28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[Qrazy]

Lola (1961): Great film, or the greatest film?

Quite a good film, I found it a little obnoxious here and there though, particularly Lola's character.

[Yxklyx]

Lola (1961): Great film, or the greatest film?

Very good. Reminded me of Kieslowski's Red in parts.

[number8]

Don't worry. It's not exploitative, and it's not entertaining.

Haha, I remember Morris getting a lot shit in the previous site when this came out and he said it was an "awesome, roller coaster of a film."

But yeah, United 93 is a great movie. But no, not exactly entertaining.

[Qrazy]

Very good. Reminded me of Kieslowski's Red in parts.

How?

[Mara]

Alonso Duralde, who I usually find interesting, doesn't know what twee (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31048866/) means.

[Sycophant]

In looking for the dictionary definition for "twee" (just to firm up my understanding of the word), I've discovered that "twee" redirects to "indie pop" on Wikipedia. What the hell?

[Sven]

I was just commenting, in relation to my dislike of Belle and Sebastian, that I will not use the word "twee" because I don't know what "twee" means either. Call it my "hipster." Armond uses it in his review for Away We Go, a film that he suggests is exactly the way I thought it would be from the trailer.

Edit: didn't realize that link was also a review of Away We Go. Ha.

[MacGuffin]

It's directed by Sam Mendes, Sven, so chances are, yeah, it probably sucks.

[Spinal]

Twee just means sickeningly adorable.

[Mara]

In looking for the dictionary definition for "twee" (just to firm up my understanding of the word), I've discovered that "twee" redirects to "indie pop" on Wikipedia. What the hell?

Twee means overly cute or dainty, to a point where it's affected.

Redefining it as indie pop is annoying.

[Qrazy]

I've seen a lot of people use nonplussed in reviews incorrectly.

[Mara]

I've seen a lot of people use nonplussed in reviews incorrectly.

Similarly, bemused.

[Melville]

I've seen a lot of people use nonplussed in reviews incorrectly.

Similarly, bemused.
After looking those words up, I see that my understanding of their meaning was way off. I always thought that "nonplussed" meant unaffected or unimpressed, and that "bemused" meant wryly amused. Though Merriam-Webster actually does contain that definition of "bemused", and there seems to be some controversy over it:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2008/11/16/we_are_not_bemused/

EDIT: And here's an article that talks about both words: http://www.visualthesaurus.com/cm/wordroutes/1609/

[Sven]

Twee just means sickeningly adorable.

I would've assumed it meant "slight." As in "wee." But I suppose that is not the case.

[Sycophant]

After looking those words up, I see that my understanding of their meaning was way off. I always thought that "nonplussed" meant unaffected or unimpressed, and that "bemused" meant wryly amused.

Oh, man! I've been under those same impressions. I'd better watch myself on these.

[Qrazy]

I got into a major argument with my ex-girlfriend about what has in the past been referred to as Ebonics but which is now known as African American vernacular english. She argued that it should be viewed as a dialect and endorsed. I argued it was just an improper use of language facilitating ignorance. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

[chrisnu]

After looking those words up, I see that my understanding of their meaning was way off. I always thought that "nonplussed" meant unaffected or unimpressed, and that "bemused" meant wryly amused. Though Merriam-Webster actually does contain that definition of "bemused", and there seems to be some controversy over it:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2008/11/16/we_are_not_bemused/

EDIT: And here's an article that talks about both words: http://www.visualthesaurus.com/cm/wordroutes/1609/
I have thought that nonplussed meant confounded or bewildered, but I was similarly incorrect about the meaning of bemused.

[Mara]

I got into a major argument with my ex-girlfriend about what has in the past been referred to as Ebonics but which is now known as African American vernacular english. She argued that it should be viewed as a dialect and endorsed. I argued it was just an improper use of language facilitating ignorance. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

Sorry, friend. It's a dialect.

[Sycophant]

Sorry, friend. It's a dialect.

Yup.

[number8]

Yeah, it's a dialect, particularly because it was born out of Southern vernacular. You can argue that Southerners use the English language improperly, too, but then you'd have to convince people how American English isn't, as well.

[Qrazy]

It's only a dialect in so far as it's standardized. So now do we start correcting people on their improper use of AAVE?

Man: He Gone and she just left.

Oh no I'm sorry I believe it's said she gone as well, please adjust your grammar accordingly.

At what point does something become a new dialect versus an improper use of speech? Do you all just think it's a dialect because there are enough people speaking it? Is it really sufficiently standardized? I've heard different people speak different versions AAVE. I've also heard white children misspeak, do we then encourage their continued use of AAVE?

"As with African English, African American Vernacular English does not pronounce r in words such as art, door, and worker. Other characteristics, some going back to similar features of African languages, are: (1) the use of d and t instead of th, as in dem for them and tree for three; (2) the dropping of l, as in hep for help, sef for self, and too for tool; (3) consonant reduction at the ends of some words (including tense endings), as in wha for what, jus for just, and pas for past; (4) use of -n for -ing, as in runnin for running; (5) multiple negatives, as in no way nobody can do it; (6) verb aspects marked for intermittent, momentary, or continuous action rather than tense per se, the tense time being apparent from the contexts, as in he be laughin for he is always laughing and he run for he runs; and (7) dropping of the verb in some constructions, as in she sick and he gone for she is sick and he has gone."

To be clear I have no problem calling it African American Vernacular English rather than Ebonics as I do recognize past negative connotations for the latter term. However I don't think it should be taught in schools beyond being used to help kids learn standard English. That is my position.

[number8]

To be clear I have no problem calling it African American Vernacular English rather than Ebonics as I do recognize past negative connotations for the latter term. However I don't think it should be taught in schools beyond being used to help kids learn standard English. That is my position.

Well, of course they won't teach it in schools. They don't teach people in Fargo to write "Don't you know?" as "Dontcha know?" either. I know black folks who understand the proper grammar and has no problem with it (although admittedly, like most native English speakers, they are horrendous at spelling, but that's another matter), but simply chooses to speak a certain way because that is what he's used to in conversations.

[Wryan]

After looking those words up, I see that my understanding of their meaning was way off. I always thought that "nonplussed" meant unaffected or unimpressed, and that "bemused" meant wryly amused. Though Merriam-Webster actually does contain that definition of "bemused", and there seems to be some controversy over it:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2008/11/16/we_are_not_bemused/

EDIT: And here's an article that talks about both words: http://www.visualthesaurus.com/cm/wordroutes/1609/

Our house dictionary notes that bemused means muddled, plunged in thought, or stupefied.

But I've always used it in the "wryly amused" sense you describe above, mostly cause I like that definition better for that word.

Or, if you prefer, a more twee "amused."

[Qrazy]

Well, of course they won't teach it in schools. They don't teach people in Fargo to write "Don't you know?" as "Dontcha know?" either. I know black folks who understand the proper grammar and has no problem with it (although admittedly, like most native English speakers, they are horrendous at spelling, but that's another matter), but simply chooses to speak a certain way because that is what he's used to in conversations.

Well one of the 'official' arguments so to speak is whether or not it ought to be acknowledged and taught in schools. That's why I brought it up, that's what my initial argument was about.

[number8]

Well one of the 'official' arguments so to speak is whether or not it ought to be acknowledged and taught in schools. That's why I brought it up, that's what my initial argument was about.

Oh, then your ex is retarded. We don't teach dialects in schools. At least, I hope they don't. I wouldn't put it past today's education standards.

[EyesWideOpen]

It definitely should not be taught in schools.

[Yxklyx]

How?

It's been a while but the story of the peeping tom's younger life (from Red) was similar to that of the young man's in Lola. More importantly, that sailor that was hanging out with the younger kid had a similar story (or the girl did) - where one of them represented a younger version of another character in the film. Same thing happens in Red with the relationship between the old man and the young woman. History repeating, etc...

The similarity was so pronounced at the time that I immediately considered that Kieslowski was thinking of this film when he made Red.

[Qrazy]

It's been a while but the story of the peeping tom's younger life (from Red) was similar to that of the young man's in Lola. More importantly, that sailor that was hanging out with the younger kid had a similar story (or the girl did) - where one of them represented a younger version of another character in the film. Same thing happens in Red with the relationship between the old man and the young woman. History repeating, etc...

The similarity was so pronounced at the time that I immediately considered that Kieslowski was thinking of this film when he made Red.

Ah, that makes sense.

[Qrazy]

Harper - Pretty good private eye flick (for fans of Chinatown, The Long Goodbye, etc) Once again Conrad Hall's cinematography gives the film that added punch. The storyline is solid. The atmosphere compelling. My only criticisms were that the dramatic direction while decent stumbles every once in a while. Paul Newman is OK here but not on the top of his game. His performance picks up in the second half of the film. Also certain crucial moments, the final scene for instance, don't really go where they need to... they just kind of fizzle out.

[MacGuffin]

I wasn't crazy about the movie the first time I watched it like some, but I do want to see it again and this is very tempting (although I may end up just renting it, too):

http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/7816/img9127jpg.jpg

[soitgoes...]

I wasn't crazy about the movie the first time I watched it like some, but I do want to see it again and this is very tempting (although I may end up just renting it, too):

http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/7816/img9127jpg.jpgI still haven't seen it, or any of his feature length films for that matter.

[Qrazy]

I still haven't seen it, or any of his feature length films for that matter.

Hiroshima Mon Amour is one of my favorites. Last Year at Marienbad is very good and conceptually compelling but the score grated on my nerves. Mon Oncle D'Amerique is interesting as a cinematic exploration of behavioralism but kind of psychologically behind the times imo and not wholly successful as a film. Same Old Song was OK, kind of enjoyed it at the time but it's disposable. Night and Fog is key but I saw it too long ago to really say anything about it... other than important holo docu etc.

I have and have been meaning to watch Muriel for some time now. I'd also like to see Je T'aime Je T'aime, Providence and Not on the Lips.

[D_Davis]

I watched half of Postal today.

The opening spoof on 9/11 was actually pretty well done.

There were also other moments during the part I watched that I enjoyed. Some of the satire is spot on.

Uwn Boll has made a film that could easily be released under the Troma banner. Some of it is actually kind of good, in a weird way.

I have not idea why it's called Postal - was this ever even supposed to be a movie based on the video game?

[megladon8]

I have not idea why it's called Postal - was this ever even supposed to be a movie based on the video game?


That pretty much sounds like every Uwe Boll video game movie.

There was no house in House of the Dead.

Alone in the Dark had no relation to the game at all.

From what I've read, Far Cry is a far cry from the game. *ZING!*

[Ivan Drago]

Haven't seen the movie, but that packaging is AWESOME.

[MacGuffin]

Haven't seen the movie, but that packaging is AWESOME.

Yeah, I really like when Criterion releases are done with digipacks.

[megladon8]

I generally find Criterion packaging is pretty awesome.

There have been a couple of instances where I found the chosen cover art was trying a little too hard to be artsy-fartsy, but that's like 3 instances out of their whole catalogue.

