28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[Ivan Drago]

Two of Armond White's favorite films (A.I. and The Passion of Joan of Arc) are in my top 5. :eek:

[Boner M]

Tarantino on There Will Be Blood (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rp5NjLRRyw&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ecigare ttesandredvines%2Ecom%2Fnews%2 F&feature=player_embedded#t=56).
*Spinal upgrades Death Proof rating based on Dano-bashing*

[Raiders]

Don't understand his rationale for the Dano bashing though. Of course he can't stand toe-to-toe with Day-Lewis. He is supposed to be weaker and meeker and less assured. I still think the performance is terrific.

[Amnesiac]

I really like the performance, as well.

[Boner M]

Me three.

[Sven]

Although I was not fond of the film (though I should follow 'tino's advice and see it again before saying such), I quite liked the performances. They were both equally capable, though Day-Lewis's showmanship was universally more magnificent.

[megladon8]

Dano was great.

[chrisnu]

Tarantino on There Will Be Blood (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rp5NjLRRyw&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ecigare ttesandredvines%2Ecom%2Fnews%2 F&feature=player_embedded#t=56).
Interesting YouTube channel. I agree entirely with his review of Sunshine (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAMYudPgQKc): the first two acts are marvelous, and the third act pretty much self-destructs the whole thing, but doesn't take away from the power of what came before it.

[Ezee E]

Interesting YouTube channel. I agree entirely with his review of Sunshine (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAMYudPgQKc): the first two acts are marvelous, and the third act pretty much self-destructs the whole thing, but doesn't take away from the power of what came before it.
Also agreed.

He doesn't seem to like Danny Boyle much.

[Amnesiac]

I just noticed that Tarantino referred to Plainview as "Longview". :lol:

[Bosco B Thug]

Also agreed.

He doesn't seem to like Danny Boyle much.
He doesn't seem to like Altman either... Oooh, he says he finds his techniques "tiresome," oooooh.

[Qrazy]

Qrazy, were you not taken aback by Jean Claude Van Damme's performance?

Particularly his 6 minute speech?

I definitely shed a few tears for him.

The scene was fairly powerful but the subtitles I had were not ideal so it lost a little of it's potency in the translation. Still overall yeah, I agree definitely an impressive performance and I hope he does more work of this nature or gets some supporting roles in more interesting projects.

[Spun Lepton]

I can't wait for Van Damme to become a success again so he can go back to being a primadonna. :P

Seriously, though, I do watch to catch JCVD one of these days.

[balmakboor]

Tarantino on There Will Be Blood (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rp5NjLRRyw&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ecigare ttesandredvines%2Ecom%2Fnews%2 F&feature=player_embedded#t=56).

I quite enjoyed that. I wouldn't say he bashed Dano. Maybe he'll revise his feelings after another viewing or two and start saying that the relative qualities of the two central performances perfectly reflect the relative qualities of the two central characters. Or at least that's how I feel.

Btw, I don't have any expectations that Inglourious Basterds will be anything to compare with There Will Be Blood. I'd love to be wrong though.

[Pop Trash]

Tarantino on There Will Be Blood (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rp5NjLRRyw&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ecigare ttesandredvines%2Ecom%2Fnews%2 F&feature=player_embedded#t=56).

That's really funny because after seeing There Will Be Blood, I wondered if Tarantino was like "fuck...I gotta try harder if I'm going to still be considered the best American filmmaker to come out of the 90s." He was really mature and eloquent in that though. And he's completely right: a healthy competition with PTA will just bring out the best in both of them. Kudos to him.

Fun fact: Daniel Day Lewis actively courted Tarantino for the John Travolta role in Pulp Fiction.

Oh and Raiders>Tarantino re: Dano's performance. I'm pretty sure the movie is more interesting because he is weak and twerpy. There is something odd and peculiar about boyish preachers. See Will Oldham in Matewan for more proof.

Also, his Sunshine review reminded me why I love that guy. Seriously, I probably wouldn't be posting here if it wasn't for reading/seeing Tarantino interviews and buying an Ebert movie book back in high school.

[Pop Trash]

He doesn't seem to like Altman either... Oooh, he says he finds his techniques "tiresome," oooooh.

He's right on about Altman. It took me forever to get through McCabe as well, but I quite like the film now. But he's correct in that Altman's "innovations" are oft annoying. "Hey my sound mix sux and you can't hear specific dialogue, isn't that cool?" Na dude, put the joint down and mix the movie properly.

[origami_mustache]

I just noticed that Tarantino referred to Plainview as "Longview". :lol:

haha yeah that was pretty hilarious.

[number8]

Yah, he wasn't bashing Dano, he said as much that it was good. He simply thought that the character should have had another actor on DDL's caliber to even out the conflict, which I'm not even sure was PTA's intention.

[Spinal]

Regarding Dano's performance, Tarantino says, "There's nothing bad about it."

Disagreed. Death Proof rating stays where it is.

[BuffaloWilder]

What's bad about Dano's (and where did that name come from?) performance?

[Spinal]

What's bad about Dano's (and where did that name come from?) performance?

It's inauthentic and grating. All calculation and bluster. Nothing behind the eyes.

[BuffaloWilder]

It's inauthentic and grating.

Oh? How so?



Nothing behind the eyes.

See, I disagree.

[Duncan]

It also comes across as kind of desperate. The second actor to play a role, obviously not matching the quality of the actor across from him, too hysteric, his voice cracks annoyingly, he just gets completely run over in every scene, even the ones in which he's supposed to have the upper hand.

It's a great film, but that performance will always stick out as inadequate.

[BuffaloWilder]

I think it's supposed to be a little desperate, especially in the second half. The same goes for him growing more and more hysterical after he loses his son.

[Rowland]

Great thoughts on Sunshine by Tarantino there, especially his observation regarding the thematic importance of Cliff Curtis' character, which I also made and elaborated upon in my analysis of the film. I don't feel the third act is anywhere near disastrous like he does, but I do believe the same philosophical conflict could have been explored without going so deeply into slasher territory. Still, it has enough powerful moments to largely negate the error in writing judgement.

[transmogrifier]

Tarantino dissing Altman means Tarantino don't know shit.

[Milky Joe]

I don't think he dissed Altman. He just said he wasn't an Altman acolyte. When he said that "Altman-esque techniques" were "tiresome" I got the impression he meant other non-Altman films employing those techniques were tiresome. Maybe I'm way off though.

[Pop Trash]

I don't think he dissed Altman. He just said he wasn't an Altman acolyte. When he said that "Altman-esque techniques" were "tiresome" I got the impression he meant other non-Altman films employing those techniques were tiresome. Maybe I'm way off though.

No I'm pretty sure he meant Altman's techniques. Like the sound mixing. Which is bad.

[transmogrifier]

No I'm pretty sure he meant Altman's techniques. Like the sound mixing. Which is bad.

You know when I said Tarantino dissing Altman means Tarantino don't know shit? Well, that goes for other people as well.

[Yum-Yum]

I'm tired of seeing the publicity shots of that guy walking around in his underpants carrying a gun.

Yeah, totally. Talk about underpants fatigue. I mean, someone get this guy some trousers already.


Halifax-born, in fact.

And he's best friends with Jim Thirwell (a.k.a. Clint Ruin, Scrapping Foutus off the Wheel).

[balmakboor]

Our October film series is finalized. We will be showing:

The Kite Runner
Waltz with Bashir
The Willow Tree
Tulpan
Bumbai

I've only seen one, The Willow Tree, which was terrific.

At our meeting to plan our marketing, one of the members returned my copy of W.R. Mysteries of the Organism. I thought I was finally getting it back. But then another member snatched it up. It seems everyone is interested in seeing it now.

I pre-ordered the Eclipse box of Makavejev films already.

[Ezee E]

The Kite Runner?

But why?

[balmakboor]

The Kite Runner?

But why?

It has some big fans in the selection committee and it fit the region/theme we chose to explore. I haven't seen it myself.

[Ezee E]

Not sure if you can fit it in, or if you've seen it at all, but Turtles Can Fly is a good one and would fit with that group.

[megladon8]

It's been over a year since I saw and greatly enjoyed my first Jodorowsky film - El Topo - so I figured it was about time to see another one. Since it's one that seems to be quite well liked I decided to try The Holy Mountain. I was in the mood for a bit of a philosophical head trip, so I was really looking forward to it.

It's one of the worst movies I've seen in years, if not ever.

At no point during its clusterfuck of religious and philosophical B.S. did I ever get the feeling I was seeing something profound, thought-provoking or impressive in any way beyond its admittedly impressive visuals.

This is the stuff I imagine Matt Groening or *shudder* Seth MacFarlane are parodying when they make jokes about college art students doing films where a crying clown flips a pancake.

After about 25 minutes I was literally rolling my eyes almost every time some new attempt at profundity reared its ridiculous head.

By the end of the movie, I honestly wouldn't have been surprised if there was a scene where Satan jumped out of an ice cream cake made of Jesus' semen, pulled out a banjo and started singing country western songs with Kermit the Frog while aliens beamed down and formed an audience.

It would have been better than a lot of what actually happened in the movie.

[Raiders]

It's been over a year since I saw and greatly enjoyed my first Jodorowsky film - El Topo - so I figured it was about time to see another one. Since it's one that seems to be quite well liked I decided to try The Holy Mountain. I was in the mood for a bit of a philosophical head trip, so I was really looking forward to it.

It's one of the worst movies I've seen in years, if not ever.

At no point during its clusterfuck of religious and philosophical B.S. did I ever get the feeling I was seeing something profound, thought-provoking or impressive in any way beyond its admittedly impressive visuals.

This is the stuff I imagine Matt Groening or *shudder* Seth MacFarlane are parodying when they make jokes about college art students doing films where a crying clown flips a pancake.

After about 25 minutes I was literally rolling my eyes almost every time some new attempt at profundity reared its ridiculous head.

By the end of the movie, I honestly wouldn't have been surprised if there was a scene where Satan jumped out of an ice cream cake made of Jesus' semen, pulled out a banjo and started singing country western songs with Kermit the Frog while aliens beamed down and formed an audience.

