28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[Watashi]

Whoa whoa whoa, D-dawg... *1/2? I would like some words, please.
Who are you refering to?

[Derek]

Whoa whoa whoa, D-dawg... *1/2? I would like some words, please.

Are you really an Auto Focus fan? Really? It's not that bad, but Kinnear is so vanilla that he never really inhabited the role and Schrader put very little emphasis on the visuals outside of the awkward Hogan's Heroes hallucination. It gave little insight as to what led to Crane's psychological disintegration and seemed to just hit the beats at each stage of the downfall. Dafoe was great fun to watch, so I'll give it that.

[Qrazy]

The book is seriously awesome. Disappointed to hear about the movie. Maybe if it the adaptation was in the hands of a filmmaking Don like a Billy Wilder or a Nicholas Ray.

Heh. Yeah maybe, personally the content seemed like sub-par Tenessee Williams to me though.

[Boner M]

Why does everyone always have a wank over this scene? I mean, I dig the dance moves and all, but this awe-inspiring moment of cinematic genius and artistic stupendousosity? I don't see it.
It's probably the most imaginative eschewal of a literal depiction of events that I've ever seen in a film; the sheer audacity of ending a film that way, combined with it being - in some inexplicable way - such an acute metaphysical rendering of what we expect to happen, knocked me for a loop. I never though "Rhythm of the Night" would ever occupy a special place in my heart, but now it does.

[Qrazy]

The Rhythmeh of the Night.

[Boner M]

The Rhythmeh of the Night.
http://images.icanhascheezburger.com/completestore/2008/9/16/128660498159844805.jpg

[dreamdead]

Godard's In Praise of Love has some excessively obfuscating sections, where the multiple narratives occasionally left me forgetting which narrative is ostensibly occurring, and there's a whiff of excessive name dropping of literary or musical names, but the film overall achieves a grand sense of contemplation about the nature of art, romance, and survival, especially as Hollywood markets seek to co-opt those interests. Despite others branding the film as anti-American in very facile ways, I thought the interrogation of America as a country lacking narratives and needing to translate over others', was surprisingly well done. And much of the black and white cinematography is just achingly beautiful.

Kon's Tokyo Godfathers is a lesser work by him. It comes off incredibly artificial in its construction, and though I know that it's meant as a Christmas parable, the excessive artificiality irked me in a way that Kon has never before hit me. Some interesting ideas explored with the gay character, but the whole overall effect feels like less than the sum of its parts.

[B-side]

A Man There Was -- my first Sjöström -- was so aesthetically pleasing. The gorgeous waves crashing on the Norwegian coast sent chills down my spine. I would also like to say that I'm a big fan of the tinting being done on silents. It's such a simple, yet effective way of creating a contrast, and it does kind of liven up some of the less formally interesting shots of the era. The tinting goes hand in hand here with the beautiful locations to win me over fairly easily. That said, the narrative is where the meat is, and it's a rather compelling portrait of karma and the passion one man felt for his family. It's fairly straightforward stuff, but it works well and maintains a good pace.

[B-side]

The Outlaw and His Wife is up next for me from Sjöström.

[Qrazy]

http://images.icanhascheezburger.com/completestore/2008/9/16/128660498159844805.jpg

http://www.villainouscompany.com/vcblog/home/cassandr/public_html/vcblog/archives/smiley%20face.jpg

[Melville]

Heh.
Yes, the most effective response is always in list form. But to add some words: I think the scene in itself, independent of the preceding film, is both mesmerizing and elating: the sparkling lights in the darkness, the music, and Lavant's frenetic dancing are a superbly evocative and enigmatic mixture, and the cut to the credits comes at just the right moment. And it's made even better by how well it concludes the film: the character was always locked in ritualized routine and in an alienated in-between state, and the film itself is always in kind of a nowhere-land of ellipses and distances; the ending serves as a sudden counterpoint in which the character and the film's aesthetic are suddenly jubilantly free and of-the-moment. As Boner said, it's a great metaphysical conclusion to the story, a display of the underlying nature of the character and his (presumable) death; or to quote the similarly-themed ending of Eraserhead, "in heaven, everything is fine." (Though that kind of simplifies the ending's enigmatic style.)

Seriously, watch it again: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQcYspfvLqY

[Bosco B Thug]

Why does everyone always have a wank over this scene? I mean, I dig the dance moves and all, but this awe-inspiring moment of cinematic genius and artistic stupendousosity? I don't see it. I expressed some of my misgivings with the ending scene here (http://match-cut.org/showthread.php?p=172276). It's a pretty petty qualm, one which doesn't add or detract from my regard for the film, but you might be interested in the short exchange me and CSC had over the scene.