Even something like Le Samourai, which comes in a standard DVD jewel case, has beautiful artwork and a slick colour scheme.

They really know how to attract the eye to their films on a shelf filled with other movies.

[MacGuffin]

Well, yeah, but they're not always perfect. The new cover for Jeanne Dielman, for example sucks:

http://www.criterion.com/films/302

[D_Davis]

That pretty much sounds like every Uwe Boll video game movie.

There was no house in House of the Dead.

Alone in the Dark had no relation to the game at all.

From what I've read, Far Cry is a far cry from the game. *ZING!*

House of the Dead at least had zombies, and Alone in the Dark was at least a kind of supernatural horror film.

Postal is basically The Toxic Avenger without the gore. It's a social satire - at least the first half is.

Also - I really like the lead actor. He's got a real earnest quality about him that makes him very sympathetic. Man, that's really weird to say about a Boll KG film.

[megladon8]

Well, yeah, but they're not always perfect. The new cover for Jeanne Dielman sucks:

http://www.criterion.com/films/302


I agree it's not their best, but I like the concept.

It might have been better if it were drawn/painted.

I have a weakness for the cover for Equinox...

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61dO2Pp4pIL._SS500_.jpg


Even though describing the movie as "mediocre" would be generous, it's a freaking awesome cover.

I wish today's movie posters still looked like that.

[MacGuffin]

Yeah, I love that one. I'm gonna create a thread for this, because it's been something I've wanted to talk about, and we could use an official DVD thread (especially if there isn't gonna be a DVD forum).

[megladon8]

Yeah, I love that one. I'm gonna create a thread for this, because it's been something I've wanted to talk about, and we could use an official DVD thread (especially if there isn't gonna be a DVD forum).


I have a thread like this already. It's probably way at the back.

I think it's called "Beautiful DVD art" or something.

[baby doll]

I still haven't seen it, or any of his feature length films for that matter.Because I can't stop rating things...

Hiroshima mon amour (1959) / ****
L'Année dernière Ã* Marienbad (1961) / ****
Muriel ou Le temps d'un retour (1963) / ***1/2
Providence (1977) / ****
Mon oncle d'Amerique (1980) / ****
Pas sur la bouche (2003) / ****
Coeurs (2006) / ****

So I guess you might say I'm a fan.

[MacGuffin]

I have a thread like this already. It's probably way at the back.

I think it's called "Beautiful DVD art" or something.

I went ahead and made it about DVDs in general, so we could talk about favorite extras, too.

[MacGuffin]

Because I can't stop rating things...

Hiroshima mon amour (1959) / ****
L'Année dernière Ã* Marienbad (1961) / ****
Muriel ou Le temps d'un retour (1963) / ***1/2
Providence (1977) / ****
Mon oncle d'Amerique (1980) / ****
Pas sur la bouche (2003) / ****
Coeurs (2006) / ****

So I guess you might say I'm a fan.

How deep is Marienbad? I'm seriously considering buying it, because I think I saw it on some worn out VHS tape and I probably didn't interpret it as the "puzzle" so many critics make it out to be. I mean, it's rewatchable, right? Rosenbaum says it's probably the best movie ever made.

[baby doll]

How deep is Marienbad? I'm seriously considering buying it, because I think I saw it on some worn out VHS tape and I probably didn't interpret it as the "puzzle" so many critics make it out to be. I mean, it's rewatchable, right? Rosenbaum says it's probably the best movie ever made.I don't know what you mean by deep, but its surface is inexhaustible. I've seen it over and over, and I'm totally obsessed with it.

[MacGuffin]

I don't know what you mean by deep, but it's surface is inexhaustible. I've seen it over and over, and I'm totally obsessed with it.

Yeah, that's exactly what I was looking for.

[Qrazy]

Because I can't stop rating things...

Hiroshima mon amour (1959) / ****
L'Année dernière Ã* Marienbad (1961) / ****
Muriel ou Le temps d'un retour (1963) / ***1/2
Providence (1977) / ****
Mon oncle d'Amerique (1980) / ****
Pas sur la bouche (2003) / ****
Coeurs (2006) / ****

So I guess you might say I'm a fan.

Aren't you being a bit generous with Mon Oncle d'Amerique?

[baby doll]

Aren't you being a bit generous with Mon Oncle d'Amerique?No, it's a terrific film. I love the very scientific narration. (And it certainly deserved the Palme d'Or more than either All That Jazz or Kagemusha.) Why do you think it's generous?

[Qrazy]

No, it's a terrific film. I love the very scientific narration. (And it certainly deserved the Palme d'Or more than either All That Jazz or Kagemusha.) Why do you think it's generous?

Sorry, saw it too long ago to remember my specific complaints other than that the psychological approach was really outdated. Other than that the film as a whole although an interesting experiment struck me as rather mediocre.

[number8]

I have not idea why it's called Postal - was this ever even supposed to be a movie based on the video game?

Well, did you play the games? The movie used a bunch of elements from the game. Of course, since the game didn't have a storyline, they had to make up their own.

[Bosco B Thug]

Well, I certainly don't think it's supposed to be pleasant! As for as the rape scene being unimaginative, I beg to differ. Many people looked into the staging of a scene in a red tunnel and the fact that it was anal rape as some sort of sign that suggested the movie was offering an analysis of masculinity. Furthermore, I think the stage is very well-designed with it's diminishing wallpaper, flickering lights and so on. I don't think adding stylistic elements beyond that (let us say, with jumpy camerawork) would have added anything to it aside from exploitation. Certainly the art direction is there. It definitely can be said to offer a relatively clinical presentation of non-reproductive sex at its recreational and abusive, selfish extreme, considering it's daring us to note every violent thrust and dry flap of the act (pardon the crudeness).

I think a big part of my negativity toward the scene is the film has a general ostentatiousness about it, that just rubs off onto this scene. One thing I dislike about the film is how the first act comes off like a high-octane action flick. And perhaps part of it's problem is the highly composed art direction in the scene? JK JK! I don't even agree with that.

[Ezee E]

Postal has a few funny moments, but there's so much annoying stuff that it was torturous. A friend of mine legitimatly loves it though.

[MacGuffin]

Certainly the art direction is there. It definitely can be said to offer a relatively clinical presentation of non-reproductive sex at its recreational and abusive, selfish extreme, considering it's daring us to note every violent thrust and dry flap of the act (pardon the crudeness).

I think a big part of my negativity toward the scene is the film has a general ostentatiousness about it, that just rubs off onto this scene. One thing I dislike about the film is how the first act comes off like a high-octane action flick. And perhaps part of it's problem is the highly composed art direction in the scene? JK JK! I don't even agree with that.

I know what you mean by high octane, but I srsly don't think Noé's trying to exploit the material or anything. I find the high octane nature of it even more challenging. But really, I need to see this again. This weekend, I will try to get to it.

[balmakboor]

Watched Trip with the Teacher tonight. That Zalman King is one freaky dude. One odd and interesting movie.

If Malibu High and Trip with the Teacher are truly typical of the so-called '70s grindhouse movie (these two are on a "Welcome to the Grindhouse" dvd), then I can see why Tarantino and Rodriguez et al find them so interesting and enjoyable.

[MadMan]

Watching MSTK episodes recently makes me wonder if I can actually count the movies they make fun of as actual film viewings. Since the movies are inter cut with commentary from the merry hilarious trio and all. Anyways, The Un earthly was humorous, but I couldn't bring myself to even finish watching The Atomic Brain. I just saw The Skydivers and I have to say that without the jokes and snappy mocking one-liners, I couldn't have made it through it. The fact that its awful is a given, but its really a boring movie.

[balmakboor]

Something I've always loved about Full Metal Jacket is how Kubrick used countless blatently intentional continuity "errors" as creative devices.

[Spun Lepton]

I watched Tenacious D: The Pick of Destiny last night. I love their music, but when I heard the movie was a big disappointment, I decided to skip it and assure my opinion of them would not be damaged. Somebody lent the DVD to me the other day, so I figured what the hell.

Well, my opinion wasn't damaged, I guess. I still love their music.

The flick, though, was only OK. The music was really good -- as expected -- but nothing else really worked. The tone was uneven. The story was flat and pretty dull. The comedy was funny only sporatically, and the best jokes were delivered by cameo appearances. Tim Robbins was the funniest thing about the whole movie, as far as I'm concerned. The scene where he threatened to swap their testicles with their eyeballs had me laughing pretty hard. Unfortunately, that was my only LOL moment. 5/10

[Boner M]

Cuppla quick shots on my recent viewings:

Husbands - Even more rambling and frequently excruciating than Cassavetes' other films, yet still blessed with his trademark live-wire power that makes roughly 99% of films seem trivial and useless. Surreal to see trained Brit thesps in one of his films.

Mahanagar - Frequent on-the-nose dialogue can't detract from undeniable humanist poignance.

The Flower of Evil - I can barely remember this after seeing it a few weeks ago. It felt like one plot point after another to the point that I didn't register what those plot points were. Formally impeccable nonetheless, which can't be said for even some of Chabrol's best films.

Desperate Living - First 10 minutes are total comic gold ("How can you ever repay the last thirty seconds you've stolen from my life?!"), the rest is admirably go-for-broke if exhausting, as ever with Waters.

Payday - God, how awesome is Rip Torn? He's like a less hammy Jack Nicholson here, as a sociopathic drunk country singer ready to self-destruct at any moment. Haunting ending.

Samson & Delilah - Not the 'greatest Australian film ever made' as the press has been unanimously roaring (it also won the Camera D'or), but a solid if familiar entry into the marginalised-mutes-hit-the-road subgenre of art cinema. Exceptional sound design.

[Qrazy]

I watched Tenacious D: The Pick of Destiny last night. I love their music, but when I heard the movie was a big disappointment, I decided to skip it and assure my opinion of them would not be damaged. Somebody lent the DVD to me the other day, so I figured what the hell.

Well, my opinion wasn't damaged, I guess. I still love their music.

The flick, though, was only OK. The music was really good -- as expected -- but nothing else really worked. The tone was uneven. The story was flat and pretty dull. The comedy was funny only sporatically, and the best jokes were delivered by cameo appearances. Tim Robbins was the funniest thing about the whole movie, as far as I'm concerned. The scene where he threatened to swap their testicles with their eyeballs had me laughing pretty hard. Unfortunately, that was my only LOL moment. 5/10

About half of their short lived TV show was very funny, the other half is serviceable.

[Rowland]

Holy crap, Vantage Point is the most uproariously contrived pile of pablum I've seen in ages. I should probably rate it even lower, but its riotously ludicrous plotting coupled with its crisply overcooked filmmaking hackitude, its lack of overbearing pretense, and Forrest Whitaker's goofily tic-addled performance were enough to charm me into enjoying it more than I should have. But yeah, it's pretty much crap, albeit of the easily digestible sort. Talk about wasting an intriguing premise though, functioning not as its Rashomon-inspired roots may logically suggest but rather as a shallow structural device designed to spread its thinly conceived thriller plot over 80 minutes with as many labored cliffhangers as possible. My favorite? The completely shameless nonsensicality of the circumstances surrounding a mid-film cliffhanger in which a child is about to be run over by a speeding ambulance, and the sheer camp by which the film resolves the predicament.