It would have been better than a lot of what actually happened in the movie.

http://deconstructingthoughts.mlblogs .com/Soccer%20Fail.jpg

[D_Davis]

I love The Holy Mountain. Remember, it's just a movie.

[megladon8]

I love The Holy Mountain. Remember, it's just a movie.


OK...what are you saying?

I know it's just a movie.

I just found it to be a ridiculous, dare I say pretentious one.

[Ezee E]

I didn't like The Holy Mountain either. El Topo is fascinating, mostly because of its first hour where there is actually something going on.

Check out Santa Sangre though. I should really see it again, because I bet that would be my favorite on a rewatch. It's practically Lynch+Fellini's baby.

[D_Davis]

I just found it to be a ridiculous, dare I say pretentious one.

I think that's kind of the point. To me, Jodorowsky is actually making a comment on those kinds of movies. It's kind of about the absurd nature of life and art, how we're always looking for meaning and substance and symbolism; of how both the religious and the secular seek these things. And yet at the end of the film, once the ultimate destination is reached, what does everyone discover? They learn of the ridiculous nature of their quest; we learn to laugh at things that are supposed to be taken very seriously. It's all very absurd, a lot like life.

It's also a gorgeous film to look at. The colors are deep and evocative, the framing is perfect, and it contains one memorable image after another.

[Spinal]

Top 10 film for me. Only Prospero's Books rivals it for audacity, artistry and invention per second.

[megladon8]

I will agree that it's gorgeous to look at, and if it weren't for the striking visuals I would have probably given the film a rating of 0. But I'm sorry, I can't agree with what you wrote before that.

Yes, the final image brings about a sense of irony, but it doesn't dismiss everything that has come before. It's not like a giant "ha! Joke's on your for finding symbolism in Jesus' shit turning into gold!".

The images it was presenting right from the beginning were all too obvious to have been simply a lead-up to the ending. The prostitution of religion, the greed inherent in secular life, etc.

[D_Davis]

It's not like a giant "ha! Joke's on your for finding symbolism in Jesus' shit turning into gold!".


I disagree. I think the joke is on the audience. The movie asks us to laugh at the things we take seriously. Not in a mocking manner, but in such a way that adds levity to the situation. It asks us to admit to ourselves the absurdities of life.

[Spinal]

The images it was presenting right from the beginning were all too obvious to have been simply a lead-up to the ending. The prostitution of religion, the greed inherent in secular life, etc.

I don't think they're obvious. They're clear and vivid. Just because you can take meaning from a symbol doesn't mean that it's obvious. Jodorowsky is the last director I would connect with the word 'obvious'. His images are wonderfully creative and often shocking.

Incidentally, the resonance of the symbols is a major reason that I like this film more than El Topo. I appreciate the focus and the clarity.

[D_Davis]

His images are wonderfully creative and often shocking.

And often hilarious.

[Spinal]

And often hilarious.

Yes, thank you, that too.

[Qrazy]

I quite enjoyed that. I wouldn't say he bashed Dano. Maybe he'll revise his feelings after another viewing or two and start saying that the relative qualities of the two central performances perfectly reflect the relative qualities of the two central characters. Or at least that's how I feel.

Btw, I don't have any expectations that Inglourious Basterds will be anything to compare with There Will Be Blood. I'd love to be wrong though.

I think he'll continue to say what he said, which I agree with. Dano is competent, good even, but not on the same level as Day Lewis. This is true of lots of films where one performance shines so brightly that many of the supporting roles just don't match up. One case that I think is comparable (although this case I don't actually agree with) is with Andrei Rublev, Tarkovsky was happy with the performance of Anatoli Solonitsyn as Rublev but less happy with Nikolay Burlyaev as the bellmaker.

Also in terms of your latter statement I found it funny that Tarantino chose himself as Brando for the Brando/Clift analogy.

[BuffaloWilder]

Aw, gee. Now, don't I feel like an idiot.

You were all talking about Paul Dano.

Hmmm.

[Qrazy]

OK...what are you saying?

I know it's just a movie.

I just found it to be a ridiculous, dare I say pretentious one.

I feel like you weren't able to get on board with the film's sense of humor. If you didn't find much of what you saw funny than yeah it will just come across as grating and obnoxious.

[Amnesiac]

One case that I think is comparable (although this case I don't actually agree with) is with Andrei Rublev, Tarkovsky was happy with the performance of Anatoli Solonitsyn as Rublev but less happy with Nikolay Burlyaev as the bellmaker.

Yeah, I recently read through that part in Sculpting In Time where he mentions his misgivings about the actor. But he says he got around Burlyaev's limitations by having the threat of his dismissal loom over him, thereby unsettling him. So I suppose, given the tactics he used to goad a good performance out of him, he may have been finally happy with the performance in the end.

I thought the performance was pretty damn great, myself.

[Qrazy]

Yeah, I recently read through that part in Sculpting In Time where he mentions his misgivings about the actor. But he says he got around Burlyaev's limitations by having the threat of his dismissal loom over him, thereby unsettling him. So I suppose, given the tactics he used to goad a good performance out of him, he may have been finally happy with the performance in the end.

I thought the performance was pretty damn great, myself.

Yeah I thought it was pretty great also. But I don't remember if I read it there, the nostalghia website or elsewhere but I remember reading that he wasn't fully satisfied with the finished performance either. He wasn't unhappy with it, it just wasn't quite up to where he wanted it to be I think.

[megladon8]

I feel like you weren't able to get on board with the film's sense of humor. If you didn't find much of what you saw funny than yeah it will just come across as grating and obnoxious.


Perhaps this is it, and perhaps I need to re-watch it in time.

But as of now, I can say I took absolutely nothing of value from the film, aside from a handful of images I would say are indisputably striking.

[Qrazy]

Perhaps this is it, and perhaps I need to re-watch it in time.

But as of now, I can say I took absolutely nothing of value from the film, aside from a handful of images I would say are indisputably striking.

You're also a horror fan aren't you? Santa Sangre is probably still worth a look for you. Fando y Lis is probably not.

[megladon8]

You're also a horror fan aren't you? Santa Sangre is probably still worth a look for you. Fando y Lis is probably not.


I'm going to watch them all at some point. As I said, I really liked El Topo a lot.

[Amnesiac]

More Tarantino stuff. Artist on Artist with Eli Roth (http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.indi vidual&videoid=61959314).

[Spinal]

Aw, gee. Now, don't I feel like an idiot.

You were all talking about Paul Dano.

Hmmm.

Did you think we were calling Daniel Day-Lewis 'Dano'? :lol:

[Eleven]

Did you think we were calling Daniel Day-Lewis 'Dano'? :lol:

Someone needs to book 'im, pronto.

[Pop Trash]

See I feel the reverse. El Topo is ho-hum for me but seeing The Holy Mountain on the big screen was pretty f'ing cool. The music in that movie is awesome as well.

[megladon8]

I would love to see how Daniel Day-Lewis would respond if one of his fans approached him and insisted on calling him "Dano".

[Spinal]

I would love to see how Daniel Day-Lewis would respond if one of his fans approached him and insisted on calling him "Dano".

Safe to say, milkshakes would be consumed.

[megladon8]

CRAZED FAN: Yo! Dano! Hey! Over here! Dano! 'I drink your milkshake!' Hahaha! Hey man, how's it going?


http://i537.photobucket.com/albums/ff331/chuchitoduque/billthebutcher3wj.jpg

[Spinal]

By the way, meg, that av represents one of my top five Simpsons moments of all time.

[megladon8]

By the way, meg, that av represents one of my top five Simpsons moments of all time.


As well it should.

Amen.

[Spinal]

In truth, though, real life Day-Lewis seems to be a rather kind, gracious guy.

[Eleven]

DDL sure has that "crazed mustachioed gent" thing on screen down pat.

[Amnesiac]

I can't wait to see DDL sing in Nine.

[Ezee E]

DDL is the calmest, most free-spirited celebrity I've met. Very humble too. He's quite the ladies man too because of that.

[Winston*]

Daniel Day Lewis retiring from acting to go to Italy to train as a shoemaker is one of the best celebrity things.

[D_Davis]

Daniel Day Lewis is the greatest guy of all time.

[Sven]

I can't think of a time where he was not the best part of the movie he was in.

Hmmm... maybe The Boxer? I really like that movie.

[BuffaloWilder]

Boy, my cheeks be red.

Oh, well.

[Ezee E]

I can't think of a time where he was not the best part of the movie he was in.

Hmmm... maybe The Boxer? I really like that movie.
What would be better than him in that movie.

He was in Gandhi for a couple minutes, if that, maybe that one.

[megladon8]

DDL gets women because he's humble and nice?

Jeez, are we living in topsy turvy land all of a sudden?

[Dead & Messed Up]

Daniel Day-Lewis is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.

[Ivan Drago]

As well it should.

Amen.

What moment is it? I'm drawing a blank...

[Dead & Messed Up]

What moment is it? I'm drawing a blank...

When the German execs speak with Homer and note that "Germany is the land of chocolate," which sends Homer into a dreamland where dogs are made of chocolate, lampposts are made of chocolate, and a chocolate-built chocolate store sells chocolate for an impressive 50% discount.

[Sven]

What would be better than him in that movie.

Was this a diss on that movie? If so, drop out now, E... you're a child playing in an adult's game.


He was in Gandhi for a couple minutes, if that, maybe that one.

Doubt it. That movie is long and boring.

[Ivan Drago]

When the German execs speak with Homer and note that "Germany is the land of chocolate," which sends Homer into a dreamland where dogs are made of chocolate, lampposts are made of chocolate, and a chocolate-built chocolate store sells chocolate for an impressive 50% discount.

YES. I love that episode.

"We were talking about chocolate..."
"ZAT VAS 10 MINUTES AGO!"

[Dead & Messed Up]

YES. I love that episode.

"We were talking about chocolate..."
"ZAT VAS 10 MINUTES AGO!"

"The following layoffs will be read in alphabetical order. Simpson, Homer.

...that is all."