[Melville]

I expressed some of my misgivings with the ending scene here (http://match-cut.org/showthread.php?p=172276). It's a pretty petty qualm, one which doesn't add or detract from my regard for the film, but you might be interested in the short exchange me and CSC had over the scene.
I find it odd that you prefer to think of the final scene as something that "really" happened. What difference does it make?

[Bosco B Thug]

I find it odd that you prefer to think of the final scene as something that "really" happened. What difference does it make? Like I said, it's a petty qualm that doesn't truly detract from the film. But I suppose it's an issue of context for me; of inadequate integration into the film's act of telling. If it's not a part of the told story, what is it doing there at the end? You and CSC defend it the best way possible by calling it on how it contrasts the entirety of the film around it, made up of routine and ellipses, with this sustained moment of freedom and jubilance. Also, in how the film focuses on the movement of the body and ends with it, now on a different level. But, if it's not something to actually attribute to the character and is only this "metaphysical" and entirely abstract addendum, it seems more than a little tacked on and superfluous to me.

[Melville]

If it's not a part of the told story, what is it doing there at the end?... But, if it's not something to actually attribute to the character and is only this "metaphysical" and entirely abstract addendum, it seems more than a little tacked on and superfluous to me.
I guess we view films in very different ways, since I really make no distinction between reality/fantasy scenes in a movie: it's all just an artistic expression of something, not a history of real events. (Obviously, if the film itself clearly distinguishes between the two, by overtly presenting some scenes as "reality" and some as the dreams or fantasies of a particular character, then I acknowledge the distinction.) I'm reminded of people's arguments over Mulholland Dr. So many people insist that the first two thirds of the film are literally a dream that the character Diane has, and they even try to fit together the timeline and everything; that seems like a meaningless endeavor to me.

But putting that aside, why would you want to limit the film to depicting things that literally and physically happened to the character? That seems like an overly restrictive notion of story-telling. If a book ends with a few words (or in the case of something like War and Peace, a few hundred pages) of commentary on what has occurred, a bit of philosophizing or retrospection, then presumably you wouldn't have any problems with it. Then what is the problem with the film doing the same thing, only with light and sound rather than words? Or would you have a problem with the book too?

[Bosco B Thug]

I guess we view films in very different ways, since I really make no distinction between reality/fantasy scenes in a movie: it's all just an artistic expression of something, not a history of real events. (Obviously, if the film itself clearly distinguishes between the two, by overtly presenting some scenes as "reality" and some as the dreams or fantasies of a particular character, then I acknowledge the distinction.) I'm reminded of people's arguments over Mulholland Dr. So many people insist that the first two thirds of the film are literally a dream that the character Diane has, and they even try to fit together the timeline and everything; that seems like a meaningless endeavor to me.

But putting that aside, why would you want to limit the film to depicting things that literally and physically happened to the character? That seems like an overly restrictive notion of story-telling. If a book ends with a few words (or in the case of something like War and Peace, a few hundred pages) of commentary on what has occurred, a bit of philosophizing or retrospection, then presumably you wouldn't have any problems with it. Then what is the problem with the film doing the same thing, only with light and sound rather than words? Or would you have a problem with the book too? The nitpicks and rhetorical question I posed were really very specific to this film. It's the scene's occurrence at the end, the one-off-ness of it all, the sense of its existence as a final grab at pathos instead of a further layering of meaning.

I just don't think the scene as it exists, stuck at the end as some sort of interpretive cherry-on-top coda, is much more than elating, seen in its best light, and - I'm afraid to say it - a bit manipulative, seen in its worst.

It's not that I don't think the moment is great, or value what it does. It's great. It's just not entirely faultless, in my eyes. I've found it best to relegate my complaints to a one-off zing about Denis finding out her lead dances mid-shoot, and then deciding that that's what she's ending the film with.

As for the reality/fantasy thing, I'm just saying that the scene would simply mean more by thinking it as a reality. It would be the fact that he can or loves to dance being communicated... not that his ability or desire to dance is not already implicit in the scene, which is why the scene does work to the extent it does.

And I wouldn't have a problem with the book, in theory. Haven't thought about the distinctions between the two.

[Skitch]

Are you really an Auto Focus fan? Really? It's not that bad, but Kinnear is so vanilla that he never really inhabited the role and Schrader put very little emphasis on the visuals outside of the awkward Hogan's Heroes hallucination. It gave little insight as to what led to Crane's psychological disintegration and seemed to just hit the beats at each stage of the downfall. Dafoe was great fun to watch, so I'll give it that.

"This is you and me later.". :lol:

There has to be a few fans here.