[Watashi]

What the hell is pablum?

[Watashi]

Did you ever write any thoughts on the Spongebob movie, Rowland?

[Rowland]

Did you ever write any thoughts on the Spongebob movie, Rowland?Nope. It loses a bit of steam in the homestretch, which is made up for by how ingeniously it resolves the second-act-concluding reversal, even if the Hasselhoff's inherent ironic coolness has pretty much faded, and Spongebob's climactic musical performance is infectious enough, even as it closes the film on an unexpectedly pat note. Otherwise, the first two acts sustain the inspired anarchy of the show remarkably well, so that I was laughing more consistently for most of its length than any comedy I've recently seen. It's one inspired set piece after another, each generously exploding with clever gags and that all-encompassing off-kilter tone that characterizes the show at its most endearingly subversive. And of course, one mustn't forget Alec Baldwin as über-tough bounty hunter Dennis.

[Rowland]

What the hell is pablum?
http://bkmarcus.com/blog/images/food/Pablum.jpg

[Boner M]

Weekend viewing possibilities (I'm doing volunteer work for the Sydney film festival, so I'll probably see some other films unintentionally)

35 Rhums (Denis)
Last Chants for a Slow Dance (Jost)
The Lineup (Siegel)
The Lusty Men (N. Ray)
The Tall T and/or Ride Lonesome (Boetticher)
Nayak and/or Charuluta (S. Ray)

I wish:

Jeanne Dielman in 35mm (I have to work... thankfully there's the upcoming Criterion to ease the pain)

[soitgoes...]

Mahanagar - Frequent on-the-nose dialogue can't detract from undeniable humanist poignance.
I pretty much loved this. My only "problem" was the too-perfect-timing of some events. The husband losing his job the moment when his wife was to quit. Her husband getting a possible job the same day his wife quits. A little too perfect for the realness Ray tends to go for in his early period films. I loved the boss/wife and husband/wife interactions, especially the power the wife achieves as the film progresses.

[soitgoes...]

The Tall T and/or Ride Lonesome (Boetticher)
Nayak and/or Charuluta (S. Ray)

God, enjoy all of those. Nayak was brilliant. A great critique on Indian cinema, and the hero worshipping that comes with any great level of stardom. Uttam Kumar is perfect as an actor who's at his peak. All of India desires him. But what is his story? What are his desires, and what pushes him?

[soitgoes...]

Another Indian Weekend:

Kanchenjungha
The Adventures of Goopy and Bagha
Days and Nights in the Forest
Distant Thunder

[Boner M]

I pretty much loved this. My only "problem" was the too-perfect-timing of some events. The husband losing his job the moment when his wife was to quit. Her husband getting a possible job the same day his wife quits. A little too perfect for the realness Ray tends to go for in his early period films. I loved the boss/wife and husband/wife interactions, especially the power the wife achieves as the film progresses.
I dunno, it felt more of a melodrama to me despite the ostensible realist style; those kind of contrivances didn't bother me too much.

[balmakboor]

Something I've always loved about Full Metal Jacket is how Kubrick used countless blatently intentional continuity "errors" as creative devices.

A few examples:

During the first scene with Sgt Hartman, the three main recruits stand by their bunks, left to right, Pyle-Joker-Cowboy when the camera first tracks past them. But when Hartman returns to their side of the barracks after Joker's "Is that you John Wayne? Is this me?"to berate them one-by-one, they stand, left to right, Joker-Cowboy-Pyle.

When the marines make the move toward flushing out the sniper, Cowboy orders a total of seven people counting himself to advance, but in wide shot we see only six advance. Those six join Animal Mother at a wall making seven. Cut to a different angle and there are eight. There is also a mystery marine lurking in the rubble as the camera tracks with the marines of the narrative toward the wall. It creates a weird sense of ambiguity as to how many marines are working to flush out the sniper -- 7? 8? 9?

Then there is the hole in the wall during the sniper sequence that is first not there and then it suddenly appears, allowing Cowboy to get shot. For a long time, I thought it merely expressed the theme that the VC are "deceitful" as the movie earlier informs us. It's a way of saying, "Unlike Parris Island, here there are no rules."

But then I realized something even more interesting is going on. When Cowboy first moves to the corner of the building, there is no hole in the wall. He gets to the corner and he stares for a long time at a sign reading "My-Toan." Then he comes back and hops on the radio and the hole is now there -- perfectly framing the "My-Toan" sign. Then, when Animal Mother blasts away at the building in reaction to Cowboy being shot, what we see frame center is the "My-Toan" sign being blasted to bits. Then, after Cowboy's death, Animal Mother leads the men past a different wall and tells them (and us) to "Watch that hole." The camera peers through the hole in the wall, perfectly framing the "My-Toan" sign, mysteriously intact again. Then, after passing the corner of the building, the camera tilts up a bit just to make sure we get one more glance at the now intact "My-Toan" sign.

The words on the sign translate to mean either "My Whole" or "All United States." What does all that mean? I don't know although ideas abound.

(And yes, a few of these oddities first came to my attention on Rob Ager's website.)

[Qrazy]

A few examples:

During the first scene with Sgt Hartman, the three main recruits stand by their bunks, left to right, Pyle-Joker-Cowboy when the camera first tracks past them. But when Hartman returns to their side of the barracks after Joker's "Is that you John Wayne? Is this me?"to berate them one-by-one, they stand, left to right, Joker-Cowboy-Pyle.


While I feel it's a stretch I can understand the others but what about this is used as a creative device?

[balmakboor]

While I feel it's a stretch I can understand the others but what about this is used as a creative device?

Well, I'm not sure if I even have a stretch of a guess. There is a lot of Left/Right/Left/Right/Left stuff going on during the whole Parris Island segment and Pyle first being on their left and then on their right could relate to that.

I admit though that Kubrick was such a meticulous perfectionist that I give him a huge benefit of the doubt. Considering he must've spent weeks shooting that scene, getting it just right, I doubt such a huge continuity shift would be an error.

[Qrazy]

Well, I'm not sure if I even have a stretch of a guess. There is a lot of Left/Right/Left/Right/Left stuff going on during the whole Parris Island segment and Pyle first being on their left and then on their right could relate to that.

I admit though that Kubrick was such a meticulous perfectionist that I give him a huge benefit of the doubt. Considering he must've spent weeks shooting that scene, getting it just right, I doubt such a huge continuity shift would be an error.

Meh. Personally I just think continuity in film is damn hard. Even the perfectionists stumble sometimes. Everyone seems to bend over backwards giving Kubrick the benefit of the doubt when they don't do the same for other directors. Here are a bunch of errors (it being imdb I can't speak to their legitimacy).

A Clockwork Orange:

http://www.geocities.com/malcolmtribute/aco/errors.html
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066921/goofs

Spartacus:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0054331/goofs

Lolita:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056193/goofs

Dr. Strangelove:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057012/goofs

Barry Lyndon:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072684/goofs

[balmakboor]

Meh. Personally I just think continuity in film is damn hard. Even the perfectionists stumble sometimes. Everyone seems to bend over backwards giving Kubrick the benefit of the doubt when they don't do the same for other directors. Here are a bunch of errors (it being imdb I can't speak to their legitimacy).

A Clockwork Orange:

http://www.geocities.com/malcolmtribute/aco/errors.html
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066921/goofs

Spartacus:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0054331/goofs

Lolita:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056193/goofs

Dr. Strangelove:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057012/goofs

Barry Lyndon:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072684/goofs

Yeah, and FMJ has a very long list on that site as well. Still, I go through those and find myself categorizing them as "probably a legitimate goof" and "quite possibly communicating something."

[Qrazy]

Yeah, and FMJ has a very long list on that site as well. Still, I go through those and find myself categorizing them as "probably a legitimate goof" and "quite possibly communicating something."

And I'm sure Ed Wood intentionally changed his scene from night to day.

The point being I don't think I've ever heard of a narrative feature film without a single continuity error or some sort of goof.

[balmakboor]

And I'm sure Ed Wood intentionally changed his scene from night to day.

The point being I don't think I've ever heard of a narrative feature film without a single continuity error or some sort of goof.

I never claimed -- nor would I ever dare to claim -- that every goof in FMJ is really some clever device to communicate a hidden theme. But I do claim that some of them are.

A question I can ask anyone out there is, is it a valid option for a director to do such a thing? I once had a film studies professor who pointed out how as Ethan approaches the homestead at the start of The Searchers there is a blanket (which later comes to symbolize home) is draped over a railing. Then Ford cuts to the reverse angle and the blanket is gone. The professor said it symbolized Ethan's acceptance into the home.

The professor could have been wrong and it was just a goof. (He could've been wrong about it symbolizing "home" in the first place.) But, in theory, are such "goofs" valid and possible ways of subtly communicating ideas?

[Qrazy]

I never claimed -- nor would I ever dare to claim -- that every goof in FMJ is really some clever device to communicate a hidden theme. But I do claim that some of them are.

A question I can ask anyone out there is, is it a valid option for a director to do such a thing? I once had a film studies professor who pointed out how as Ethan approaches the homestead at the start of The Searchers there is a blanket (which later comes to symbolize home) is draped over a railing. Then Ford cuts to the reverse angle and the blanket is gone. The professor said it symbolized Ethan's acceptance into the home.

The professor could have been wrong and it was just a goof. (He could've been wrong about it symbolizing "home" in the first place.) But, in theory, are such "goofs" valid and possible ways of subtly communicating ideas?

I'm sure they have been used purposely by directors in the past to communicate ideas. But personally I don't think they're a very worthwhile manner of conveying ideas. The most obvious reason being how do you differentiate between purposeful goofs and accidental ones? The second reason being that the director is trying to create a world (not necessarily a realistic world but a world nonetheless)... and this world operates according to certain established rules. Goofs by their very nature violate these rules. They necessarily violate because they are not standardized, they are isolated incidents where something does not make sense. Unless the director is drawing attention to this something not making sense, in which case it is not a goof after all, and would not seem to be one. So even in Godard films or avant-garde cinema or what have you goofs can still be made. If you're going to make a statement with a boom mic for instance, better to do it for some reason, make the 'pretend goof' obvious... so then having a boom mic in the shot would be a joke or 4th wall breaking or etc.

Then there's also the case where a goof occurred unintentionally during the shoot and the director has to decide what to do with the footage during an edit. Then the goof could effectively be manipulated to communicate meaning... however I still don't really get much out of such an approach.

[Russ]

The point being I don't think I've ever heard of a narrative feature film without a single continuity error or some sort of goof.
I haven't seen Russian Ark yet, but I wonder if it would be the exception? (as far as continuity goes; I'm sure there were probably other goofs of which I'm unaware)

[number8]

Coppola believes (http://www.justpressplay.net/movies/movie-news/5450-coppola-qthe-godfatherq-should-have-stayed-one-movie.html) that Godfather Part II should have never been made.