[BuffaloWilder]

Doubt it. That movie is long and boring.

it's about ghandi shame on you

[Spinal]

My parents took me to Gandhi when I was about 8 years old. I always thought that was cool of them. Haven't seen it since though.

[BuffaloWilder]

You know, I like that Where The Buffalo Roam actually imagines a fictional confrontation between Nixon and Thompson - that's the best scene in the film, and it's entirely because of Murray.

I just wish the rest of the film wasn't so - non-directed.

[megladon8]

You know what?

When he stops masturbating, I really like listening to Quentin Tarantino talk about movies. He has a lot of interesting things to say, and I actually notice that he and I see lots of things very similarly.

[BuffaloWilder]

Tarentino's no different from any of the guys here - he's just a bit louder, a little more nasally, and famous. And, I can't blame him for that.

[Dead & Messed Up]

You know what?

When he stops masturbating, I really like listening to Quentin Tarantino talk about movies. He has a lot of interesting things to say, and I actually notice that he and I see lots of things very similarly.

I wish he would stop with cinema and devote more time to masturbation. Think of all the onanism he missed while directing Kill Bill Vol. 2.

[Boner M]

Anyone seen Albert Serra's Honor de cavalleria? Ultra-ascetic take on Cervantes' Don Quixote, probably the most minimalist narrative film I've seen, I think. I feel inequipped to talk about it, but I watched it in one sitting, and my periods of contemplation were mostly to do with the film's form & content and not what I'd eat for dinner afterwards... so it has that going for it. Michael Sicinski's review (http://academichack.net/reviewsApril2007.htm#Honor) helped me sort out my thoughts, particularly his last paragraph about the film's peculiar form:


He knows his audience, the festival-going set who have come to expect a particular type of rigor and resplendent natural beauty in films such as these. However, just as Honor adopts neither a critical nor a reverential stance towards the Cervantes text, Serra provides neither the sumptuousness of the landscape minimalists (Joe, Kiarostami, Benning) nor the loosey-goosey style that has glutted the image market since the advent of digital video. Instead we have a hybrid style, one that features scenes of deep tenderness and stunning natural splendor and yet allows a digital artifact to pop in and break the spell. Or, a scene of figures in a landscape, engaged in sparse, concentrated dialogue about the ways of God, is bisected between two different camera views for no apparent reason. It's like Terrence Malick directing an episode of "I Love Lucy." And so then, ultimately, the question becomes, are these decisions flaws? Do we have a right (and this is both an aesthetic and an ethical question) to demand a particular standard of filmic beauty in every situation? Or is Serra correct to set up and then thwart expections, while exceeding others that we (well, I) didn't even know we had? I was overwhelmed by Honor de cavalleria, and above all overwhelmed by the sense that I am still in no real position to evaluate it. I plan to remedy this situation as soon as possible.

[megladon8]

Tarentino's no different from any of the guys here - he's just a bit louder, a little more nasally, and famous. And, I can't blame him for that.


Nah, he's gotten pretty full of himself. Convinced of his own genius.

This is my biggest problem with his later works, particularly Death Proof. The movie will actually stop so he can throw more proverbial QT-sperm in our faces.

I know he loves movies, and it's great when he integrates it in like Pulp Fiction where it's not just the conversations but also the style, the aesthetic, the music, everything.

Death Proof felt like I was being talked at about his love of movies, rather than talked to as a fellow movie lover.

[BuffaloWilder]

Dude, seriously.

http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/7870/41cbs2krxjlss350.jpg

I'm moving to France.

[transmogrifier]

Death Proof is easily his third best film, his best since Pulp Fiction.

[BuffaloWilder]

Nah, he's gotten pretty full of himself. Convinced of his own genius.

...like baby doll and Clipper Ship. Oh my god, the parallels!


This is my biggest problem with his later works, particularly Death Proof. The movie will actually stop so he can throw more proverbial QT-sperm in our faces.

Yes, Death Proof isn't one of his better films - it's almost sleep-inducing for just that reason, until the last half hour where he stops and orchestrates that car stunt.



I know he loves movies, and it's great when he integrates it in like Pulp Fiction where it's not just the conversations but also the style, the aesthetic, the music, everything.

Death Proof felt like I was being talked at about his love of movies, rather than talked to as a fellow movie lover.

Well, I think the problem is that he's so enthusiastic about these things that he sometimes trips over himself and forgets to do that. He can't make up his mind whether or not to proceed with his story or tell you about this latest film he's found out about, rather than do both at the same time - although from every indication that we're getting so far, that's corrected in Inglourious Basterds.

[Spinal]

You know, throwing the word 'proverbial' in front of the phrase 'QT-sperm' really doesn't make the imagery any less nauseating.

[Boner M]

Weekend/now-'til-next-announcement viewings:

Inglourious Basterds
Historie(s) du Cinema (or as much of it as I can)
Insignificance
Road Games
In The Loop

[soitgoes...]

Weekend enjoyments:

La ciénaga
Pontypool
The Story of Late Chrysanthemums
The Banishment
Straits of Hunger

[Qrazy]

Here are some films I have which I may or may not watch in the near or far distant future:

Tora-san 12
Tora-san 13
Tora-san 14
Tora-san 15
Burmese Harp
Il Mestiere delle Armi
All that Heaven Allows
All that Jazz
Lenny
Chappaqua
The Third Generation
Fast Company
Three Times
Innocence
Island of Lost Souls
The Beekeeper
Pandora's Box
Pelle the Conqueror
Possession
Ride Lonesome
Siddhartha
Silent Light
The Loved One
The Man from Earth
Third Part of the Night
Innocent Sorcerers
Yaaba
Yi Yi
Killer Elite
Pistol Opera
Scenic Route
Crime Wave
Visitor of a Museum
Cairo Station

[soitgoes...]

Here are some films I have which I may or may not watch in the near or far distant future:


Burmese Harp
All that Jazz
Pandora's Box
Pelle the Conqueror
Ride Lonesome
Yi Yi
Crime Wave

Of those I've seen, these are all varying degrees of greatish.

[Grouchy]

So, Defiance is a reasonably good film. Nothing extraordinary there, nothing outrageously bad - the very definition of mediocre filmmaking. It might seem strange, but this is the first Zwick film I've ever seen. It doesn't really want me to seek out more, because I feel like I can imagine every second of his movies already on my mind. Daniel Craig has movie star written all over his forehead right now, he just needs the breakthrough movie. Liev Schreiber's character was by far the cooler of the brothers.

[Qrazy]

Of those I've seen, these are all varying degrees of greatish.

What about Tora-san 12-15? :P

People don't seem to talk about Pelle the Conqueror (or Bille August) very often but when I do hear it mentioned it's with high praise.

[Qrazy]

So, Defiance is a reasonably good film. Nothing extraordinary there, nothing outrageously bad - the very definition of mediocre filmmaking. It might seem strange, but this is the first Zwick film I've ever seen. It doesn't really want me to seek out more, because I feel like I can imagine every second of his movies already on my mind. Daniel Craig has movie star written all over his forehead right now, he just needs the breakthrough movie. Liev Schreiber's character was by far the cooler of the brothers.

The Last Samurai was cliched, melodramatic crap. I saw half of Blood Diamond and it struck me as more of the same. I have and will still watch Glory at some point though.

[Grouchy]

The Last Samurai was cliched, melodramatic crap. I saw half of Blood Diamond and it struck me as more of the same. I have and will still watch Glory at some point though.
Something I didn't say about the movie - cut the shit with the bad accents. Either speak English all the way, or don't, but don't cut away from Polish/German to actors inmediately working hard on those clumsy "European" accents. And no, I don't need extended mazel tov sequences to realize these people are Jewish.

Fucking Hollywood.

[soitgoes...]

What about Tora-san 12-15? :P

People don't seem to talk about Pelle the Conqueror (or Bille August) very often but when I do hear it mentioned it's with high praise.
I haven't seen a lot of August's work to know if he's someone that should be talked about often, but this film definitely deserves some love. You can throw in Babette's Feast for a pretty good 1987 Danish film doubleheader.

Also, have you seen Brother? I would think you'd like it (a lot) if you haven't.

[Qrazy]

I haven't seen a lot of August's work to know if he's someone that should be talked about often, but this film definitely deserves some love. You can throw in Babette's Feast for a pretty good 1987 Danish film doubleheader.

Also, have you seen Brother? I would think you'd like it (a lot) if you haven't.

No, I haven't. I'll give it a look. Israfel told me to check out Of Freaks and Men and Cargo 200. I did not like Of Freaks and Men at all. Have but have not yet watched Cargo 200.

Babette's Feast was alright, worth seeing for the story, the filmmaking didn't do anything for me.

[Mara]

Babette's Feast was alright, worth seeing for the story, the filmmaking didn't do anything for me.

Generally speaking, I like films about food. I'd rank this up there with Eat Drink Man Woman as one of the best films about food.

EDIT: I forgot Like Water for Chocolate. That's better than Babette's Feast.

[B-side]

Keaton has entered my life at just the right time, it seems. The Cameraman was terrific.

[Skitch]

I'm an unabashed Edward Zwick fan.

[Sven]

I quite like Zwick myself, though I have not seen The Blood Diamond and wasn't in love with The Last Samurai, though I think I'd like it more on a rewatch. But Glory, The Siege, About Last Night..., and Courage Under Fire are all excellent. Legends of the Fall is good, too.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Weekend:

Moon
Food Inc.
Sin Nombre
Paris 36
Sita Sings the Blues
Summer Hours
Sugar

My local film festival starts tonight.

[balmakboor]

Burmese Harp
All that Heaven Allows - A-
All that Jazz - A-
Lenny - A
The Third Generation - B+ (needs a re-watch)
Innocence - B (not sure yet, only saw it last night)
Pelle the Conqueror - A
Yi Yi - A
Pistol Opera - C- *

A lot of strong stuff there from what I've seen. I'm sure -- on your grading scale -- that everything will be about one grade lower.

* This thing really disappointed me. After seeing a number of Suzukis that I really liked, I had high expectations and it just seemed ugly, sloppy, incoherent filmmaking. Based on other opinions I've read, I probably missed something.