[Dukefrukem]

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is a big MEH

[Spinal]

Top 10 endings:

1. Stroszek

Yes.

[ledfloyd]

for some reason i'm leery of stroszek since ian curtis watched it right before he killed himself.

[Qrazy]

It's not that I don't think the moment is great, or value what it does. It's great. It's just not entirely faultless, in my eyes. I've found it best to relegate my complaints to a one-off zing about Denis finding out her lead dances mid-shoot, and then deciding that that's what she's ending the film with.

Really? Because imo aside from two moves in there he can't dance for shit.

But ultimately yeah I am also in the camp of people underwhelmed by the ending. It's kind of cool. I can see it's point, but I'm not overly enthusiastic about it.

I guess I agree with Melville in that I don't care that much if it's reality or not, but I also agree with your sense that it doesn't full work.

[Qrazy]

Top 10 endings:

10. Chinatown
9. The New World
8. Aguirre, the Wrath of God
7. 8 1/2
6. There Will Be Blood
5. In a Lonely Place
4. Beau Travail
3. 2001
2. Ordet
1. Stroszek

Negative points for not including Andrei Rublev.

[Melville]

Yes.
Actually, I wonder if Bosco feels the same way about the ending of Stroszek as the ending of Beau travail, since they have a very similar suddenness and primarily thematic and emotional (rather than narrative) role.


Negative points for not including Andrei Rublev.
It's a great ending, but if I were to include a Tarkovsky film on that list, it would be either Solaris or The Mirror.

[Boner M]

Stalker has Tarko's best ending.

[The Mike]

I don't have a list of Top 10 endings, but I'm sure all I'd need to compile one is John Carpenter's filmography.

(And the alternate ending of Suspicion. Sigh. Would have been Hitchcock's best.)

[Qrazy]

It's a great ending, but if I were to include a Tarkovsky film on that list, it would be either Solaris or The Mirror.

Come to think of it the man really does know how to end a film. I actually love all his endings.

[Qrazy]

Stalker has Tarko's best ending.

The Lady from Shanghai has a dynamite ending as well. Too bad the rest of the film isn't at that level.

[Mysterious Dude]

My favorite Tarkovsky ending:

"In the beginning... was the Word... Why is that, Papa?"

(The Sacrifice)

[Grouchy]

Just watched Quantum of Solace with my dad and I liked it even better than the first time. The plot is really very well structured, and I can't fathom what annoys most of the people about it except for maybe the artsy fartsy editing.

Loved the cynical exchanges between Bond and Leiter about international politics when they're in the bar in Bolivia.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Amoeba Music inexplicably had a DVD of The Lost World (the original) in its bargain bin for $1.00.

Which is to say, I now own The Lost World.

[Rowland]

Amoeba Music inexplicably had a DVD of The Lost World (the original) in its bargain bin for $1.00.

Which is to say, I now own The Lost World.The one from 1925? Netflix has that available for instant viewing, it's one I've been intending to watch during my recent viewings from that era.

[The Mike]

I love The Lost World. It's way better than Up.

[Dead & Messed Up]

The one from 1925? Netflix has that available for instant viewing, it's one I've been intending to watch during my recent viewings from that era.

I don't remember it being great, but I remember having a lot of fun. I mean, I love fantasy silent pictures, and I love dinosaurs. We'll see if it holds up.

[Yxklyx]

I liked Frownland quite a bit (where are you Trotchky?). I disagree with most of the reviews that use words like misfit and messed up to describe the main character, he's got major psychological and/or phsyical issues. Kinda of like a cross between a Cassavettes and Morrissey film. Nice to see this kind of film still being made today.

[Lucky]

(And the alternate ending of Suspicion. Sigh. Would have been Hitchcock's best.)

What is it?

[balmakboor]

What is it?

http://www.stevenderosa.com/writingwithhitchcock/suspicion2.html

I guess anyway.

[baby doll]

Clint Eastwood's A Perfect World holds up surprisingly well.

[MadMan]

Just watched Quantum of Solace with my dad and I liked it even better than the first time. The plot is really very well structured, and I can't fathom what annoys most of the people about it except for maybe the artsy fartsy editing.

Loved the cynical exchanges between Bond and Leiter about international politics when they're in the bar in Bolivia.Perhaps because the previous act (Casino Royale) was quite hard to follow, but I still don't quite understand why people didn't like QOS. As far as Jame Bond films go it was one of the best in the series, and was highly entertaining. While the film's attempts to being relevent in terms of international politics fell a bit flat, I do agree with you that the exchanges between Bond and Leiter are great. I'm hoping that in the next movie they feature more Leiter, as he was always one of the best secondary characters in the series. Besides Q, of course.