Thoughts?

[Qrazy]

I haven't seen Russian Ark yet, but I wonder if it would be the exception? (as far as continuity goes; I'm sure there were probably other goofs of which I'm unaware)

Good call, I have seen it and it's good. Here's all I could find.

Mistake Factual error: Peter the Great died 32 years before the construction of the Winter Palace had begun and 40 years before the construction of the original "Hermitage" gallery, built for Catherine the Great in 1765 by the French architect Vallin de la Mothe.

Factual error: One of the members of the orchestra is reading off sheet music held together by sticky tape, which is an anachronism.

[Raiders]

Coppola believes (http://www.justpressplay.net/movies/movie-news/5450-coppola-qthe-godfatherq-should-have-stayed-one-movie.html) that Godfather Part II should have never been made.

Thoughts?

I agree, if only because I find the second film weaker than the first. It certainly wasn't necessary in that the first film doesn't need the second film and does end on a pitch-perfect, and self-sufficient, note. But, then again, the second film is still damn good and any film worth watching was worth being made.

[Qrazy]

I prefer the second and if the script is worthwhile and the film turns out good enough I see nothing wrong with a sequel. The two films balance very well off one another. I appreciate his sentiment that unnecessary sequels usually should not be made but The Godfather Part II was an artistic success so I'm glad it was made.

[BuffaloWilder]

This just in, on IMDb, from user jamb-kirch, on the subject of contemporizing To Kill A Mockingbird:


I agree, Cuba Gooding Jr. should be Tom Robinson.

I say Robert Downey Jr. should be Atticus.

The mind! She burns!

[Spinal]

Coppola believes (http://www.justpressplay.net/movies/movie-news/5450-coppola-qthe-godfatherq-should-have-stayed-one-movie.html) that Godfather Part II should have never been made.

Thoughts?

I agree with Francis. Never really understood this notion that the second Godfather ranks among the all-time great films. It's well made. It's well acted. But it lacks the sense of purpose and consequence that makes the first so good.

[megladon8]

Christian Bale should play Tom Robinson in black face.

[Raiders]

This just in, on IMDb, from user jamb-kirch, on the subject of contemporizing To Kill A Mockingbird:

The mind! She burns!

I don't know. I think a sly, sarcastic and somewhat impious Atticus Finch would be a great idea. However, Cuba Gooding Jr. should never be in anything ever again.

[number8]

I agree with Francis. Never really understood this notion that the second Godfather ranks among the all-time great films. It's well made. It's well acted. But it lacks the sense of purpose and consequence that makes the first so good.

Hm. I appreciate the story of Michael stepping up into the role, but I've just always preferred the story of it being cyclical and parallel at the same time with Vito. I think the second one expresses a sense of history that I didn't get from the first.

I'm thinking of rewatching both this weekend. I own the trilogy, but I'm probably going to go rent that new Bluray release.

[Spinal]

Christian Bale should play Tom Robinson in black face.

How about Ted Danson in black face with Whoopi playing Atticus in white face?

[Qrazy]

I agree with Francis. Never really understood this notion that the second Godfather ranks among the all-time great films. It's well made. It's well acted. But it lacks the sense of purpose and consequence that makes the first so good.

I prefer it because it has greater scope and really shows how the business can completely unravel a man. By the end of the film Michael loses everything he once valued. The juxtaposition between the old days and the new days of the mafia also really demonstrates how enormously things have changed... but all the old grudges are still there. Plus you have the brotherly rivalry, the family tearing itself apart from the inside out. There was an inside man in the first film but he wasn't as central a figure in the family.

[BuffaloWilder]

I don't know. I think a sly, sarcastic and somewhat impious Atticus Finch would be a great idea. However, Cuba Gooding Jr. should never be in anything ever again.


In the name of god, do your duty.


http://www.filmofilia.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/robertdowney_big.jpg

[Spinal]

Yeah, Downey is a good enough actor that I don't think casting him as Atticus is all that crazy.

[dreamdead]

Weekend:
The Apartment (Mimouni, not Wilder)
My Beautiful Girl Mari (Korean animation)
The Scarlet Empress
Save the Green Planet!

[Raiders]

In the name of god, do your duty.

I'm not really following you here. Maybe it is the fact that I am not much of a fan of either the book or the 1962 film.

[number8]

Obviously, Downey can play both Atticus and Tom Robinson. Duh.

[BuffaloWilder]

I've got no problem with Downey by himself, but it seems his name is starting to pop up as much as Christian Bale's did, after Batman Begins.

Speaking of whom, yes to Bale in blackface.

[transmogrifier]

Well, I'm not sure if I even have a stretch of a guess. There is a lot of Left/Right/Left/Right/Left stuff going on during the whole Parris Island segment and Pyle first being on their left and then on their right could relate to that.

I admit though that Kubrick was such a meticulous perfectionist that I give him a huge benefit of the doubt. Considering he must've spent weeks shooting that scene, getting it just right, I doubt such a huge continuity shift would be an error.

That's the cult of Kubrick in a nutshell right there. He is assumed to be a perfectionist genius, and then every single microsecond of every single film is rendered as some sort of high art, so even an apparent flaw is another example of his artistic genius. Circular reasoning 101.

The camera crew reflected in the bathroom in Eyes Wide Shut begs to differ.

[MacGuffin]

Shoot the Piano Player: I'm going to go ahead and edit out all of the excess that I had previously written. This is too poorly structured, Truffaut throws us right in (I know I didn't care about what I was watching), and gives us exposition in the middle of the movie? Ruins pacing. Movie picks back up in the second half, but remains no more than a homage to gangster movies. I don't find this to be very important at all. Entertaining, certainly watchable, but definitely passable.

[Raiders]

The camera crew reflected in the bathroom in Eyes Wide Shut begs to differ.

Clearly a subversive comment on voyeurism.

[transmogrifier]

Clearly a subversive comment on voyeurism.

:)

Hardly subversive when a million faceless thriller directors manage to do it every single year. Or maybe they're all superubercinematic geniuses as well.

[BuffaloWilder]

David Carradine was found dead in his Bangkok hotel room, earlier today.

[number8]

David Carradine was found dead in his Bangkok hotel room, earlier today.

Celeb Obit thread.

[balmakboor]

That's the cult of Kubrick in a nutshell right there. He is assumed to be a perfectionist genius, and then every single microsecond of every single film is rendered as some sort of high art, so even an apparent flaw is another example of his artistic genius. Circular reasoning 101.

The camera crew reflected in the bathroom in Eyes Wide Shut begs to differ.

There is of course a world of difference between a helicopter shadow being visible during the credits for The Shining or a reflection of the crew visible in the bathroom in Eyes Wide Shut and a huge chunk of the set being added and removed in between setups in Full Metal Jacket. Re-arranging the order of principle cast members between two parts of a scene and having a character verbally and physically point at a sign that is once again standing after pointedly being blown to bits less than a minute previously also fall under this whole different realm of continuity inconsistencies.

I've read "cult of Kubrick" people who go overboard and try to apply meaning to that helocopter shadow. I laugh at them.

[Ezee E]

Ha, I've never noticed a camera crew in EWS.

I like To Kill A Mockingbird, but I don't have a problem if they remake it. Downey would actually excite me in that role.

Coppola should regret many other movies before Part II, which is essential to the growth of the Michael Corleone character. Now that he's in the Family, we see that progression, also paralleled by his father earlier. The Vito flashback is probably my favorite story on film period.

[MacGuffin]

I don't have a problem if they remake it.

It's gotten to the point where I don't care if they remake anything, because they are going to at some point.

[Ezee E]

It's gotten to the point where I don't care if they remake anything, because they are going to at some point.
Any "big" movies that you think won't ever be remade?

I'd like to think that movies like Casablanca, Citizen Kane, and The Godfather won't be redone.

[Sycophant]

In another generation's time, I suspect we could see a remake of The Godfather, since it's based on a novel. Citizen Kane and Casablanca seem harder to tackle, but I would've probably said the same thing about The Manchurian Candidate seven years ago, so.

Remakes don't bother me, because they don't erase the original/earlier films, and could even have something new and interesting to offer. I swear I typed that exact sentence in another thread like four days ago.

[Pop Trash]

Thoughts on The Wrestler Rowland? You are a pretty smart chap and a good writer so I'd like to read your view on it.

[MacGuffin]

Any "big" movies that you think won't ever be remade?

I'd like to think that movies like Casablanca, Citizen Kane, and The Godfather won't be redone.

With the Seven Samurai remake and all that, I don't think anything is sacred. But yeah, the movies you name probably wouldn't happen for a while, if at all.

[Ezee E]

I should take that back. Casablanca is one that I think will be attempted at some point since its characters are easily identifiable. It'll be like "who would fit that role." Oh, Ben Affleck.

Which they did talk about years ago when he was with J'Lo.

Citizen Kane though, wouldn't make sense to remake. Not one that would bring in much money I'd suspect. And other people just try to "outdo" The Godfather instead of remaking it.

[MacGuffin]

Citizen Kane though, wouldn't make sense to remake. Not one that would bring in much money I'd suspect. And other people just try to "outdo" The Godfather instead of remaking it.

You're probably right here in both ways: not only would this movie not likely be remade, but we have to consider that the studios are not thinking artistically (in this day and age, Hollywood cinema exists solely for entertainment purposes and money and not for artistic sake, save for a few directors who truly have a vision), but in terms of how much money a particular movie will bring in. I think many people know Citizen Kane is generally regarded as the greatest American movie, so they'd probably recognize something fishy is going on (and hey, if that's what it would take to stop all these remakes, then go ahead and remake it as far as I care).

[Amnesiac]

I've read "cult of Kubrick" people who go overboard and try to apply meaning to that helocopter shadow. I laugh at them.

But is it that big of a deal? I'm not sure what shadow you're referring to, though. I can see why you would feel like laughing at them if they're claiming the shadow is an unequivocally deliberate gesture on Kubrick's behalf.

But is there really harm in analyzing a film in regards to its more serendipitous/unintended facets? Of course, it's more traditional and preferable and arguably more rewarding to analyze what the director actually meant to include but people glean meanings from films that directors never once thought of all the time. And most directors usually welcome that kind of creative plundering.

Is there something inherently wrong with making meaning out of the final product, ostensible blemishes and all?

[number8]

2001, now there's a remake there.

[Duncan]

Watched Stephen Frears' Bloody Kids last night. It's about these two kids who "fake" a crime, and then the ensuing night of consequences. Reminded me a lot of the first half of A Clockwork Orange, except less technically proficient and less interesting thematically. It's got some definite atmosphere though. I guess it captures the punk scene relatively well. I wouldn't really know, but it seems basically accurate. The narrative drive is a bit stunted because the two kids get separated and then it's constantly cutting back and forth between their stories. Decent child actors. Maybe my vote for most obnoxious score of all time.

[Amnesiac]

2001 should definitely be left alone but anything is possible. I wouldn't necessarily be too surprised if I saw an announcement for a remake on the news page one day.