[balmakboor]

W/E

Inglourious Basterds
The Long Goodbye (a re-watch of my favorite Altman movie)

[balmakboor]

http://www.moviegoods.com/Assets/product_images/1020/365555.1020.A.jpg

Has anyone watched any of the stuff from Crown International Pictures? I picked up one of the Grindhouse Experience and one of the Drive-in Cult Classics sets and have started watching them every so often. They are low-budget and quickly made. I love how every time a set includes bookshelves (in a home, at a school, in a lawyer's office) it is fully stocked with Reader's Digest Condensed Books. I love how the female leads are both hot and absolutely terrible as actresses.

I've found them all fun and even interesting as a sort of low-rent genre. I've seen:

Trip with the Teacher
Malibu High
The Babysitter
Weekend with the Babysitter
Pink Angels

I found Pink Angels especially interesting. It seems an obvious exploitation of Easy Rider and features a Hell's Angels-like motorcycle gang where all the members are flaming gay, some cross-dressers. It felt like it was shot in the same manner as Hopper did with Easy Rider. Grab a camera and some drugs and hit the road, filming whatever happens and turning gas station attendants and girls behind drugstore counters into unsuspecting cameo movie stars.

[The Mike]

I have a couple of those sets. The only flicks that are sticking out from them in my early morning brain are The Specialist, in which a hottie sets out to seduce and destroy Adam West; and The Pick-Up, in which some people get lost in a hippie van and things get trippy. The former was entertaining as heck, the latter was mind bogglingly ridiculous.

[ledfloyd]

i've been going through QTs catalog this week to prepare for Basterds.

Pulp Fiction seems to have lost a bit of it's luster for me. i certainly don't consider it a masterpiece anymore. it's a bit uneven, and aside from Jules character, a bit flat thematically.

Jackie Brown, on the other hand, gets better with every viewing.

on tap for tonight: Kill Bill

[Amnesiac]

Nah, he's gotten pretty full of himself. Convinced of his own genius.

Yeah, I think this means that BuffaloWilder was right on the money. He isn't that different from some of the guys here. :lol:

[Sven]

Ashes of Time Redux was spectacular, really, but so, so boring. Perhaps this is the definition of Wong Kar Wai, as I have come to understand him. So much yearning and yearning. Unfortunately, yearning is not really all that visually interesting, from a durational perspective. Thankfully, the performances, as monotonous as they usually are in a WKW flick, are very appealing, the photography is incredible, although some of the digital and post coloring stuff (probably unique to the Redux, things like the overhead neck-splurting-blood shot) looks unnatural (slapping WKW's greatest asset, his naturalism, in the face), and the structure is quite fascinating.

Still, I wish that all the flat talk talk talk stuff (which completely destroyed 2046) wasn't so necessary to his approach. I guess I am not won over by ponderous recitation. Thumbs up on the movie, though.

[Amnesiac]

Ashes of Time Redux was spectacular, really, but so, so boring. Perhaps this is the definition of Wong Kar Wai, as I have come to understand him. So much yearning and yearning. Unfortunately, yearning is not really all that visually interesting, from a durational perspective. Thankfully, the performances, as monotonous as they usually are in a WKW flick, are very appealing, the photography is incredible, although some of the digital and post coloring stuff (probably unique to the Redux, things like the overhead neck-splurting-blood shot) looks unnatural (slapping WKW's greatest asset, his naturalism, in the face), and the structure is quite fascinating.

Still, I wish that all the flat talk talk talk stuff (which completely destroyed 2046) wasn't so necessary to his approach. I guess I am not won over by ponderous recitation. Thumbs up on the movie, though.

I've been wondering which WKW film I should check out next. I watched Chungking Express a few weeks back and it had a certain ecstatic charm to it that I found pretty ingratiating. Redux was playing at a local theater a while ago but I missed the boat. Maybe In The Mood For Love?

[Derek]

Maybe In The Mood For Love?

I think it's his best, but your mileage may vary depending on your tolerance for yearning and talking.

[Eleven]

yearning and talking.

Isn't this what "Wong Kar Wai" roughly translated to English means?

[Raiders]

Isn't this what "Wong Kar Wai" roughly translated to English means?

Hm, you may be right. Let's ask baby doll.

[Eleven]

Hm, you may be right. Let's ask baby doll.

Poupée bébé, s'il vous plaît.

[Skitch]

I've found them all fun and even interesting as a sort of low-rent genre. I've seen:

Trip with the Teacher
Malibu High
The Babysitter
Weekend with the Babysitter
Pink Angels


I buy those grindhouse box sets occasionally. They amuse me as well.

[Sven]

In light of just watching Revolver, I'm knocking my score for RocknRolla down a peg. RocknRolla, while fun, nowhere reaches for the kind of highs that Revolver achieves. I love how it employs the cliches of the shoot 'em up genre, but attempts to wrestle with the psychological elements of those cliches. It's a film that questions the nature of its being. It's wild and rare and impressive.

[Raiders]

In light of just watching Revolver, I'm knocking my score for RocknRolla down a peg. RocknRolla, while fun, nowhere reaches for the kind of highs that Revolver achieves. I love how it employs the cliches of the shoot 'em up genre, but attempts to wrestle with the psychological elements of those cliches. It's a film that questions the nature of its being. It's wild and rare and impressive.

REP.

[Amnesiac]

REP.

Huh. I always thought you were one of those above doing this.

[Raiders]

Huh. I always thought you were one of those above doing this.

Above doing what? Would you prefer I edit that to say "I agree?"

[Amnesiac]

Above doing what? Would you prefer I edit that to say "I agree?"

Above giving rep. Why would I prefer an edit?

[Raiders]

Above giving rep. Why would I prefer an edit?

Oh. I misread your comment to mean "above posting that I was giving someone rep."

I didn't know giving "rep" was something to be above doing. I do rarely give it, but since it's a feature of this site, I do use it.

[Amnesiac]

I didn't know giving "rep" was something to be above doing.

I dunno, why not?


I do rarely give it

This is about what I assumed.

[Raiders]

I dunno, why not?

Because I don't look down on those who do it. Choosing not to is one thing, but I wouldn't say I'm "above" it as if it were some lesser person's activity.

[Qrazy]

I've been wondering which WKW film I should check out next. I watched Chungking Express a few weeks back and it had a certain ecstatic charm to it that I found pretty ingratiating. Redux was playing at a local theater a while ago but I missed the boat. Maybe In The Mood For Love?

Happy Together, In the Mood for Love, Fallen Angels

[Amnesiac]

Because I don't look down on those who do it.

For the record, I'm not looking down on you.


Choosing not to is one thing, but I wouldn't say I'm "above" it as if it were some lesser person's activity.

Oh. Well, alright.

[Amnesiac]

I think it's his best, but your mileage may vary depending on your tolerance for yearning and talking.


Happy Together, In the Mood for Love, Fallen Angels

Thanks.

[Eleven]

Happy Together, In the Mood for Love, Fallen Angels

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g138/iand1993/Scruffy_Futurama.jpg

[Sven]

Amnesiac, the first time in a year that Raiders has complimented an opinion of mine and you have to give him a hard time about it. :evil: *face palm*

:)

[Qrazy]

I think what Amny is really trying to say here.


Is that he wants some Raiders rep.

[Amnesiac]

Sorry, Sven. I should have let you have your moment. :lol:


I think what Amny is really trying to say here.


Is that he wants some Raiders rep.

Diabolical. You see right through me.

[Sven]

Another awesome reason to like Revolver: another admirable Statham performance.

It always irks me, thinking about this guy's role in the Transporter films (the shallow schtick he's famous for) compared to his roles in nearly everything else I've seen him in. He's really quite something here, particularly in the elevator scene in the end.

[D_Davis]

I like Tarentino's movies, and because of his love for movies I've discovered many really neat movies.

Thanks QT for expanding my horizons.

[Qrazy]

Sorry, Sven. I should have let you have your moment. :lol:



Diabolical. You see right through me.

http://www.repja.com/shop/catalog/images/shoppingcart_rep_f_white.jpg

[D_Davis]

Dude, seriously.

http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/7870/41cbs2krxjlss350.jpg

I'm moving to France.

You could import it, and not move.

[BuffaloWilder]

You could import it, and not move.

Too much trouble.

[Mara]

You're aware that in addition to being populated with DVDs, France is full of French people, right?

[Philosophe_rouge]

Weekend
Inglorious Basterds
In the Loop
El Topo
The Fourth Man
Dead Man

[Watashi]

Revolver - ****



Hmm...

I'll admit that I have never seen a Guy Ritchie movie, but this rating interests me.

[BuffaloWilder]

You're aware that in addition to being populated with DVDs, France is full of French people, right?

I was not aware of that.

[Mara]

I was not aware of that.

I'm here to help, mon ami.

[ledfloyd]

I like Tarentino's movies, and because of his love for movies I've discovered many really neat movies.

Thanks QT for expanding my horizons.
i'm not as big a tarantino fan as i used to be. but discovering him when i was 16 was crucial in my development as a movie lover. i discovered godard and the french new wave because of him. along with howard hawks. and several more directors and movements i'm sure.

[BuffaloWilder]

I'm here to help, mon ami.

Cheese-eating surrender-monkeys, everywhere.

[Mara]

Cheese-eating surrender-monkeys, everywhere.

Hey! That's my family you're describing! Accurately!

[BuffaloWilder]

Hey! That's my family you're describing! Accurately!

:lol:



:sad:

[Philosophe_rouge]

I watched Night Nurse (1931) last night, and I have to say, it exceeded my meager expectations. I find pre-code film inherently interesting, even the ones that fail to grip me through it's narrative or visuals, often holds my interest as a relic of one of the most fascinating eras of Hollywood. The film grabbed me immediately, as the opening shot is a POV "docu" style ride in an ambulance. The camera is situated where the driver ought to be, and there is a race through the city to the hospital.