Oh and after trying to type up my review of Southland Tales, I realized it was horribly inadequate, and that really a second viewing of the movie is probably in order. See folks, I really tried to post a review. Honestly.

[Melville]

Stalker has Tarko's best ending.
I'm not sure that I remember it. Is it the stalker lying in bed, talking to his wife about humanity's loss of faith or something?


Come to think of it the man really does know how to end a film. I actually love all his endings.
Indeed. He's the king of transcendent moments. The ending of Nostalghia also deserves a mention.

[megladon8]

I want to see more films by Tarkovsky.

At this point I've only seen Solyaris, which I enjoyed greatly, but felt it was inferior to Soderbergh's (vastly different) film.

[Raiders]

Clint Eastwood's A Perfect World holds up surprisingly well.

Why wouldn't it? For my money it is still his best film (as director).

[baby doll]

Why wouldn't it? For my money it is still his best film (as director).I'm not generally a fan (Million Dollar Baby, Flags of Our Fathers, and Letters From Iwo Jima all blow chunks, and though I liked Mystic River and Changeling, both struck me as rather heavy-handed). As for it being his best film, as director or otherwise, I'm partial myself to Gran Torino because it has a more interesting subject, in addition to being funnier and having a better performance by Eastwood.

[balmakboor]

Why wouldn't it? For my money it is still his best film (as director).

Well damn. I'm going to have to check it out now. I loved Gran Torino and anything that's even better must be awesome.

[balmakboor]

I'm not generally a fan (Million Dollar Baby, Flags of Our Fathers, and Letters From Iwo Jima all blow chunks, and though I liked Mystic River and Changeling, both struck me as rather heavy-handed). As for it being his best film, as director or otherwise, I'm partial myself to Gran Torino because it has a more interesting subject, in addition to being funnier and having a better performance by Eastwood.

Nah. Maybe I was a sucker or something, but I quite fell for Million Dollar Baby.

[baby doll]

Nah. Maybe I was a sucker or something, but I quite fell for Million Dollar Baby.Going back to what I said about Mystic River and Changeling, it's just so heavy-handed, from the mustache-twirling German boxer villainess, who appears out of thin air to supply the film with a melodramtic twist, to the comic relief character, who would make John Ford blush, to the scene where an aged, one-eyed Morgan Freeman (in the kind of black sidekick role one would expect to see in a 1940s Hollywood film, like Casablanca, but not in 2004--well, okay modern Hollywood is generally pretty racist, but that's hardly an excuse) takes on a much younger boxer who's in better shape, and beats his ass, just so the seniors in the audience can have the vicarious thrill of seeing him take the young whippersnapper down a peg. I was just offended by how little Eastwood expects of his viewer.

[Dukefrukem]

Do the Harry Potter movies get better? So far i'm pretty unimpressed by the first two entries.

[balmakboor]

Do the Harry Potter movies get better? So far i'm pretty unimpressed by the first two entries.

Yes. Or at least the third one did. I haven't seen any after that.

[Melville]

I liked Million Dollar Baby. It has very emotionally affecting moments (e.g. the ending), and some very graceful ones (e.g., the car ride with shadows passing over the characters' faces). But it was definitely hackneyed, and the one-dimensionality of the comic relief character and the villainous white-trash family was very bothersome. It's all very heavy-handed, and the storytelling is horribly contrived in how it goes about hitting its emotional notes.

My favorite Eastwood is far and away Unforgiven, though I haven't seen a bunch of his acclaimed films (e.g. Bird, A Perfect World, Bridges of Madison County).

[balmakboor]

I liked Million Dollar Baby. It was very emotionally effective, and it had some graceful moments (e.g., the car ride with shadows passing over the characters' faces). But it was definitely hackneyed, and the one-dimensionality of the comic relief character and the villainous white-trash family was very bothersome. It's all very heavy-handed, and the storytelling is horribly contrived in how it goes about hitting its emotional notes.

My favorite Eastwood is far and away Unforgiven, though I haven't seen a bunch of his acclaimed films (e.g. Bird, A Perfect World, Bridges of Madison County).

I thought MDB worked in spite of its heavy-handed script because Eastwood's directions was so direct and assured and even muted. Great use of lighting, etc. I should see it again though. Maybe I'll feel differently.

Crash, on the other hand, failed because it had the same heavy hand behind the camera as it had putting words on paper.

[Fezzik]

Why wouldn't it? For my money it is still his best film (as director).

I wholeheartedly agree. Most people I know haven't even seen it ("eww...Kevin Costner lol" *rolls eyes*) but its easily my favorite Eastwood film, and has been since it came out.