[Ezee E]

I'm pretty surprised that A Clockwork Orange hasn't been remade to be honest.

I was going to say surprised that no Kubrick movies in general have been remade, but there was the TV Shining.

[Duncan]

2001, now there's a remake there.

It could be like a Final Destination type thing where the computer comes up with amazing deaths for the crew members. And then one guy would get blown out into space and he'd let out this really loud scream and the audience would be like wow.

[Amnesiac]

but there was the TV Shining.

I did not know about this. I don't think I even want to know about this.

[Ezee E]

I'd bet the monkeys would get jipped in the remake.

And Amnesiac, the tv version as about 8-10 years ago on ABC. Stephen King wanted it more faithfully done to the book, which mean there were grass animals instead of a maze. Among other things.

[number8]

I'd bet the monkeys would get jipped in the remake.

They'll have it. For a total of 2 minutes. With narration, which then dissolves into a college Engineering classroom scene where the professor is talking about how far we've come as humans with our tools.

[MacGuffin]

King doesn't even like Kubrick's version, if I have heard correctly.

[balmakboor]

But is it that big of a deal? I'm not sure what shadow you're referring to, though. I can see why you would feel like laughing at them if they're claiming the shadow is an unequivocally deliberate gesture on Kubrick's behalf.

But is there really harm in analyzing a film in regards to its more serendipitous/unintended facets? Of course, it's more traditional and preferable and arguably more rewarding to analyze what the director actually meant to include but people glean meanings from films that directors never once thought of all the time. And most directors usually welcome that kind of creative plundering.

Is there something inherently wrong with making meaning out of the final product, ostensible blemishes and all?

During one of the helicopter shots during the title sequence a shadow from the helicopter can be seen on the ground below. It only shows up when the film is shown fullframe on television.

That's one of those --most likely -- true flubs. I don't see much point in analyzing it.

[balmakboor]

King doesn't even like Kubrick's version, if I have heard correctly.

King changed his mind, but, no, he didn't initially like it at all.

[number8]

King liked the shitty TV version.

[Amnesiac]

During one of the helicopter shots during the title sequence a shadow from the helicopter can be seen on the ground below. It only shows up when the film is shown fullframe on television.

That's one of those --most likely -- true flubs. I don't see much point in analyzing it.

I suppose. I know there is some pretty farfetched and ludicrous analysis out there but I try to hesitate before chastising people for where they find meaning in a film. I'm not up for opening the floodgates and giving credibility to everything out there, but disparate meanings founded on things that the director never intended can often contribute to the richness of a text. I was just trying to indicate that, just because it wasn't authorially mandated doesn't mean it's not a valuable point of analysis.

[Rowland]

I've read "cult of Kubrick" people who go overboard and try to apply meaning to that helocopter shadow. I laugh at them.I don't think the helicopter shadow is visible when the aspect ratio is widescreen, which, contrary to common perception, seems the preferred method to view the film.

[Dead & Messed Up]

King liked the shitty TV version.

It didn't need the hedge animals, and it went on too long, but I kinda like it. Like The Stand, it's more a victim of its medium than anything else.

[Pop Trash]

Not sure if you guys saw the news but David Carradine died in Thailand. Possible suicide. They are still not quite sure. Very sad.

[Sycophant]

Not sure if you guys saw the news but David Carradine died in Thailand. Possible suicide. They are still not quite sure. Very sad.

We have a Celebrity Obituary thread in The Kitchen Sink, and BuffaloWilder mentioned it 2 hours ago here in the FDT.

[Bosco B Thug]

King liked the shitty TV version.
I have a feeling King doesn't have the most discriminating taste in movies. I'm sure I have read one of his EW articles and felt queasy afterwards.

Not much to do with Mick Garris and his King adaptations. Except see them if you must and not feel bad for fast forwarding through most of it. And try to ignore the continual presence of Steven Weber. The adaptation of Desperation is probably the worst thing Garris has done, if only because the King novel is totally blah, too.

[Amnesiac]

King's favorite adaptation is 1408, right?

[Rowland]

Worse yet, have any of you seen the movie King directed? Emilio Estevez vs. Killer Sentient Appliances or whatever? Good lord, I hope it was meant to be campy. I mean c'mon, the kids playing softball being massacred by a soda dispensing machine pummeling them with airborne coke cans to Psycho-esque shrieking strings? And that's before the steamroller drives onto the field...

[D_Davis]

I thought Desperation was OK - I liked it well enough - and I think it's a fantastic novel. Top 10 King for sure. I also think his EW column is the only thing worth reading in EW. It is often times brilliant, insightful, and funny.

[Bosco B Thug]

King's favorite adaptation is 1408, right?
Probably. (because it's not very good)

At the end of the recent and very useless King cash-in publication Stephen King at the Movies (which anthologizes the short stories that have been made into movies), he lists his ten favorite film adaptations at the end, although not in order and with no commentary (emphasizing how worthless that compilation book is), so I'm not really answering your question:

Apt Pupil
Cujo
Dolores Claiborne
1408
Green Mile
Misery
The Mist
Shawshank Redemption
Stand By Me
Storm of the Century

[number8]

King's favorite adaptation is 1408, right?

Really? Not Shawshank or Green Mile? I know he loved Carrie.

[Bosco B Thug]

I thought Desperation was OK - I liked it well enough - and I think it's a fantastic novel. Top 10 King for sure. I also think his EW column is the only thing worth reading in EW. It is often times brilliant, insightful, and funny.
I was really disappointed with Desperation. The demonology and setting were interesting, but everything else didn't do it for me.

Also, didn't mean to say anything about King's articles themselves. Just about his taste in movies, as his articles often reveal what movies he's currently geeking out over.

[number8]

Worse yet, have any of you seen the movie King directed? Emilio Estevez vs. Killer Sentient Appliances or whatever? Good lord, I hope it was meant to be campy. I mean c'mon, the kids playing softball being massacred by a soda dispensing machine pummeling them with airborne coke cans to Psycho-esque shrieking strings? And that's before the steamroller drives onto the field...

I've been meaning to. You've just sold me.

[balmakboor]

I don't think the helicopter shadow is visible when the aspect ratio is widescreen, which, contrary to common perception, seems the preferred method to view the film.

No, it isn't visible in the widescreen ratio.

[D_Davis]

I think King's taste in movies is like his taste in books: he likes them. He watches and reads A TON OF STUFF. He is not overly discerning, he simply enjoys being exposed to as much as he can. He's like a sponge. Unlike a lot of us here, I don't think he is overly critical with the things he watches and reads. He likes a good yarn, and enjoys being entertained, and that's totally cool.

[number8]

So, for his The Warriors remake, Tony Scott has been meeting with real life gangs in LA--Blood, Crips, all of them--and he plans to have the "Can you dig it" shot to feature 100,000 of these bangers gathered together, representing their real gangs.

In completely unrelated news, Tony Scott has been arrested for starting a major gang riot.

[Bosco B Thug]

So, for his The Warriors remake, Tony Scott has been meeting with real life gangs in LA--Blood, Crips, all of them--and he plans to have the "Can you dig it" shot to feature 100,000 of these bangers gathered together, representing their real gangs.

In completely unrelated news, Tony Scott has been arrested for starting a major gang riot.

Yet to happen, right? You made me Google News search.

I wish him luck, LAPD approval, and the appropriate budgeting for increased security.

[Spun Lepton]

In completely unrelated news, Tony Scott has been arrested for starting a major gang riot.

Maybe he showed them all Domino?

[D_Davis]

That's disgusting. Real gangs should not be glorified like that.

What's next, a movie about pedophiles in which real members of NAMBLA are used to populate a convention?

[Bosco B Thug]

I just realized that there are a ton of King films that I've seen way too many of. I've even seen the Angela Bettis Carrie.

BEST
1. The Shining
2. Carrie
3. Cujo
4. The Mist
5. Christine
6. The Mangler (yeah, that's right, loud and proud)

INDIFFERENT: Stand By Me, The Shawshank Redemption, 1408, Hooper's Salem's Lot

WORST
1. Ugh CHILDREN OF THE CORN
2. Ugh DREAMCATCHER
3. Ugh NEEDFUL THINGS
4. Ugh PET SEMATARY
5. Ugh IT

Ugly set of movies right there. Scatter the Mick Garris movies in there somewhere.

Need to see The Dead Zone. Have the morbid desire to see Thinner. And do I have to see The Green Mile? Ehhhh.

[number8]

Yet to happen, right? You made me Google News search.

Yeah, sorry. No, he's still in pre-production. This is his plan for the film, to make a realistic modern-day LA gang culture Warriors, and he's visited the various gangs to ask for their participation. Most of them said yes, being fans of the original film, so it is going to happen should the movie start production, which is still a maybe.

[Spun Lepton]

Worse yet, have any of you seen the movie King directed? Emilio Estevez vs. Killer Sentient Appliances or whatever? Good lord, I hope it was meant to be campy. I mean c'mon, the kids playing softball being massacred by a soda dispensing machine pummeling them with airborne coke cans to Psycho-esque shrieking strings? And that's before the steamroller drives onto the field...

King readily admits how bad the movie turned out in his book On Writing. He was on a lot of coke when he made it, so just keep that in mind. Yes, it's supposed to be campy.

[Pop Trash]

Worse yet, have any of you seen the movie King directed? Emilio Estevez vs. Killer Sentient Appliances or whatever? Good lord, I hope it was meant to be campy. I mean c'mon, the kids playing softball being massacred by a soda dispensing machine pummeling them with airborne coke cans to Psycho-esque shrieking strings? And that's before the steamroller drives onto the field...

That movie is kind of awesome. It used to be on basic cable all the time when I was a kid in the late 80s/early 90s so I've probably seen it at least five times. Love the AC/DC during the opening as well.

[Bosco B Thug]

Yeah, sorry. No, he's still in pre-production. This is his plan for the film, to make a realistic modern-day LA gang culture Warriors, and he's visited the various gangs to ask for their participation. Most of them said yes, being fans of the original film, so it is going to happen should the movie start production, which is still a maybe.
Wow, messy. Yeah, I think I'm with D_Davis on this one, the stunt shouldn't happen.

[Watashi]

How do you exactly approach a gang? It's not like they have open houses.

[D_Davis]

Wow, messy. Yeah, I think I'm with D_Davis on this one, the stunt shouldn't happen.

A couple of months ago the Seattle Times, or PI, can't remember, did a series of interviews with gang members in which the bangers talked about all the crimes they've committed. It really made me angry; why aren't they in jail? They were confessing to crimes in the paper. I just don't get it. Then they also had pictures of them in their colors, and their tats and stuff; bangers see that crap as making them more "real" and "hard." I don't mind fake gang stuff in movies, but the real stuff makes me kind of sick, especially since I often lived in fear growing up in Fresno Ca.

[number8]

How do you exactly approach a gang? It's not like they have open houses.

They kinda do. How do you think journalists and research writers do it? Gangs have known headquarters and/or turfs. You just go and talk to someone and present your intentions.