The storyline is rather conventional, or... less conventional, simple. Stanwyck's character needs a job, gets hired as a nurse, works her way up to being a night nurse for two sick children, and suspects foul play. It's fairly typical pre-code fare, but it's raised substantially by both Stanwyck and Wellman's technique. As a director, Wellman had a unique ability to bring personality and pathos to even the most outrageous scripts. He hung onto performance quirks as a means of creating a sense of camaderie between characters, as well as tying together odd scenes and situations. Otherwise mundane actions like starting a car become exciting, as there is always an air of unpredictability and a sense of play that overhangs every action and every scene.

That being said, even the over the top nature of the film's major conflict is handled with surprising care, and is surprisingly heart wrenching. This is in large part because Stanwyck could sell anything, and she sells the idea of a tough nurse who believes in right and wrong, even at the expense of her own well being.

[ledfloyd]

for some reason that giraffe avatar perfectly suits mara.

[Mara]

for some reason that giraffe avatar perfectly suits mara.

It's because I'm a giraffe.

[D_Davis]

i'm not as big a tarantino fan as i used to be. but discovering him when i was 16 was crucial in my development as a movie lover. i discovered godard and the french new wave because of him. along with howard hawks. and several more directors and movements i'm sure.

Me too. His early praising of John Woo and the HK industry is what initially kicked off my post-Black Belt Theater interest in HK cinema.

[Yxklyx]

I watched Night Nurse (1931) last night, and I have to say, it exceeded my meager expectations. ..

Wellman pre-code ratings:

The Public Enemy - 7
Night Nurse - 6
Wild Boys of the Road - 8
Heroes for Sale - 7

He's got a few more I need to see. He directed 18 films from '31 to '33!

[right_for_the_moment]

Aww, You Can Count On Me was really great. It does a surprising amount cinematically, and the screenplay gets more and more intricate as it goes along. I didn't think it would pull it off, but the personal drama evolves to be very nicely entwined with grander commentary about what people will do to satisfy their sense of control and/or worldview, and we see horizons widen for both the brother and sister. Linney got the Oscar nom (and she's very good), but Mark Ruffalo I found the most impressive and most convincing. He's really fantastic here.

I haven' seen You Can Count On Me, but I've read Lonergan's follow-up, Margaret and it's fantastic. It's a shame it'll probably never be released despite production wrapping like three years ago.

And since everyone was doing it... since 1992...

A.I. Artificial Intelligence
Blue Streak
Boogie Nights
Crimson Gold
Dead Man
Donnie Darko
Fargo
A History of Violence
I’m Not There
Last Resort
The Limits of Control
Lost in Translation
Pan’s Labyrinth
Pulp Fiction
The Shawshank Redemption
Summer Hours
The Thin Red Line
25th Hour
Wall-E
Wendy and Lucy

[baby doll]

So I finally watched The Leopard all the way through (I saw the American cut on TV seven years ago). The climatic ball sequence is worth sticking around for, but overall this is elegant to a fault. Pretty to look at, but not very dramatic. I prefer my Visconti with cross-dressing pedophile Nazis.

[megladon8]

Having Alain Delon and Claudia Cardinale in one movie together made that worth watching.

The beauty was painfully sweet.

[Bosco B Thug]

I haven' seen You Can Count On Me, but I've read Lonergan's follow-up, Margaret and it's fantastic. It's a shame it'll probably never be released despite production wrapping like three years ago. Sucks how long it's been shelved. I swore I saw this film on a festival line-up someone posted here, though... anyone?

EDIT: Searched for "Margaret Lonergan" here, and nothing. Maybe I imagined it.

[Philosophe_rouge]

Wellman pre-code ratings:

The Public Enemy - 7
Night Nurse - 6
Wild Boys of the Road - 8
Heroes for Sale - 7

He's got a few more I need to see. He directed 18 films from '31 to '33!

I need to see Heroes for Sale and Wild Boys, I'll hopefully rent them soon. It's insane the amount of films he made though, I can't imagine that kind of workload.

Pre-code ratings
Other Men's Women (1931) 9
The Public Enemy (1931) 8.5
Night Nurse (1931) 8
Safe in Hell (1931) 9.5
Frisco Jenny (1932) 6

[BuffaloWilder]

So, I'm about a third of the way through Crank 2: High Voltage, and my overwhelming feeling is "Jesus Christ, enough already."

I'm wary to continue.

[Ezee E]

You know, it's lucky we have a Tarantino considering 5-10 years ago it was almost impossible to see some of the movies he's seen. Now, they're all a click away.

Does that mean we'll have many more Tarantino's in the future though?

[Spinal]

So, I'm about a third of the way through Crank 2: High Voltage, and my overwhelming feeling is "Jesus Christ, enough already."

I'm wary to continue.

You did see the first one, yes?

[BuffaloWilder]

A while back, sure. Didn't pay much attention to it, though.

[right_for_the_moment]

Sucks how long it's been shelved. I swore I saw this film on a festival line-up someone posted here, though... anyone?

EDIT: Searched for "Margaret Lonergan" here, and nothing. Maybe I imagined it.
Aww, man. You got my hopes up for a moment, lol

[baby doll]

You know, it's lucky we have a Tarantino considering 5-10 years ago it was almost impossible to see some of the movies he's seen. Now, they're all a click away.It's too bad he's the Ed Wood of cinephiles: he's never seen a disreputable low-budget that film he didn't like. It helps if they're super-obscure, because then he can champion its maker as a neglected master. He reminds me of this guy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKd0JRCZi9I) I went to school with, who once told me that his favorite film was Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. If you're going to become an expert of trash, you should at least learn to distinguish the good stuff (like Russ Meyer--and even then, not all his films are as good as Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! and Beyond the Valley of the Dolls) from the junk. I mean, Battle Royale? He apparently doesn't care that it's ugly, stupid, and monotonous because it has teenagers killing each other, and that's cool.

[Qrazy]

You know, it's lucky we have a Tarantino considering 5-10 years ago it was almost impossible to see some of the movies he's seen. Now, they're all a click away.

Does that mean we'll have many more Tarantino's in the future though?

Pretty sure Tarantino did not invent the internet.

[Raiders]

Pretty sure Tarantino did not invent the internet.

No, Al Gore did.

Really though, I kind of agree with baby doll. He loves genre cinema almost simply for existing.

[Qrazy]

No, Al Gore did.

Really though, I kind of agree with baby doll. He loves genre cinema almost simply for existing.

Yeah personally I found both Lady Snowblood and City on Fire to be not good. But he did good things with them. Although he also ripped them off a bit much.

[Raiders]

Well I uh, did really love City on Fire.

[Qrazy]

Well I uh, did really love City on Fire.

I didn't but Chinese cinema from the 80's may well be my least favorite aesthetic of all time. The film built well to a solid finale at least. So there's that.

Also, The Defiant Ones?

[Sycophant]

[I don't care] that it's ugly, stupid, and monotonous because it has teenagers killing each other, and that's cool.

You borrowed this directly from 8's defense of the film, right?

I like Battle Royale.

Basically, can you link me to where he said that? 'Cause I'd bet that's not QT's taken on the picture.

[Bosco B Thug]

Aww, man. You got my hopes up for a moment, lol My b. Here's a long Apr 2009 article on it, for anyone interested: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-ca-margaret26-2009apr26,0,4565897,full.story

[Spinal]

I thought Faster Pussycat! was ugly, stupid and monotonous. But it has women with big breasts hitting people and that's cool.

[Benny Profane]

It's too bad he's the Ed Wood of cinephiles: he's never seen a disreputable low-budget that film he didn't like. It helps if they're super-obscure, because then he can champion its maker as a neglected master. He reminds me of this guy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKd0JRCZi9I) I went to school with, who once told me that his favorite film was Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. If you're going to become an expert of trash, you should at least learn to distinguish the good stuff (like Russ Meyer--and even then, not all his films are as good as Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! and Beyond the Valley of the Dolls) from the junk. I mean, Battle Royale? He apparently doesn't care that it's ugly, stupid, and monotonous because it has teenagers killing each other, and that's cool.

This is a great post.

[Sven]

I can't quite figure out how to word what I want to say, but I'd like to voice something about the fact that not all genres, peoples, cultures, philosophies, outlooks, etc, conform to the same standards of conventional cinematic evaluation. I mean... if the genre is junk, why should it bother how much emphasis he puts on "good junk" instead of "bad junk?" It seems broad and reductive to employ one's opinion of formal rigor to even the outcast classes of films. It's like trying to spread democracy to third world nations... look how well that works.

[Ezee E]

Lady Snowblood is pretty great.

[megladon8]

Lady Snowblood is pretty great.


Yes, it really, really is.

[Qrazy]

Nope.

[Spun Lepton]

I mean, Battle Royale? He apparently doesn't care that it's ugly, stupid, and monotonous because it has teenagers killing each other, and that's cool.

Battle Royale has a ton of fans the world over, not just Tarantino. The Japanese Academy Awards nominated it for a ton of awards, too, including Best Picture.

[Amnesiac]

Battle Royale has a ton of fans the world over, not just Tarantino. The Japanese Academy Awards nominated it for a ton of awards, too, including Best Picture.

Given who this post is directed to, I find it hopelessly funny and futile.

[B-side]

The Holy Mountain - 1

What are these shenanigans?

[Derek]

Chinese Roulette (Fassbinder, 1976)

What'd you think of this since you give no hint as to your opinion in your sig though frustratingly decide to list it there anyway thus forcing people to waste a post simply to ask what your opinion is of a film that we both know you've recently seen?

[Sycophant]

What are these shenanigans?

He wrote like a big goddamned thing about it like two days ago and it took up like two pages of conversation.

[balmakboor]

What'd you think of this since you give no hint as to your opinion in your sig though frustratingly decide to list it there anyway thus forcing people to waste a post simply to ask what your opinion is of a film that we both know you've recently seen?

It's his 5th favorite first time viewing of the year.

[megladon8]

What are these shenanigans?


Eh, I explained it about 2 pages back.

Basically, I guess I missed out on the film's alleged sense of humor, because all I saw was an obnoxiously pretentious piece of faux-art with the depth and complexity of a college art student's thesis project.

A complete embodiment of what I imagine would come from the comedic stereotype of the "artiste", who wears a beret, smokes cigarettes out of 7-inch long cigarette holders, and doesn't talk about movies but rather "fillims".