[Melville]

I thought MDB worked in spite of its heavy-handed script because Eastwood's directions was so direct and assured and even muted. Great use of lighting, etc. I should see it again though. Maybe I'll feel differently.

Crash, on the other hand, failed because it had the same heavy hand behind the camera as it had putting words on paper.
Yeah, I think that's a fair assessment.

[baby doll]

I thought MDB worked in spite of its heavy-handed script because Eastwood's directions was so direct and assured and even muted. Great use of lighting, etc. I should see it again though. Maybe I'll feel differently.

Crash, on the other hand, failed because it had the same heavy hand behind the camera as it had putting words on paper.I think it's pretty facile to blame all the bad stuff on Haggis, and then praise Eastwood for managing to pull it off in spite of his material. And since when did anonymous direction (in terms of staging and découpage, he's not doing anything very interesting) become synonomous with "direct," "assured," and "muted"? I remember when Million Dollar Baby came out, one reviewer even likened it to Robert Bresson, which is pretty absurd on a number of levels (given the vast differences in their respective approaches to sound, montage, narration, acting, lighting, and composition, I can't even imagine what she meant).

[Melville]

I don't remember the movie too well, but I think at the very least Eastwood made very effective use of heavy shadows to help created a muted and elegiac tone.

What does découpage mean in the context of film making?

[balmakboor]

I think it's pretty facile to blame all the bad stuff on Haggis, and then praise Eastwood for managing to pull it off in spite of his material. And since when did anonymous direction (in terms of staging and découpage, he's not doing anything very interesting) become synonomous with "direct," "assured," and "muted"? I remember when Million Dollar Baby came out, one reviewer even likened it to Robert Bresson, which is pretty absurd on a number of levels (given the vast differences in their respective approaches to sound, montage, narration, acting, lighting, and composition, I can't even imagine what she meant).

Nah, I love blaming bad stuff on Haggis. It's my favorite spectator sport.

[Sven]

What does découpage mean in the context of film making?

I found this. (http://www.allmovie.com/glossary/term/decoupage)

Seems like pretentious non-term.

[Melville]

I found this. (http://www.allmovie.com/glossary/term/decoupage)

Seems like pretentious non-term.
So it's just a use of continuity editing to achieve dramatic effect?

[Sven]

So it's just a use of continuity editing to achieve dramatic effect?

I also found this:


The French definition is “to cut,” but applied to film the word is better described as construction. Noel Burch, in Theory of Film Practice, defines the three terms for which decoupage is inter*changeably used for as: 1) The final form of a script replete with the required technical information. 2) The practical breakdown of the film’s construction into separate shots/sequences prior to filming & 3) The underlying structure of the finished film, which has probably deviated from the original “decoupage.”

[Melville]

I also found this:
Hm. I'm guessing that baby doll was referring to something like 2) there.

[Sven]

Hm. I'm guessing that baby doll was referring to something like 2) there.

I would guess 3), actually, because that's the only one on which a viewer really can comment. A viewer can only imagine 1 & 2. Unless I'm misunderstanding "prior to filming."

[Eleven]

Manohla Dargis rants (http://jezebel.com/5426065/****-them-times-critic-on-hollywood-women--why-romantic-comedies-suck)

[Grouchy]

2) The practical breakdown of the film’s construction into separate shots/sequences prior to filming

That is the only definition of decoupage I was ever aware of. Well, I read Theory of Film Practice, so I guess I was mildly aware of the other two, but we only use that definition in all of my film classes.

[Melville]

I would guess 3), actually, because that's the only one on which a viewer really can comment. A viewer can only imagine 1 & 2. Unless I'm misunderstanding "prior to filming."
Yeah, I'm imagining 2) without the "prior to filming" (and perhaps the "practical"). With those words removed, 2) would become a subset of 3), but I'm guessing (somewhat haphazardly) that that's the subset that baby doll was referring to, since the "underlying structure" of the finished film would also include large scale narrative structure and such, which I doubt he was referring to.


Manohla Dargis rants (http://jezebel.com/5426065/****-them-times-critic-on-hollywood-women--why-romantic-comedies-suck)
I like her style. One of the better critics that I've read.

EDIT: also, when are you going to grace us with a top 11 something-or-other thread?

[Dead & Messed Up]

Manohla Dargis rants (http://jezebel.com/5426065/****-them-times-critic-on-hollywood-women--why-romantic-comedies-suck)

Nice. I wonder if the relatively low number of female directors comes from the inherent nature of the medium. My understanding is that pursuing directing is very high-risk, high-reward, and, psychologically, that tends to attract more men than women.

[megladon8]

Nice. I wonder if the relatively low number of female directors comes from the inherent nature of the medium. My understanding is that pursuing directing is very high-risk, high-reward, and, psychologically, that tends to attract more men than women.