Scott said that he could only go up to the second-in-command of each gang. He's never met any of the leaders.

[megladon8]

I'd really like to make a documentary about the homeless people living in the subway tunnels under New York City.

Apparently there is an entire "City of the Lost" (as NY'ers call it) down there. More than 300,000 people living in those tunnels, with their own communities and cliques and everything.

I find that simultaneously fascinating, terrifying, and very sad.

[number8]

A couple of months ago the Seattle Times, or PI, can't remember, did a series of interviews with gang members in which the bangers talked about all the crimes they've committed. It really made me angry; why aren't they in jail? They were confessing to crimes in the paper. I just don't get it. Then they also had pictures of them in their colors, and their tats and stuff; bangers see that crap as making them more "real" and "hard." I don't mind fake gang stuff in movies, but the real stuff makes me kind of sick, especially since I often lived in fear growing up in Fresno Ca.

Well, that's all unsubstantiated. I could get tattoos and go to a journalist and get him to write about how I killed 5 rivals with a hammer. I never did it, and no one can prove either way. Would it be fair to give me a life sentence for it?

[Winston*]

I'd really like to make a documentary about the homeless people living in the subway tunnels under New York City.

Apparently there is an entire "City of the Lost" (as NY'ers call it) down there. More than 300,000 people living in those tunnels, with their own communities and cliques and everything.

I find that simultaneously fascinating, terrifying, and very sad.

http://www.documentarychannel.com/store/images/darkdays.jpg

[Milky Joe]

Worse yet, have any of you seen the movie King directed? Emilio Estevez vs. Killer Sentient Appliances or whatever? Good lord, I hope it was meant to be campy. I mean c'mon, the kids playing softball being massacred by a soda dispensing machine pummeling them with airborne coke cans to Psycho-esque shrieking strings? And that's before the steamroller drives onto the field...

That sounds awesome.

[number8]

I'd really like to make a documentary about the homeless people living in the subway tunnels under New York City.

Apparently there is an entire "City of the Lost" (as NY'ers call it) down there. More than 300,000 people living in those tunnels, with their own communities and cliques and everything.

I find that simultaneously fascinating, terrifying, and very sad.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Days_(documentary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Days_%28documentary))

It's very good.


EDIT: DAMN YOU WINSTON.

[EvilShoe]

So basically Tony Scott is acting like a real life Cyrus?
I hope for his sake life won't imitate art.

[Spun Lepton]

http://www.documentarychannel.com/store/images/darkdays.jpg

Queued. Thanks for the heads-up, Winston. It does sound very fascinating, meg.

[lovejuice]

Well, that's all unsubstantiated. I could get tattoos and go to a journalist and get him to write about how I killed 5 rivals with a hammer. I never did it, and no one can prove either way. Would it be fair to give me a life sentence for it?
at least, should you be on trial?

[Spun Lepton]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Days_(documentary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Days_%28documentary))

It's very good.


EDIT: DAMN YOU WINSTON.

Pwned.

[megladon8]

Oh awesome, I'll check that one out.

Thanks number8 and Winston*!

[D_Davis]

Well, that's all unsubstantiated. I could get tattoos and go to a journalist and get him to write about how I killed 5 rivals with a hammer. I never did it, and no one can prove either way. Would it be fair to give me a life sentence for it?

No - not without a proper trial.

But where there is smoke, there is often fire, especially when gangs are involved.

The way gangs create fear in the lives of people not involved in the gang lifestyle is very, very disturbing to me.

[number8]

I'm currently watching Tak Sakaguchi's directorial debut, Be A Man! Samurai School!

It's quite obvious that he is a protege of Ryuhei Kitamura.

[megladon8]

Do gangs ever really mess with people who aren't involved in gangs themselves?

I mean of course there's the issue of crossfire in a gun fight, and I'm certainly not condoning gang activity at any level.

But do gangs ever really just say "hey there's some guy...let's go mess with him".

[number8]

No - not without a proper trial.

Trial? That's where it gets iffy. Do you think the cops should be able to arrest me and put me on trial, just because I make up stories? Not even claiming credit on an ongoing investigation, mind you, cause that's obstruction of justice, but if I just go on an interview and say that the three teardrops tats on my face represent 3 people I've gunned down.

All I'm saying is, it's totally angering, but that's why criminals can go on TV or write books about their crimes, and still get away with it. Now, if the cops want to take it as a "smoke" and then re-open investigation, that's another matter. But that's the extent of it.

[lovejuice]

But do gangs ever really just say "hey there's some guy...let's go mess with him".
i think that's how they operate. especially if you own a business and they want something from you.

[number8]

I'm currently watching Tak Sakaguchi's directorial debut, Be A Man! Samurai School!

It's quite obvious that he is a protege of Ryuhei Kitamura.

This movie is awesome.

[The Mike]

1) Hasn't Casablanca already been remade? Like, in the '80s?

2) Why in the name of Bob Dole do I not currently own a copy of Maximum Overdrive???? That movie is painfully awesome.

[Melville]

I'd really like to make a documentary about the homeless people living in the subway tunnels under New York City.

Apparently there is an entire "City of the Lost" (as NY'ers call it) down there. More than 300,000 people living in those tunnels, with their own communities and cliques and everything.

I find that simultaneously fascinating, terrifying, and very sad.
Yeah, that's pretty fascinating stuff. (Though there's no way the population is anything close to 300,000, which would be one-fifth that of Manhattan; according to the New York Post, the number is more like 1500.) There's a book about it called The Mole People: Life in the Tunnels Beneath New York City,
(http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2488/are-there-really-mole-people-living-under-the-streets-of-new-york-city) which sound pretty intriguing, if somewhat exaggerated in its details.

What I want to see a documentary on is the walled city of Kowloon (http://images.google.ca/images?q=walled%20city%20of%20 kowloon), which seems like the most awesome place ever. Too bad it was torn down.

[Sycophant]

1) Hasn't Casablanca already been remade? Like, in the '80s?

As a television show, apparently! A 1983 one hour drama with Hector Elizondo and Ray Liotta, it lasted five episodes. More of a prequel, it would seem, as was the fifties television series before it.

Actually, Wikipedia tells me Bollywood director Rajeev Nath is working on a remake.

[The Mike]

As a television show, apparently! A 1983 one hour drama with Hector Elizondo and Ray Liotta, it lasted five episodes. More of a prequel, it would seem, as was the fifties television series before it.

Actually, Wikipedia tells me Bollywood director Rajeev Nath is working on a remake.
OK, I think the Bollywood one was what I was thinkin' of. Though I did know about the TV Series, too. (There was also a TV series in the '50s, the pilot of which is available on the 2-Disc SE).

[Grouchy]

To pick up on a conversation from a few pages back, I thought it was pretty much established that Godfather II and III had been cash-ins. Hell, the third one was only made because Zoetrope was facing bankruptcy. Still, the second movie greatly fleshes out the Corleone family and tells a very different story from the first one, so in my opinion, yes, of course it should've been made. I think Coppola is just on this new "art" period where he's probably rejecting the previous money-making phase.

That stuff with the gangs in the Warriors remake... Eh. Looks like Scott's orchestrating a slaughterhouse. How about just sending the actors to meet the gangs and learn from them and shit?

[baby doll]

Weekend:

Jellyfish (Shira Geffen and Etgar Keret, 2007)

Revisiting: À ma souer!, La Cérémonie, Margot at the Wedding, Mean Streets, She's Gotta Have It, and Touch of Evil.

[EyesWideOpen]

I'm currently watching Tak Sakaguchi's directorial debut, Be A Man! Samurai School!

It's quite obvious that he is a protege of Ryuhei Kitamura.

For some reason I was thinking you were talking about the director of Battlefield Baseball (awesomeness by the way) Yudai Yamaguchi who is a protege of Ryuhei Kitamura also but Tak Sakaguchi also happened to be an actor in Battlefield Baseball so I wasn't too far off.

[Qrazy]

To pick up on a conversation from a few pages back, I thought it was pretty much established that Godfather II and III had been cash-ins. Hell, the third one was only made because Zoetrope was facing bankruptcy. Still, the second movie greatly fleshes out the Corleone family and tells a very different story from the first one, so in my opinion, yes, of course it should've been made. I think Coppola is just on this new "art" period where he's probably rejecting the previous money-making phase.

That stuff with the gangs in the Warriors remake... Eh. Looks like Scott's orchestrating a slaughterhouse. How about just sending the actors to meet the gangs and learn from them and shit?

Maybe Scott spoke to the LAPD first and real cops are going to break up the rally and put a bunch of punks in jail. Scott is justice FTW!

[Qrazy]

Oh and Dark Days is quite good I third the rec.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Oh and Dark Days is quite good I third the rec.

Fourthed. And if my wife was here, she'd totally fifth that shit.

[Qrazy]

Fourthed. And if my wife was here, she'd totally fifth that shit.

That sounds vaguely sexual and potentially painful. I don't need to know what you do with your wife during your off hours KF.

[number8]

That sounds vaguely sexual and potentially painful. I don't need to know what you do with your wife during your off hours KF.

I'd sixth it.

[EvilShoe]

That sounds vaguely sexual and potentially painful. I don't need to know what you do with your wife during your off hours KF.
They have kids, Qrazy. They're obviously perverts.

[Derek]

Shoot the Piano Player: I'm going to go ahead and edit out all of the excess that I had previously written. This is too poorly structured, Truffaut throws us right in (I know I didn't care about what I was watching), and gives us exposition in the middle of the movie? Ruins pacing. Movie picks back up in the second half, but remains no more than a homage to gangster movies. I don't find this to be very important at all. Entertaining, certainly watchable, but definitely passable.

I don't find this post important, entertaining or passable. I think there's a lot more going on here than you're giving it credit for.

[Grouchy]

For what it's worth, I'm with Clipper about Shoot the Piano Player. Not the most memorable movie - just a collection of disjointed jokes, some of which work, some of which not so much.

[Ezee E]

I think if the gangs get to be presented in the film, they'll remain content on set with each other, solely because they wouldn't want that instantly bad publicity to hit.

Now, that's not to say there will be fights over who gets to do security, advisors, etc on the film. That's where the true crime comes in though.

[Ezee E]

Oh, and have you heard, David Carradine is dead.

[Spun Lepton]

Did any of you hear about David Carradine's death? You may not know this lovely trivia-nugget, but, he was Bill in the Kill Bill movies.

[Qrazy]

I don't find this post important, entertaining or passable. I think there's a lot more going on here than you're giving it credit for.

I'm on your side Derek, fantastic film, one of Truffaut's best and one of the best new wave films imo.

[Derek]

For what it's worth, I'm with Clipper about Shoot the Piano Player. Not the most memorable movie - just a collection of disjointed jokes, some of which work, some of which not so much.

No (http://www.match-cut.org/showpost.php?p=134802&postcount=1012).


I'm on your side Derek, fantastic film, one of Truffaut's best and one of the best new wave films imo.

Nice! It actually improved for me quite a bit the second time through.


I also thought Dark Days was great, but I'd still watch meg's documentary.