[B-side]

What'd you think of this since you give no hint as to your opinion in your sig though frustratingly decide to list it there anyway thus forcing people to waste a post simply to ask what your opinion is of a film that we both know you've recently seen?

I'm just frustrating like that. I get too weird with ratings. Once I rate something, I'm never happy with that rating and always wanna mess with it. Plus, a rating doesn't convey the nuances of an experience. Oh wait, I should probably save this for the rating scale discussion thread, shouldn't I?:P

As for the film, it made #5 on my "best films seen first in 2009" list. It's excellent. My 2nd favorite Fassbinder after In a Year with 13 Moons. The cast was uniformly excellent, as is pretty much the norm with Fassbinder's acting troupe. The compositions were meaningful and provocative. Not sure where I wanna go next with him.

[B-side]

He wrote like a big goddamned thing about it like two days ago and it took up like two pages of conversation.

Oh. Heh. I don't always back-read.

[B-side]

Eh, I explained it about 2 pages back.

Basically, I guess I missed out on the film's alleged sense of humor, because all I saw was an obnoxiously pretentious piece of faux-art with the depth and complexity of a college art student's thesis project.

A complete embodiment of what I imagine would come from the comedic stereotype of the "artiste", who wears a beret, smokes cigarettes out of 7-inch long cigarette holders, and doesn't talk about movies but rather "fillims".

Heh. Well, Jodorowsky does seem to straddle that line between being able to take him seriously and just wanting to denounce his craziness altogether. I find his films rather magical. He's an avid fan of mysticism, psychomagic and all things absurd. I love that he has such a fondness for people and things deemed strange or inappropriate by most.

[B-side]

Sum up: it has some striking imagery but everything else about it sucks. Not that it matters, but no one agreed with him and he stuck to his guns as per usual.

It's much easier for me to understand a hatred for Jodorowsky than most film-makers I love, so I can't say I blame a close-minded approach or anything for his reaction.

[Derek]

A complete embodiment of what I imagine would come from the comedic stereotype of the "artiste", who wears a beret, smokes cigarettes out of 7-inch long cigarette holders, and doesn't talk about movies but rather "fillims".

Has anyone ever met or even seen anyone like that? Even someone who only talks about "fillims"? It just seems like a nonsensical stereotype.

I don't like Holy Mountain either meg so we're solid there. :)

[megladon8]

Heh. Well, Jodorowsky does seem to straddle that line between being able to take him seriously and just wanting to denounce his craziness altogether. I find his films rather magical. He's an avid fan of mysticism, psychomagic and all things absurd. I love that he has such a fondness for people and things deemed strange or inappropriate by most.


It was certainly strange, but I found nothing about it inappropriate.

In fact, one of the most maddening things about it was that its frequent attempts at being offensively sacreligious had no effect on me whatsoever. Since I was raised in a household where religion was not only non-existent but practically frowned upon, there was really nothing edgy about it.

As Amnesiac said, I did find the imagery quite striking. The work that went into the set design, props and costumes was quite incredible. But the movie surrounding all this was mind-numbing to me, and the imagery alone just couldn't salvage it, let alone create an enjoyable experience.

[megladon8]

Has anyone ever met or even seen anyone like that? Even someone who only talks about "fillims"? It just seems like a nonsensical stereotype.


Isn't it pretty much a parody of the '50s BeAtnik crowd? Like in "The Simpsons" when Moe turns his Bar into a hipster hang-out, and Homer is bewildered by a conversation between two men about who is the better director, Kurosawa or Bergman.

Of course we'd saY that's pretty acceptable, but the way Homer feels towarDs thOse peopLe is the way peopLe like us would feel towards these "artistes".

[B-side]

It was certainly strange, but I found nothing about it inappropriate.

In fact, one of the most maddening things about it was that its frequent attempts at being offensively sacreligious had no effect on me whatsoever. Since I was raised in a household where religion was not only non-existent but practically frowned upon, there was really nothing edgy about it.

Naturally, the typical match-cut cinephile wouldn't be offended, but you can see why he was quite the controversial figure back in his day given the circumstances. Plus, it's not just organized religion he targets, but I'm sure you know that.


As Amnesiac said, I did find the imagery quite striking. The work that went into the set design, props and costumes was quite incredible. But the movie surrounding all this was mind-numbing to me, and the imagery alone just couldn't salvage it, let alone create an enjoyable experience.

Right. He's pretty niche, I'd wager.

[Ezee E]

Those people are in film schools. They just don't have the seven-inch cigarette holder, because they can't find them.

[Derek]

Isn't it pretty much a parody of the '50s BeAtnik crowd? Like in "The Simpsons" when Moe turns his Bar into a hipster hang-out, and Homer is bewildered by a conversation between two men about who is the better director, Kurosawa or Bergman.

Of course we'd saY that's pretty acceptable, but the way Homer feels towarDs thOse peopLe is the way peopLe like us would feel towards these "artistes".

It was Kurosawa and Herzog, meg. Get your Simpsons references straight ferchrissakes!

I do know what you mean though.


Those people are in film schools. They just don't have the seven-inch cigarette holder, because they can't find them.

Not in the one I went to. Everyone just loooved Sin City there and I was all "You've got to be kidding me."

[B-side]

Is it narcissistic to think that, if I end up taking a film course, I'll likely be more knowledgeable than 90% of the class I'm in?

[megladon8]

Is it narcissistic to think that, if I end up taking a film course, I'll likely be more knowledgeable than 90% of the class I'm in?


Not at all.

In my Script Writing program, I was surrounded by guys who wanted to write movies like Transformers and 300, and girls who wanted to write the next Notting Hill.

Then there was me and about 4 other people who were kind of "outcasts" and would have weekend movie nights where we had Bergman marathons, or watched all three (at the time) movies by Aronofsky.

[Amnesiac]

In case anyone is wondering, I deleted that sum-up Brightside posted because I realized that megladon had already stepped in and cleared it up.

[B-side]

Not at all.

In my Script Writing program, I was surrounded by guys who wanted to write movies like Transformers and 300, and girls who wanted to write the next Notting Hill.

Then there was me and about 4 other people who were kind of "outcasts" and would have weekend movie nights where we had Bergman marathons, or watched all three (at the time) movies by Aronofsky.

I mean, I don't exactly think I'm an expert, but I hear these types of stories all the time about film classes. People who balk at watching black and white movies and think the course is simply sitting around and watching blockbusters.

[Ezee E]

Not in the one I went to. Everyone just loooved Sin City there and I was all "You've got to be kidding me."

Mine was obsessed with Mulholland Drive. I had no problem with that, but all their films were attempts at Lynch, until the latter years in which they would go for Peckinpah and/or Lynch.

[Amnesiac]

Is it narcissistic to think that, if I end up taking a film course, I'll likely be more knowledgeable than 90% of the class I'm in?

Your viewing habits seem to be quite broad and eclectic, so it is a possibility. But it depends on what the class is about. If it's heavily about film theory, and you don't know much about that (as I didn't before I started taking classes), then you might not be able to enjoy the inherent validation of being the most knowledgeable.

[Amnesiac]

People who balk at watching black and white movies and think the course is simply sitting around and watching blockbusters.

You usually only encounter these types of students in a first (or second) year film studies course.

[megladon8]

I mean, I don't exactly think I'm an expert, but I hear these types of stories all the time about film classes. People who balk at watching black and white movies and think the course is simply sitting around and watching blockbusters.


Yeah, it's unfortunate that some people who consider themselves movie experts really haven't even scratched the surface.

I mean, none of us here at MatchCut have scratched the surface, either. It's impossible to come even close to seeing everything. But at least we widen our horizons.

I just cannot imagine being someone who watches movies all the time, and forever being content watching stuff like Michael Bay and Brett Ratner movies, occasionally watching something by Steven Spielberg when you want something deep and artsy.

[B-side]

Your viewing habits seem to be quite broad and eclectic, so it is a possibility. But it depends on what the class is about. If it's heavily about film theory, and you don't know much about that (as I didn't before I started taking classes), then you might not be able to enjoy the inherent validation of being the most knowledgeable.

Yeah, I have only cursory knowledge of film theory. I really wasn't trying to come off as narcissistic, though I suppose that was inevitable.:P

[B-side]

You usually only encounter these types of students in a first (or second) year film studies course.

Interesting. Can one at least count on the professor being knowledgeable?

[Amnesiac]

This reminds me of a question I wanted to ask.

Do any of you guys ever get stigmatized for your intense interest in film from other people? Do you ever get caught talking about film in a sincere and involved manner (i.e., the type of stuff no one would bat an eye at here) with people who soon find your interests/passion to be kind of outlandish or silly?

I feel there are a lot of people out there who are convinced that film is only a pastime and that it's not something that can come anywhere close to being a vocation or a serious interest. I sense that people ranging from ardent and dedicated film fans to full out scholars get a lot of stigma aimed their way.

[Amnesiac]

Interesting. Can one at least count on the professor being knowledgeable?

From my experience, I'd say this is usually the case. They always have specialized interests, though, and they especially excel when the classes they teach are about those interests.

[B-side]

This reminds me of a question I wanted to ask.

Do any of you guys ever get stigmatized for your intense interest in film from other people? Do you ever get caught talking about film in a sincere and involved manner (i.e., the type of stuff no one would bat an eye at here) with people who soon find your interests/passion to be kind of outlandish or silly?

I feel there are a lot of people out there who are convinced that film is only a pastime and that it's not something that can come anywhere close to being a vocation or a serious interest. I sense that people ranging from ardent and dedicated film fans to full out scholars get a lot of stigma aimed their way.

I'm sure my friends and family think it's a bit silly that I take film as seriously as I do, but I don't think it paints me in a terribly negative light. I know I've had experiences where my lack of enthusiasm for a film or my enthusiasm about seeing a certain film they hadn't heard of or don't have an interest in has created some awkward moments.

[megladon8]

This reminds me of a question I wanted to ask.