I wouldn't be surprised if this is a big part of it.

In studying entrepreneurship and small businesses as part of my college education, we learned that so called "high-risk, high-reward" employees are most often male, as well.

So it would make sense that this same trend would work on the higher level of film directing and its high-risk, high-reward nature.

[Sycophant]

Manohla Dargis rants (http://jezebel.com/5426065/****-them-times-critic-on-hollywood-women--why-romantic-comedies-suck)

This is good.

[Dead & Messed Up]

You know what happens when we let women direct movies? Leni Riefenstahl.

Think about it.

[Dukefrukem]

I liked Million Dollar Baby. It has very emotionally affecting moments (e.g. the ending), and some very graceful ones (e.g., the car ride with shadows passing over the characters' faces). But it was definitely hackneyed, and the one-dimensionality of the comic relief character and the villainous white-trash family was very bothersome. It's all very heavy-handed, and the storytelling is horribly contrived in how it goes about hitting its emotional notes.

My favorite Eastwood is far and away Unforgiven, though I haven't seen a bunch of his acclaimed films (e.g. Bird, A Perfect World, Bridges of Madison County).

I haven't seen those too, but I would say...

1. Unforgiven
2. Million Dollar Baby
3. Gran Torino
4. Mystic River

[soitgoes...]

Clint Eastwood's A Perfect World holds up surprisingly well.
Have you seen High Plains Drifter and/or The Outlaw Josey Wales yet?

[Melville]

I haven't seen those too, but I would say...

1. Unforgiven
2. Million Dollar Baby
3. Gran Torino
4. Mystic River
I agree with those rankings.

Unforgiven >> Million Dollar Baby > Gran Torino > The Outlaw Josey Wales > Letters from Iwo Jima > Mystic River > High Plains Drifter > Space Cowboys > Absolute Power

I think I've seen True Crime, but I can't be sure.

[megladon8]

Unforgiven - 10
Gran Torino - 9
High Plains Drifter - 8.5
Sudden Impact - 7.5
The Outlaw Josey Wales - 7
Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil - 6.5
Absolute Power - 6
True Crime - 6
Space Cowboys - 5

[soitgoes...]

I agree with those rankings.

Unforgiven >> Million Dollar Baby > Gran Torino > The Outlaw Josey Wales > Letters from Iwo Jima > Mystic River > High Plains Drifter > Space Cowboys > Absolute Power
I don't agree with these rankings.

[Melville]

I don't agree with these rankings.
The only acceptable response is to post your own.

[soitgoes...]

The only acceptable response is to post your own.
In order:

High Plains Drifter
Unforgiven
A Perfect World
The Outlaw Josey Wales
Gran Torino
Letters from Iwo Jima
Million Dollar Baby
Mystic River
------------------
Pale Rider
Flags of Our Father
Blood Work
Absolute Power
Play Misty for Me
------------------
Sudden Impact
The Bridges of Madison County
Space Cowboys

[Winston*]

Unforgiven
White Hunter Black Heart
High Plains Drifter
Gran Torino
A Perfect World
Letters From Iwo Jima
Million Dollar Baby
Mystic River
Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil

[Winston*]

More people should see White Hunter, Black Heart. Clint is so good in this movie.

[The Mike]

http://www.stevenderosa.com/writingwithhitchcock/suspicion2.html

I guess anyway.What the......???

I was thinking of this:
Lina is writing a letter to her mother stating that she fears Johnnie is going to poison her, at which point he walks in with the milk. She finishes the letter, seals and stamps an envelope, asks Johnnie to mail the letter, then drinks the milk. The final shot would have shown him leaving the house and dropping into a mailbox the letter which incriminates him.

[Scar]

More people should see White Hunter, Black Heart. Clint is so good in this movie.

YES.

[number8]

Eastwood's top 3 (as director):

1. A Perfect World
2. Unforgiven
3. Gran Torino

[Spaceman Spiff]

Yes, the most effective response is always in list form. But to add some words: I think the scene in itself, independent of the preceding film, is both mesmerizing and elating: the sparkling lights in the darkness, the music, and Lavant's frenetic dancing are a superbly evocative and enigmatic mixture, and the cut to the credits comes at just the right moment. And it's made even better by how well it concludes the film: the character was always locked in ritualized routine and in an alienated in-between state, and the film itself is always in kind of a nowhere-land of ellipses and distances; the ending serves as a sudden counterpoint in which the character and the film's aesthetic are suddenly jubilantly free and of-the-moment. As Boner said, it's a great metaphysical conclusion to the story, a display of the underlying nature of the character and his (presumable) death; or to quote the similarly-themed ending of Eraserhead, "in heaven, everything is fine." (Though that kind of simplifies the ending's enigmatic style.)