[Duncan]

Oh yeah, I rewatched The Long Goodbye last night. That might actually be my favourite Altman film, and it might be my choice for best screenplay in a genre flick, like, ever.

[Sycophant]

I'd sixth it.

FILTH.

[MacGuffin]

I don't find this post important, entertaining or passable. I think there's a lot more going on here than you're giving it credit for.

Of course; you loved the film. I didn't find any reason to care about any of the characters and it struck me as an unimportant, generic gangster movie. That said, it wasn't bad, but I didn't think it was that good either. Too much of a crowd pleaser, you might say. It doesn't take any risks.

[Duncan]

Of course; you loved the film. I didn't find any reason to care about any of the characters and it struck me as an unimportant, generic gangster movie. That said, it wasn't bad, but I didn't think it was that good either. Too much of a crowd pleaser, you might say. It doesn't take any risks.

Oh man, that's Derek's favourite thing to hear.

[MacGuffin]

Oh man, that's Derek's favourite thing to hear.

Yeah, I know. But with this, it's character-based; there's very little possible depth aside from the promising of action and emotional reaction that the characters emit as a result of the movies long-winded gags and crime sequences. I know Derek argues that the movie is one of great depth, and I have heard many people argue the movie is like an onion, but I personally just couldn't see it. The introduction of subtext thirty minutes into the movie after we've already been following around who the hell knows for twenty-five strikes me as a poor directoral choice and while I could easily follow along because I'm sort of used to seeing movies like this, and I was curious about what was going to happen next, the movie didn't offer any insight as to how the characters reacted to the things that they were going through. For example, Charlie or whatever his name is doesn't seem the least impacted by his ex-wifes' suicide, and Truffaut feels a flashback does more than enough to sum up the characters' psychological state, which seems rather superficial to me. When Charlie and Léna are kidnapped, Truffaut does not bother with investigating how this abduction affects the characters, but rather, draws them into conversation with the criminals and avoids any emotional investigation or psychological examination entirely.

I just find the movie to be generally pretty bland as a whole. It's got everything there on the surface: a pretty decent story, awesome music, cinematography by Raoul Coutard, and it takes place in Paris and in some really awesome snowy mountains, but the movie never goes beyond these foundations; it never becomes a movie interested in exploring the characters' psyche and thereby offering any intellectual stimulation. Baby doll, from this site, once said Truffaut made art films for people who don't like art films, and I'm starting to see why. The 400 Blows was a masterful character study, but movies like Jules and Jim and this just strike me as generally uninspired.

[Raiders]

I'm just not sure I watched the same film. Generic? Takes no risks? It's easily the riskiest thing I think Truffaut ever pulled. It barely even follows a script but rather the whims of its creator. Truffaut creates right from the beginning an entire car action sequence and then abandons it; he casually edits what feel like important character moments with quips of irreverent humor and so forth. What he creates is a tapestry of cinema, not really character or emotion. He puts himself, sometimes haphazardly, into each sequence in the film. I think it ultimately feels very organic and playful at the same time, and the greatest trick is the same Truffaut always pulled which is to create, almost out of thin air, moments of overwhelming emotion that both resonate and dissipate (here, the body sliding down the ice, the final images, etc.).

It's a gorgeous, beautiful and wickedly entertaining film. By far my favorite of Truffaut's.

[balmakboor]

W/E

Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song
Daisies
The films of James Broughton: The Early Years

[MacGuffin]

For example,

A few more things:

1. Spoilers. When Fido is kidnapped, Clarisse is locked in the room and supposedly gets drunk, but after Léna asks her what occurred and concludes she is drunk, we never heard of her again. We can collect that Charlie and Léna would have went on to be together, but this doesn't occur, and we never learn anything else about Clarisse. She's just another character Truffaut introduces with no purpose. (One may even argue that Charlie is suffering after his ex-wife's suicide, but flash-forward, and Charlie doesn't not seem the least bit affected as he sees other women, and when Léna is killed, he seems to keep playing the piano happily.

2. After Léna dies, Truffaut puts another elipsis in the story as if to declare: This is a gangster movie! We don't need to add depth to characters; all they need are guns! Just like after Charlie's ex-wife commits suicide, Truffaut goes ahead in time and doesn't bother to explore how either death has affected Charlie.

3. Chico, the most interesting character in the movie just because of the brilliant performance and the fact that we're meant to believe he's the lead character in the beginning of the movie until Truffaut takes it off into a whole other direction, is never given enough screen time. Charlie's thoughts about him are limited to a line of voiceover dialogue. He runs off early in the movie and we never hear of him again from Charlie (though obviously, Chico has a big impact on what's to occur later; he isn't given nearly enough psychological screentime, if you will, to proportion the importance of his character; he's just there) and after Léna gets killed, they run off yet again.

Again, it's not like I have a major problem with this movie, but it seems I have caught your attention more than once these past few days, so I feel the need to elaborate a bit more than I usually would with a movie like this.

[MacGuffin]

I'm just not sure I watched the same film. Generic? Takes no risks? It's easily the riskiest thing I think Truffaut ever pulled.

I don't know about that. Truffaut casted someone to mirror himself in his own life for a series of about five movies (I've only seen the first one), but I think that is automatically riskier than anything he does here.


It barely even follows a script but rather the whims of its creator. Truffaut creates right from the beginning an entire car action sequence and then abandons it; he casually edits what feel like important character moments with quips of irreverent humor and so forth. What he creates is a tapestry of cinema, not really character or emotion.

Right, but I need more than a "tapestry", even Godard's "tapestry" of a gangster flick, Band of Outsiders, has things to say about his characters and the urban alienation of their environment around them.


He puts himself, sometimes haphazardly, into each sequence in the film. I think it ultimately feels very organic and playful at the same time, and the greatest trick is the same Truffaut always pulled which is to create, almost out of thin air, moments of overwhelming emotion that both resonate and dissipate (here, the body sliding down the ice, the final images, etc.).

It is playful, and the body sliding down the ice is an unsettling image, I will give you that, but how did he pull it out of thin air? She got shot, and fell down a snow-covered hill. It's not like there's anything innovative about that (but again, at the risk of sounding like a smartass again (and please tell me if I am), it is a good image made better by Coutard's camera).


It's a gorgeous, beautiful and wickedly entertaining film. By far my favorite of Truffaut's.

I'm not giving up on him yet. There are still quite a few that interest me and I should probably revisit Jules and Jim, because I didn't like it very much at all the first time around.

[Ivan Drago]

WOAH. Just finished the first disc of Once Upon A Time In America...it's fucking great so far. But as much as I hate watching movies in two sittings, I may have to for this one, as it's getting late. :evil:

[Derek]

WOAH. Just finished the first disc of Once Upon A Time In America...it's fucking great so far. But as much as I hate watching movies in two sittings, I may have to for this one, as it's getting late. :evil:

If I'm not mistaken, they foolishly put the intermission not too far into the second disk (no more than 15-20 minutes), so that's a better place to stop.

[right_for_the_moment]

Redbelt or The Thin Red Line. Any thoughts on these? I've had them out from Netflix for too long now.

[Winston*]

Redbelt or The Thin Red Line. Any thoughts on these? I've had them out from Netflix for too long now.
The Thin Red Line is pretty much the best movie.

[right_for_the_moment]

The Thin Red Line is pretty much the best movie.
Days of Heaven is one of my favorites so I'm really excited for it, but it's hard to find 3 uninterrupted hours

[Ezee E]

Redbelt or The Thin Red Line. Any thoughts on these? I've had them out from Netflix for too long now.
Both are very good. I've watched Redbelt a few times and like it more and more. Mamet's best movie.

But The Thin Red Line is masterful. Watch that at a time when you know you won't have any interruptions.

[Grouchy]

No (http://www.match-cut.org/showpost.php?p=134802&postcount=1012).
That's good thinking, and it explains why so many love the film and consider it a milestone, but frankly, I'd rather watch something with a little more substance. I get it, it's all a movie, etc. But I'd rather get that from a ten minute short film than from this excessively long one. Plus, the people in this film never shut up for a second, and French is a pretty fucking grating language for my tastes.

I'm not with Clipper all the way, though - I think Jules and Jim is really solid, in that the voice-over gimmick is at least organic. It's still an ironic distance from the characters, but one that works to increase the film's drama.

Truffaut is not my favorite director from the greats, to tell the truth. The 400 Blows is fantastic, but everything else I've seen beyond that has made me think less of him as a director.

[Grouchy]

http://media.monstersandcritics.com/articles/1356896/article_images/manhunter3.jpg

Manhunter is pretty great stuff. Brings back good Miami Vice waves. I think Brian Cox does a great job as Lecter/Lecktor and probably, if the movie had focused on the character as much as Silence of the Lambs, his performance would end up rivaling Anthony Hopkins. As it is, it's nice to see an alternate take on the character. The movie is unmistakably Michael Mann from the '80s, what with the music, the COMPLETELY WHITE HOUSES and the widescreen compositions the director is famous for. Tom Noonan is unbelievably spooky as the killer, and the film has moments of great intensity. Is it better than Silence? Hard to say. At the moment, I'd rather watch this again than a movie I know practically by heart.

[chrisnu]

Oh yeah, I rewatched The Long Goodbye last night. That might actually be my favourite Altman film, and it might be my choice for best screenplay in a genre flick, like, ever.
I loved this when I originally saw it a few years ago, and I should really revisit it. This and California Split.

[lovejuice]

finally have a chance to watch playtime in theatre. it's glorious. i'm so glad i resist the temptation to watch it on dvd.

[B-side]

The Perfect Vagina was kinda illuminating. I wasn't aware there was such a growing insecurity among women regarding the appearance of their vagina. It seems to be becoming as much of an issue for them as penis size is for men. Not to say they weren't worrying more than enough already about their boob and waist sizes and all that, but this is just another in a long line of reasons people feel insecure and it's pretty sad.

[soitgoes...]

The Perfect Vagina was kinda illuminating. I wasn't aware there was such a growing insecurity among women regarding the appearance of their vagina. It seems to be becoming as much of an issue for them as penis size is for men. Not to say they weren't worrying more than enough already about their boob and waist sizes and all that, but this is just another in a long line of reasons people feel insecure and it's pretty sad.
Hmm. I'm skeptical. I've never heard a woman complain about their "vagina's" appearance. (The filmmakers, I hope, are aware of the fact that the vagina is on the inside?) Every woman I've been with on a more intimate level has voiced concern over other aspects of their bodies, namely breast size and leg size. I'm sure they are out there, but I don't think it's a widespread concern.

[soitgoes...]

I have come to the conclusion that, in the 60's Sharmila Tagore was one of the most beautiful actresses in cinema.

[B-side]

Hmm. I'm skeptical. I've never heard a woman complain about their "vagina's" appearance. (The filmmakers, I hope, are aware of the fact that the vagina is on the inside?) Every woman I've been with on a more intimate level has voiced concern over other aspects of their bodies, namely breast size and leg size. I'm sure they are out there, but I don't think it's a widespread concern.