Do any of you guys ever get stigmatized for your intense interest in film from other people? Do you ever get caught talking about film in a sincere and involved manner (i.e., the type of stuff no one would bat an eye at here) with people who soon find your interests/passion to be kind of outlandish or silly?

I feel there are a lot of people out there who are convinced that film is only a pastime and that it's not something that can come anywhere close to being a vocation or a serious interest. I sense that people ranging from ardent and dedicated film fans to full out scholars get a lot of stigma aimed their way.



All the time.

But, as I've come to believe in many areas of life, if someone is going to judge or mock me based on the fact that I love movies a lot, I don't need their judgmental presence in my life.

[B-side]

From my experience, I'd say this is usually the case. They always have specialized interests, though, and they especially excel when the classes they teach are about those interests.

Right, right. I'd say my current big interest may be in the field of film theory, assuming it is what I think it is i.e. studying the notion of what film is or is capable of via the likes of Eisenstein, Deren, etc.

[Ezee E]

I just get claimed as the film buff, and if I don't like a movie that they like, they tend to say, "I don't look at it for cinematography or stupid shit, I just want to be entertained."

Ugh.

[megladon8]

I just get claimed as the film buff, and if I don't like a movie that they like, they tend to say, "I don't look at it for cinematography or stupid shit, I just want to be entertained."

Ugh.


Yeah, I get that a lot, too.

FRIEND: Braden did you see Transformers 2 yet? Oh my God, SO AWESOME!

BRADEN: Nah, I wasn't too interested. Didn't like the first one much.

FRIEND: Well, I don't really care about finding "award winning" movies.

BRADEN: :|

[Amnesiac]

they tend to say, "I don't look at it for cinematography or stupid shit, I just want to be entertained."


Something about that reply is very hilarious.

But, yeah, it's kind of hard checking your own interests at the door when you're with people who just aren't that into movies. Which is totally fine. But if you have, say, a real passion about a filmmaker who some might view as being obscure, like Ingmar Begrman for instance... if you were to start dropping his name around (in a total sincere way as opposed to a self-aggrandizing way) in front of non-film fans, or trying to explain how great one of his films are, you're likely to be pegged as some pretentious douche name dropper. Or just get a lot of quizzical stares.

And, as in E's case, your criteria for watching movies just won't synch up with others. In which case you just have to stay quiet or, if you dare speak up, you'll unwittingly become some sort of snob pariah.

[Amnesiac]

Yeah, I get that a lot, too.

FRIEND: Braden did you see Transformers 2 yet? Oh my God, SO AWESOME!

BRADEN: Nah, I wasn't too interested. Didn't like the first one much.

FRIEND: Well, I don't really care about finding "award winning" movies.

BRADEN: :|

:lol: Not to be a holier-than-thou, condescending prick (because I understand not everyone can be an ardent film fan) but I'm finding these types of exchanges very funny for some reason. If anyone has any others, please post them.

[BuffaloWilder]

Having just finished watching Crank 2, I says to my brother I says, "you'd enjoy it a lot. It's very over-the-top, and self-referential, and cartoonish. It's actually a lot like No More Heroes."

He says to me, "dude, I think you're looking too deeply at this movie."

But -- whaaa?

[Amnesiac]

But -- whaaa?

http://www.filmofilia.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/crank_2_high_voltage_photo.jpg

[Sycophant]

Psch. My friends are awesome.

[Watashi]

My roommate has pretty good tastes.

[BuffaloWilder]

Strangely, I've never gotten any guff from any of my buddies for my love of film - on the contrary, a lot of the time it was either myself or my brother who were introducing them to things they'd eventually get hooked on.

Lucky circumstances, I s'pose.

[Bosco B Thug]

Pulp Fiction is really good. It's not loud or over-the-top, it's quiet and atmospheric but without being dry. Tarantino's directing is unobtrusive, observant. Very soulful, too, with his use of music. We can sit and listen to Marcellus methodically lay out instructions to Butch because he makes it so Rhames' voice seems to croon to the accompanying beat. I thought I'd have a sour reaction to his screenplay and dialogue here, but it's pretty consistently evocative and poetic.

Now does the film and its vignette nature and its evocations have much of a "thematic center" (probably not the best phrase for what I'm trying to pinpoint)? I'm having problems pinpointing its ultimate moral and philosophical intentions. If Tarantino didn't write and direct human behavior and a textured world so well, Pulp Fiction would be too high concept for me to like very much or find much meaning in. "Deconstruction, yay!" of course, and, like I said, the dialogue never isn't flirting with social and emotional quandaries (the Mia-Vincent exchanges surprised me), but the film is undoubtedly pretty set on a "confection" mentality.

[Qrazy]

Yeah, it's unfortunate that some people who consider themselves movie experts really haven't even scratched the surface.

I mean, none of us here at MatchCut have scratched the surface, either. It's impossible to come even close to seeing everything. But at least we widen our horizons.

I just cannot imagine being someone who watches movies all the time, and forever being content watching stuff like Michael Bay and Brett Ratner movies, occasionally watching something by Steven Spielberg when you want something deep and artsy.

I'm pretty sure at this point I've scratched the fucking surface.

[Rowland]

Okay, so I was reading a review when I came across this line:

"As HBO's John Adams miniseries recently illustrated, cock-fighting and fucking is the essence of creation and, more, this is a young country still full of come."

So... should I rent John Adams? Is this a literal description? :lol:

[Duncan]

Sounds like you guys need better friends.

[Grouchy]

I'd rent John Adams.

What? is Polanski's worst movie. But it so happens that it includes some of my favorite works of art ever - the Francis Bacon Pope painting, "Death and the Maiden" by Schubert and Beethoven piano sonatas. I can picture Polanski and Mastroianni explaining a scantily clad model that the joke is on her, and on the audience. Basically, the movie is crap, but when Polanski makes crap, you better watch out for the surprises. Far from hating this. It's a joke film after all, and it has some beautiful music along with the kinky scenes.

[Philosophe_rouge]

This reminds me of a question I wanted to ask.

Do any of you guys ever get stigmatized for your intense interest in film from other people? Do you ever get caught talking about film in a sincere and involved manner (i.e., the type of stuff no one would bat an eye at here) with people who soon find your interests/passion to be kind of outlandish or silly?

I feel there are a lot of people out there who are convinced that film is only a pastime and that it's not something that can come anywhere close to being a vocation or a serious interest. I sense that people ranging from ardent and dedicated film fans to full out scholars get a lot of stigma aimed their way.
Not by family or friends, but acquaintances, yes. I've gotten a fair share of people who have been more than just a little condescending towards me for my love of film, and perhaps art in general. It's as if I'm not on the same intellectual level as they are, which is not entirely untrue... I'm certainly less practical then them... but it still irks me, to get those standard responses like, "Oh I guess you really like that kind of stuff", or I've gotten, "Oh, so what are you planning on studying after?"... etc. That's of course discounting the perception by some people that I'm a bit of a snob, which I'm assuredly not. It's very rare I dislike what I see, I'm just more thoughtful in my appreciation or critisism than they are. Most of my friends are interesting in film on some level, and I rarely encounter problems with them, but every once in a while I'll get into the argument about film being simply a means of shallow entertainment, especially when it's inspired by me disliking a "fun" movie... as if I'm pretending I didn't enjoy it, as a means of sitting on my high horse, because it's inconceivable, that I actually thought it was boring.

[Sycophant]

Fuck the surface.

[ledfloyd]

Not by family or friends, but acquaintances, yes. I've gotten a fair share of people who have been more than just a little condescending towards me for my love of film, and perhaps art in general. It's as if I'm not on the same intellectual level as they are, which is not entirely untrue... I'm certainly less practical then them... but it still irks me, to get those standard responses like, "Oh I guess you really like that kind of stuff", or I've gotten, "Oh, so what are you planning on studying after?"... etc. That's of course discounting the perception by some people that I'm a bit of a snob, which I'm assuredly not. It's very rare I dislike what I see, I'm just more thoughtful in my appreciation or critisism than they are. Most of my friends are interesting in film on some level, and I rarely encounter problems with them, but every once in a while I'll get into the argument about film being simply a means of shallow entertainment, especially when it's inspired by me disliking a "fun" movie... as if I'm pretending I didn't enjoy it, as a means of sitting on my high horse, because it's inconceivable, that I actually thought it was boring.

i get in these arguments all the time. which is crazy cause i have pretty wide ranging tastes. i'm certainly not a snob. this conversation is pretty verbatim:

"dude, have you seen 300 yet? it's one of the best movies i've ever seen."
"it was probably the most painful two hours i've ever spent in a movie theater."
"fuck man, you don't like anything that doesn't win oscars."
"that's not true."

then not too long after that:

"don't even tell me you didn't like departed."

[Qrazy]

The Long Riders - This was a really interesting Western. I actually think the casting gimmick was a great idea. The gimmick is that nearly all of the brothers are played by actors who are brothers in real life. I really like Stacey Keach and I've grown fond of the Carradine's over the years, but everyone in the cast delivers fairly well. The film is Walter Hill by way of Sam Peckinpah. It tells the story of the James brothers (Keach's), the Younger brothers (Carradine's), the Miller brothers (Quaid's) and the Ford's (Guest's). This one would make a great triple bill with Fuller's I Shot Jesse James and Dominik's The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. The final shoot out is terrific.

[baby doll]

I can't quite figure out how to word what I want to say, but I'd like to voice something about the fact that not all genres, peoples, cultures, philosophies, outlooks, etc, conform to the same standards of conventional cinematic evaluation. I mean... if the genre is junk, why should it bother how much emphasis he puts on "good junk" instead of "bad junk?" It seems broad and reductive to employ one's opinion of formal rigor to even the outcast classes of films. It's like trying to spread democracy to third world nations... look how well that works.My impression of Tarantino's worldview is that it's similarly democratic: As far as he's concerned, cinema is cinema, so somebody working on the margins of film production in some Latin American or Eastern European country, churning out schlock horror movies at a rate of forty a year, might--might--in fact have a highly developed (or at least unique) grasp of film language that would offset the unevenness of their work and the low production values enough to make their work worth seeing.