Seriously, watch it again: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQcYspfvLqY

Wow. I never thought of it that way. Although in fairness, it's been a long while since I'd seen it. Cheers.

[B-side]

The praise for Gran Torino baffles me. As a straight comedy, it's decent, as a drama, it's mediocre when it's at its best. Clint was decent in it, I guess.

[Ezee E]

The praise for Gran Torino baffles me. As a straight comedy, it's decent, as a drama, it's mediocre when it's at its best. Clint was decent in it, I guess.
Awful acting by the Asians, but otherwise it's pretty damn good. I'll still take Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby over it anyday though.

Watched Julie & Julia today. For a chic flick, it's pretty good. It actually has a very enjoyable first hour, due to the happy-go-lucky pace of it all, and the great relationship between Tucci and Streep. It peters out, but Streep makes you smile in each scene. So, enjoyable enough. A good couple's movie for sure.

[number8]

The New York Film Critics Circle voted Meryl Streep Best Actress and Morgan Freeman Best Actor.

So. Fucking. Lame.

[number8]

SF Film Critics is slightly better. Best Actor is Colin Firth.

[Philosophe_rouge]

Awful acting by the Asians, but otherwise it's pretty damn good. I'll still take Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby over it anyday though.

Watched Julie & Julia today. For a chic flick, it's pretty good. It actually has a very enjoyable first hour, due to the happy-go-lucky pace of it all, and the great relationship between Tucci and Streep. It peters out, but Streep makes you smile in each scene. So, enjoyable enough. A good couple's movie for sure.

Julie & Julia is decent, though it's WAY too long. The scenes with Adams also drag increasingly, though she is often likeable. I'm honestly not a Streep fan, but she is absolutely charming in this, and makes the film more than tolerable, even something I'd watch again.

[Derek]

The New York Film Critics Circle voted Meryl Streep Best Actress and Morgan Freeman Best Actor.

So. Fucking. Lame.

Well, it's about time those two got some recognition.

[Bosco B Thug]

Actually, I wonder if Bosco feels the same way about the ending of Stroszek as the ending of Beau travail, since they have a very similar suddenness and primarily thematic and emotional (rather than narrative) role. Stroszek's ending is good with me. It's highly integrated and envisioned into the narrative (as is Beau Travail's, but not to a satisfactory respect for me) and (now unlike Beau Travail's) is an integral component to the film's actual climax and doesn't, suddenly and from left-field, entirely rework our perception and relationship to a character. Stroszek's ending does not strike me as a complete whim (especially with the heavy montaging he works it with), and instead aids and adds further to Herzog's intellectual points.

[Melville]

Stroszek's ending is good with me. It's highly integrated and envisioned into the narrative (as is Beau Travail's, but not to a satisfactory respect for me) and (now unlike Beau Travail's) is an integral component to the film's actual climax and doesn't, suddenly and from left-field, entirely rework our perception and relationship to a character. Stroszek's ending does not strike me as a complete whim (especially with the heavy montaging he works it with), and instead aids and adds further to Herzog's intellectual points.
Dancing birds are an integral component of the film's actual climax?

I disagree that Beau travail's ending entirely reworks our perception of the character. I'd say it enlightens or clarifies it: many earlier moments, such as Lavant going to the dance club and wandering alone in the streets, as well as his general envy and infatuation with the younger soldier, all build a portrait of his constant restraint and alienation, such that the final burst of freedom makes perfect sense. Also, the fact that the film is so elliptical makes the final scene seem natural to me—certainly sudden, but not at all out of left field. And as you've said yourself, the ending furthers the film's intellectual points.

[Boner M]

I'm not sure that I remember it. Is it the stalker lying in bed, talking to his wife about humanity's loss of faith or something
Dude. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNiVFCWMrqI)

[Qrazy]

Dude. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNiVFCWMrqI)

Indeed. Appreciate Stalker more Melville or face the fiery furnace of the inferno.

Stalk on faith > Ordet on faith

[Dukefrukem]

The New York Film Critics Circle voted Meryl Streep Best Actress and Morgan Freeman Best Actor.

So. Fucking. Lame.

LOL. I think that's the same award Howard Stern voted for because "she was nice to him at a party"

[Dukefrukem]

Awful acting by the Asians, but otherwise it's pretty damn good. I'll still take Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby over it anyday though.

I agree with the acting. I loved the message. I thought it was his most powerful piece with such a short running time. Unforgiven is great, but it was clearly made for revenge and renege alone. Million Dollar Baby was also powerful, but has a lot more sorrow; a lot more depressing.