The labia and the outer appearance is the concern. The doc is also focused on Britain, not the US.

[balmakboor]

Redbelt or The Thin Red Line. Any thoughts on these? I've had them out from Netflix for too long now.

While I was at Up, some guy behind me was louding tell his friend about this really stupid Vietnam movie that just had a bunch of guys sitting around talking bullshit and was way too long. He shut it off ofter a couple hours. He told his friend, "Don't bother with it. It's called The Thin Red Line."

After Up, he loudly said, "That was pretty good but way too long."

[Scar]

http://media.monstersandcritics.com/articles/1356896/article_images/manhunter3.jpg

Manhunter is pretty great stuff. Brings back good Miami Vice waves. I think Brian Cox does a great job as Lecter/Lecktor and probably, if the movie had focused on the character as much as Silence of the Lambs, his performance would end up rivaling Anthony Hopkins. As it is, it's nice to see an alternate take on the character. The movie is unmistakably Michael Mann from the '80s, what with the music, the COMPLETELY WHITE HOUSES and the widescreen compositions the director is famous for. Tom Noonan is unbelievably spooky as the killer, and the film has moments of great intensity. Is it better than Silence? Hard to say. At the moment, I'd rather watch this again than a movie I know practically by heart.

I need to give this a rewatch. I thought it was ok the first time I saw it, but I absolutely loved the ending with Iron Butterfly blasting on the stereo.

[Mara]

(The filmmakers, I hope, are aware of the fact that the vagina is on the inside?)

This is a huge pet peeve of mine.

[Winston*]

"I've heard of popcorn in the face, but this is ridiculous!"

Role Models is quality.

[megladon8]

The labia and the outer appearance is the concern. The doc is also focused on Britain, not the US.


Kate Beckinsale says her vagina is her very best feature.

[D_Davis]

Anyone else here ever see The Master Gunfighter?

http://www.thebiff.org/art/2k8/Master_gunfighter01.jpg

This movie is awesome.

I just ordered the DVD - it's been many years since I've seen it.

[Dukefrukem]

No but that poster is awesome.

[D_Davis]

No but that poster is awesome.

I know. I want a framed one so bad.

[Dukefrukem]

I watched Mad Max last night for the first time in completion. I can't believe how bland that film is compared to the other two movies. I don't think it does a very good job setting up the universe that is depicted so well in the Road Warrior.

[D_Davis]

Mad Max is the truth, The Road Warrior is the myth, Beyond Thunderdome is the legend.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Kate Beckinsale says her vagina is her very best feature.

You sure have some odd trivia stored away.

[number8]

Kate Beckinsale says her vagina is her very best feature.

Yeah, I'll second that.

[BuffaloWilder]

Mad Max is certainly the lesser of the three films, but there's still a lot of great ideas there. It isn't the masterpiece that The Road Warrior is, or that Beyond Thunderdome almost was, and you can tell Miller is still trying to get a feel for it all.

On a somewhat related note, has anyone seen The Chain Reaction? Or, Nuclear Run, I guess it's called?

[Qrazy]

That's good thinking, and it explains why so many love the film and consider it a milestone, but frankly, I'd rather watch something with a little more substance. I get it, it's all a movie, etc. But I'd rather get that from a ten minute short film than from this excessively long one. Plus, the people in this film never shut up for a second, and French is a pretty fucking grating language for my tastes.

I'm not with Clipper all the way, though - I think Jules and Jim is really solid, in that the voice-over gimmick is at least organic. It's still an ironic distance from the characters, but one that works to increase the film's drama.

Truffaut is not my favorite director from the greats, to tell the truth. The 400 Blows is fantastic, but everything else I've seen beyond that has made me think less of him as a director.

While new wave tends to be interested in the artificiality of the cinema that is not why I love Shoot the Piano Player or any of Truffaut's first three films. I love them for the isolated moments. I love Piano Player for how the suicide scene is played, for the scene where he waits for the gangsters in the shack, for the scene at the end where they stop fighting because what's the point? To respond to Clipper depth of character is deeply expressed in these moments but they're frequently non-verbal expressions of character. Moments in Jules et Jim I love... bike ride, looking for items on the ground, paradise found/paradise lost and above all skipping rocks on the lake.

[Qrazy]

Hmm. I'm skeptical. I've never heard a woman complain about their "vagina's" appearance. (The filmmakers, I hope, are aware of the fact that the vagina is on the inside?) Every woman I've been with on a more intimate level has voiced concern over other aspects of their bodies, namely breast size and leg size. I'm sure they are out there, but I don't think it's a widespread concern.

Some labias are nicer than other labias.

[Yxklyx]

Weekend:

American Psycho
Mysterious Skin
The Way of the Gun

[Ezee E]

Weekend:
The Crying Game
Defiance

The Hangover

[Dukefrukem]

Weekend:

The Hangover at some point.

[EyesWideOpen]

Yeah, I'll second that.

Fifthed.

[Rowland]

Synecdoche NY
Timecrimes
The Visitor
The Hangover
Terminator Salvation

[BuffaloWilder]

This could probably go in a music thread, but I would like to hear use of The Falcon Project's "Soul Divider" in something, at some point in the future.

[Ivan Drago]

Weekend:

Once Upon A Time In America
Oldboy (maybe)
Revolutionary Road (2nd)
Either Land of the Lost or The Hangover

[soitgoes...]

Some labias are nicer than other labias.
Eh, maybe, but I've never run across a set of labias where I said, "No way am I sticking my dick in there!" No matter their appearance, I've always been more than eager to do stuff. I guess that's my point. What guy would care about the appearance of the average "vagina?" Sure there might be extreme cases out there, but for the most part I don't see it being a widespread concern.

[Qrazy]

Eh, maybe, but I've never run across a set of labias where I said, "No way am I sticking my dick in there!" No matter their appearance, I've always been more than eager to do stuff. I guess that's my point. What guy would care about the appearance of the average "vagina?" Sure there might be extreme cases out there, but for the most part I don't see it being a widespread concern.

Well I think it would be more of a tongue action concern but yeah labias are labias like pizzas are pizzas... they're always good, but some are better than others. I mean it would take a lot to make one repulsive but some are certainly more appealing than others. In the same way that I"m sure some penises are more appealing than others. There is always the subjective element. The labia is in the eye of the beholder.

[Qrazy]

The American Astronaut - Strange film. It's a musical space western. It's unique and well lit. The story doesn't really go anywhere. And it has the usual dramatic problems of a first feature, actors don't pick up their beats quickly enough. The story is that of Samuel Curtis, an interplanetary trader who travels around the solar system transferring goods from planet to planet and his old frenemy Professor Hess who follows behind and kills everyone Curtis comes into contact with. Watch it for the funny and highly enjoyable intentionally cheesy style.

[Philosophe_rouge]

Eh, maybe, but I've never run across a set of labias where I said, "No way am I sticking my dick in there!" No matter their appearance, I've always been more than eager to do stuff. I guess that's my point. What guy would care about the appearance of the average "vagina?" Sure there might be extreme cases out there, but for the most part I don't see it being a widespread concern.
Well, women are still concerned about it, like men are still concerned about penis size, even though for most it doesn't matter much at all outside of extreme cases. It's probably a bigger issue than you'd think, but because I think talking about it is still somewhat taboo, and many women don't like to... you don't hear about it.

[Spun Lepton]

I've had The American Astronaut crammed down my throat at least three times, and I hate the movie more and more every time.

[Qrazy]

I've had The American Astronaut crammed down my throat at least three times, and I hate the movie more and more every time.

Haha well I think of it in the same vein as The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai or Dark Star... silly low budget yet well rendered B-movie nonsense. If you dislike the style of the film there's really no reason to care about it. I can understand someone hating it but all three of the films I just mentioned I find to be deeply mediocre but mildly enjoyable diversions... still I hate Donnie Darko and Repo Man so I can commiserate with someone despising certain such diversions.

What do you hate about it? It's pointlessness? It's thinly sketched characters? It's stupidity?

[Scar]

I watched Mad Max last night for the first time in completion. I can't believe how bland that film is compared to the other two movies. I don't think it does a very good job setting up the universe that is depicted so well in the Road Warrior.

Car chases cool, most everything else meh, handcuffs + leaking car fuel = AWESOMENESS

[number8]

The American Astronaut is, at least, better than The Astronaut Farmer.

[Spun Lepton]

Haha well I think of it in the same vein as The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai or Dark Star... silly low budget yet well rendered B-movie nonsense. If you dislike the style of the film there's really no reason to care about it. I can understand someone hating it but all three of the films I just mentioned I find to be deeply mediocre but mildly enjoyable diversions... still I hate Donnie Darko and Repo Man so I can commiserate with someone despising certain such diversions.

What do you hate about it? It's pointlessness? It's thinly sketched characters? It's stupidity?

It's been at least three years since I last watched it and I have made no attempt to retain any memories of it. :) I just remember it coming off as pretentious garbage. I remember having a lot of problems with the inconsistent characterizations, too.

Buckaroo Banzai is OK. I've only seen chunks of Dark Star and was not too impressed. Donnie Darko is more pretentious twaddle. (Heehee ... twaddle.) Repo Man is one that I do enjoy.

[Qrazy]

It's been at least three years since I last watched it and I have made no attempt to retain any memories of it. :) I just remember it coming off as pretentious garbage. I remember having a lot of problems with the inconsistent characterizations, too.

Buckaroo Banzai is OK. I've only seen chunks of Dark Star and was not too impressed. Donnie Darko is more pretentious twaddle. (Heehee ... twaddle.) Repo Man is one that I do enjoy.

I didn't think it took itself seriously enough to come across as pretentious (Astronaut). But it certainly was absurd.

[Spun Lepton]

I didn't think it took itself seriously enough to come across as pretentious (Astronaut). But it certainly was absurd.

Comedy can be pretentious if you overestimate how funny you are. :)

[Qrazy]

Comedy can be pretentious if you overestimate how funny you are. :)

Fair enough but I don't think this film even thinks it's that funny. Then again if you think it's not funny at all and it only think it's mildly amusing there's still a bit of a gulf there.

[Beau]

Comedy can be pretentious if you overestimate how funny you are. :)

Hell, that's 90% of comedy. Including Get Smart.

[Spun Lepton]

Hell, that's 90% of comedy. Including Get Smart.

The movie? That didn't come off pretentious, just flat and kind of lifeless.

[Raiders]

The movie? That didn't come off pretentious, just flat and kind of lifeless.

But it obviously thought it was being funny.

[Beau]

The movie? That didn't come off pretentious, just flat and kind of lifeless.

Well, I didn't think it was pretentious, but if I was to use your definition, then it would be, seeing as most of the jokes were humorless. It wasn't painful, because most of the actors are good, but it was, yeah, dull.

[Qrazy]

Get Smart makes me think of Mel Brooks which makes me think of When Things Were Rotten which makes me think have any of you seen this show or know where I could get it (torrent)?

[lovejuice]

Comedy can be pretentious if you overestimate how funny you are. :)
this is my new signature. thank spun.