While it's true that you don't apply the same standards to Coffin Joe as you do Carl Theodor Dreyer, within the context of these outcast genres, there still has to be some way of distinguishing good schlock from bad schlock. For instance, if you've seen a lot of Russ Meyer movies, you know there's a huge difference between a major work, like Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!, and a relatively minor work like Motor Psycho or Common Law Cabin (to say nothing of a truly bad one, like Black Snake!). And with a film like Battle Royale, putting aside the dumb story, flat characters, ugly style, etc., it's not even interesting for the kills. The film is totally deadpan and monotonous; the kills certainly aren't as interesting or as imaginative as a Final Destination, where something as banal as a shopping mall escalator is transformed into this elaborate death machine, which is like Surrealism in the way it defamiliarizes the everyday.

[Ezee E]

The funny thing is that my friends don't care about my beret or that I smoke out of a seven-inch cigarette holder.

I also call them, "Fillllims."

[balmakboor]

Now does the film and its vignette nature and its evocations have much of a "thematic center" (probably not the best phrase for what I'm trying to pinpoint)? I'm having problems pinpointing its ultimate moral and philosophical intentions. If Tarantino didn't write and direct human behavior and a textured world so well, Pulp Fiction would be too high concept for me to like very much or find much meaning in.

I don't know if you've come across it before, but I always found this essay on Pulp Fiction's themes and moral and philosophical intentions pretty well done.

http://metaphilm.com/philm.php?id=178_0_2_0

The same site also has a terrific two part essay on Kill Bill by the same author.

[dreamdead]

Barefoot Gen is a traditional anime from the early '80s Japanese aesthetic wrapped in some occasional flourishes of expressionism, especially when the film begins depicting images of Hiroshima and the atomic blasts. Those scenes, with flesh curdling and eyeballs distending from the skeletal remains, achieve a haunting, and stark, grace. And the way it covers abandoning family to survive in the aftermath of radiation, pika, and collapsed architecture is convincing, especially when framed against the autobiographical coverage of the tale. Yet against those weighted moments, the film draws upon a sense of the quotidian, where it is less successful in that it never can capture the intensity of the destruction. In those moments the rudimentary animation and coming of age narrative cannot capture the emotions that desire to be expressed. So it's good and sometimes startling, but it cannot sustain itself for the duration of its two chapters.

Meantime, Hong Sang-soo's Tale of Cinema has a solid interrogation of the medium and how spectators draw upon the "magic" of cinema to frame and guide their own personal journey through. Using his usual bifurcated narrative fframework, Hong begins the assemblage of new-for-him at the time visual markers, such as ungraceful yet cinematic zooms and voiceover, letting those moments ground the film section of his narrative. Yet rather than creating a binary between film/reality, those tendencies linger in the reality section, forcing an appreciation on us that even reality can be conceived as a multitude of cinematic gestures. However, the key distinction here is how woman aids relationships in the film section but complicates and challenges expectation in the reality scenario, for Hong's protagonist keeps thinking woman can save him just as she did in the film section. It's likely an unintentional take-down of the magical pixie girl archetype, but between that and Hong's differing takes on the nuclear family it ends up being one of his richest thematically.

[dreamdead]

I watched Night Nurse (1931) last night, and I have to say, it exceeded my meager expectations. I find pre-code film inherently interesting, even the ones that fail to grip me through it's narrative or visuals, often holds my interest as a relic of one of the most fascinating eras of Hollywood. The film grabbed me immediately, as the opening shot is a POV "docu" style ride in an ambulance. The camera is situated where the driver ought to be, and there is a race through the city to the hospital.


I like your take on the intentionality and artfulness to Wellman's techniques. For my part, I found the film rather restricted by its goal in presenting a virtuous heroine in Stanwyck, so much so that it's occasional transgressions, seen most vividly in the held shots on Stanwyck and the other nurse changing into their workclothes and nightgowns, seemed limiting. Wellman's camera lingers on the flesh more than I'm used to for that period, but except for a slightly interesting innuendo about sleeping arrangements, which seem to suggest latent bi-sexuality if not active sexual interest in women, the film feels a little too rote for me. I like how assessment of the camera techniques, though, which seem to validate some of the film's visual choices.

[ledfloyd]

has anyone else seen goodbye solo? the more i think about it the more i think it's my favorite film of the year.

[balmakboor]

has anyone else seen goodbye solo? the more i think about it the more i think it's my favorite film of the year.

That's funny. I hadn't heard of it, so I looked it up. And lo and behold, it is something that a member of our film society selection committee was talking about just three days ago -- but she couldn't remember the title. She said she'd heard good things and that we should consider it for our Winter/Spring series.

It comes out on DVD next week. So it is now at the top of my Netflix queue.

Thanks for the heads up.

[ledfloyd]

I don't know if you've come across it before, but I always found this essay on Pulp Fiction's themes and moral and philosophical intentions pretty well done.

http://metaphilm.com/philm.php?id=178_0_2_0

The same site also has a terrific two part essay on Kill Bill by the same author.
this is definitely an interesting take, but i find it hard to believe tarantino put that much thought into the philosophy and ethics behind the film. i feel like, at heart, he was just trying to tell a kick ass pulpy story.

[balmakboor]

this is definitely an interesting take, but i find it hard to believe tarantino put that much thought into the philosophy and ethics behind the film. i feel like, at heart, he was just trying to tell a kick ass pulpy story.

I think Tarantino's a pretty smart guy. I think he was doing both.

[Ezee E]

While Tarantino talks about genre excessively, there are moments where he'll surprise you with a really insightful comment about a movie, or a shot. I haven't read the article yet, but I think he's looking more into his movies than just making it a "pulpy" story or "kick ass" movie.

[Eleven]

So did anyone go see Rifftrax live last night?

[ledfloyd]

I think Tarantino's a pretty smart guy. I think he was doing both.
maybe. things like equating the watch to a piece of shit, and equating the samurai sword with eastern belief systems seems a bit far reaching to me though. maybe that's there, but i think he just though the watch story was funny and the sword was cool. i could be underestimating him. i just am not sure he puts that much stock in symbolism.

[The Mike]

So did anyone go see Rifftrax live last night?
I did! Had a great time.

[Eleven]

I did! Had a great time.

Could have done without the musical numbers or Something Awful (in more ways than one) ads, but the short and movie were hilarious. "Lick your favorite state."

I was going to go with my dad, but a friend of mine, whom I introduced to MST, got to the theater to buy tickets and found them sold out. So my dad graciously allowed him to pay for and use his. I hope there's an encore in the next few weeks 'cause I think he'd enjoy it.

[Stay Puft]

has anyone else seen goodbye solo? the more i think about it the more i think it's my favorite film of the year.

I saw it last year. I can't remember if I wrote anything about it, but yeah, I enjoyed it. The two leads are exceptional together, and Solo is one of the most endearing characters I saw in a movie all year.

[Mara]

Alonso Duralde, who reviews film for msnbc.com, isn't the most esoteric reviewer out there, but I've always found his opinions sensible and his writing clear and stylish. In reading his review for Some Random Film I Will Never See he wrote the following as an opening paragraph:


How can women stand to go to the movies at all, when so much of the product ostensibly aimed at them contain such misogynist messages? A vast majority of what are known as “chick flicks” seem divided into three categories: Girl, You Need a Makeover If You Want a Man; Girl, You Need to Completely Humiliate Yourself If You Want a Man; and Girl, You Better Forget About Pursuing a Career If You Want a Man.

This concisely sums up something that's been annoying me for the last few years. Thanks, Mr. Duralde.

[Sycophant]

The level of misogyny in film is really quite incredible. And the so-called chick flicks, indeed, are some of the absolute worst perpetrators out there.

[Bosco B Thug]

I'm pretty sure at this point I've scratched the fucking surface. I was pretty sure I scratched the surface. Then I found out there was this Aleksei German dude, and that the guy who plays the carnival barker bit part in The Funhouse is actually an infamous Z-grade movie director of such classics as The Worm Eaters (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7eXx-L5UJsg).


I don't know if you've come across it before, but I always found this essay on Pulp Fiction's themes and moral and philosophical intentions pretty well done.

http://metaphilm.com/philm.php?id=178_0_2_0 Yeah, pretty good... hits well Tarantino's broad purposes to deconstruct "American nihilism" and how these lowlifes, kingpins, and henchmen function, but it doesn't quite fix the problem I have with the film, which is its nature as a concept picture.

It's fortunate Tarantino writes detailed, adult screenplays and the film has the amount of gravity it does because his stories here and the threads tying them together would be actually kind of puerile and anemic.

[Qrazy]

I was pretty sure I scratched the surface. Then I found out there was this Aleksei German dude, and that the guy who plays the carnival barker bit part in The Funhouse is actually an infamous Z-grade movie director of such classics as The Worm Eaters (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7eXx-L5UJsg).


Well we may not have plumbed the depths, but we've scratched the surface.

[balmakboor]

...but it doesn't quite fix the problem I have with the film, which is its nature as a concept picture.

I'm not sure I follow. What do you mean by "concept picture" and how does its being one constitute a problem?

[megladon8]

The level of misogyny in film is really quite incredible. And the so-called chick flicks, indeed, are some of the absolute worst perpetrators out there.


I don't know that misogyny is really the right word here.

Yes, it's troubling how women are still shown in films as being subservient, and "needing" a man to get by in life. It's pretty ridiculous.

But the word "misogyny" implies an inherent feeling of hatred towards women, which I would argue is not the case.

[megladon8]

Today my co-workers and I were discussing seeing films on opening weekend. Somehow the conversation veered off to Titanic and Pearl Harbor, neither of which I have seen.

Me: I haven't seen Titanic, not really my kind of movie. And I will definitely not see Pearl Harbor because --
Co-Worker: OMG I LOVE PEARL HARBOR!!!
Me: ...


It totally seems like your kind of movie, dude.

Sappy, terrible writing, overlong, sadistic and offensively boring.

You'd dig it.

[Spun Lepton]

It totally seems like your kind of movie, dude.

Sappy, terrible writing, overlong, sadistic and offensively boring.

You'd dig it.

I will crush you, Braden.