the politics that necessitate that each remain with their own alliances. It is interesting, though, that only the North Korean remains alive at film's end. I'm curious if that's an intentional reconciliatory note from Park. Good stuff.

[Qrazy]

Fando y Lis is insane even by Jodorowsky standards, and I couldn't be happier to say that. I'm honestly kinda surprised nobody discusses it. I'd say it might be the best Jodorowsky film he hasn't disowned. The film is permeated with Jodorowsky's guilt regarding past misogyny. I'd also wager it's probably the most uplifting film he's done that he hasn't disowned. Perhaps uplifting is the wrong word as it's still very grim, but it ends on a surprisingly romantic note. Jodorowsky utilizes a completely dry, high contrast black and white aesthetic, exaggerated dubbed sound effects and editing between past images in the film and flashbacks to further establish the film's sense of fantasy. Jodorowsky's absurdist style is perfectly in tact, and he creates scenarios that one can't help but raise an eyebrow at. The film is so effective at creating an isolated, helpless stage for these two it's hard not to yearn for the more fantastical segments, and I see this as a positive thing.

What has he disowned?

[Spinal]

What has he disowned?

The Rainbow Thief.

[Qrazy]

The Rainbow Thief.

So Brightside feels The Rainbow Thief is his best and most uplifting film then?

[Spinal]

So Brightside feels The Rainbow Thief is his best and most uplifting film then?

I was confused initially as well. I think what he was trying to say is "I think this is his best film even though I have not seen The Rainbow Thief. But since he disowned it, I doubt it's any good."

[Qrazy]

I was confused initially as well. I think what he was trying to say is "I think this is his best film even though I have not seen The Rainbow Thief. But since he disowned it, I doubt it's any good."

Ahh k. Well my confusion prompted me to start watching the film just now so I'll let everyone know once it's done.

[Philosophe_rouge]

Weekend
True Romance
My Own Private Idaho
Lady Chatterley
Les Amants
LAst Night