[Ezee E]

The New York Film Critics Circle voted Meryl Streep Best Actress and Morgan Freeman Best Actor.

So. Fucking. Lame.
Streep. Sidibe. Or Mulligan. Take your pick.

[megladon8]

I agree with the acting. I loved the message. I thought it was his most powerful piece with such a short running time. Unforgiven is great, but it was clearly made for revenge and renege alone. Million Dollar Baby was also powerful, but has a lot more sorrow; a lot more depressing.


I don't think you really understood Unforgiven, Duke.

[Benny Profane]

Waco: The Rules of Engagement is one of the most infuriating documentaries I've ever seen. Anyone who watches that without being scared of their federal government or the mainstream media is a servile lemming.

[Dukefrukem]

I don't think you really understood Unforgiven, Duke.

Thanks for your interpretation of my interpretation. :rolleyes: Revenge.

[megladon8]

Um...ok...

[Melville]

Dude. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNiVFCWMrqI)
Well, that's a great scene, alright. But there is a scene near the end in which the stalker lies in bed lamenting to his wife humanity's loss of faith, right? Or have I just completely forgotten the whole movie?


Stalk on faith > Ordet on faith
Evidently I need to see Stalker again, but that's just crazy talk. Although knowing Tarkovsky, maybe it isn't. Whatever.

[baby doll]

Have you seen High Plains Drifter and/or The Outlaw Josey Wales yet?No, the only pre-'93 film of his that I've seen is Play Misty for Me, which isn't a good film exactly, but it does have the mom from Arrested Development as a hippy skank psycho-killer filmed with a wide angle lens and stabbing into the camera.

As for the découpage thing, I was referring to the breakdown of the script into separate shots--or in other words, how Eastwood "covers" a scene (to use the Hollywood lingo).

[Skitch]

The New York Film Critics Circle voted Meryl Streep Best Actress and Morgan Freeman Best Actor.

So. Fucking. Lame.

I vote the New York Film Critics Circle "Most Non-Controversial".

[Adam]

Streep. Sidibe. Or Mulligan. Take your pick.

or Bullock, if the cover of an entertainment weekly i saw in shoprite today is to be believed

[balmakboor]

or Bullock, if the cover of an entertainment weekly i saw in shoprite today is to be believed

For The Blind Side? God I hope not.

[number8]

Thanks for your interpretation of my interpretation. :rolleyes: Revenge.

What did you mean by it was made for "revenge and renege"?

[Qrazy]

Well, that's a great scene, alright. But there is a scene near the end in which the stalker lies in bed lamenting to his wife humanity's loss of faith, right? Or have I just completely forgotten the whole movie?

Nah you're right. I think it's the previous scene.



Evidently I need to see Stalker again, but that's just crazy talk. Although knowing Tarkovsky, maybe it isn't. Whatever.

I really like Ordet too but I guess telekinesis just goes down easier for me than being raised from the dead.

[Grouchy]

The Great:
1. High Plains Drifter
2. Unforgiven
3. The Outlaw Josey Wales
4. Pale Rider
5. Gran Torino

The Good:
6. Absolute Power
7. Sudden Impact
8. Mystic River
9. White Hunter Black Heart
10. The Gauntlet
11. Letters from Iwo Jima
12. Changeling
13. Flags of Our Fathers

The Bad:
14. Million Dollar Baby
15. Blood Work
16. Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil

I don't understand the "revenge" comment either.

[Grouchy]

So Goodbye Solo deserves all the accolades it got. What could have been a cheesy, "reaffirmation" type of movie is instead a piece of human interaction with a honesty and a direction not often seen in modern cinema. Both actors are perfect for their roles and managed to engage me from scene one. It's also worth noting hoe perfectly poetic and appropriate the title is,

being the one thing left unsaid by the old man before leaving.
Julie & Julia, on the other side, I couldn't even finish. Infuriating piece of shit. Everyone involved with it should have their noses broken.

[Qrazy]

Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil really was a piece of crapola. I'm glad people share my disdain.

[balmakboor]

It's also worth noting hoe perfectly poetic and appropriate the title is,

being the one thing left unsaid by the old man before leaving.


YES! I found the whole ending to be wonderfully unspoken and poetic.

[NickGlass]

The New York Film Critics Circle voted Meryl Streep Best Actress and Morgan Freeman Best Actor.

So. Fucking. Lame.

They went for George Clooney, not Morgan Freeman, which is an equally unimaginative choice. Thankfully, it was the only award to go to Up in the Air.

[balmakboor]

Not many people have seen Bird. I can't say much though. I haven't seen it either. Been wanting to though.

[balmakboor]

They went for George Clooney, not Morgan Freeman, which is an equally unimaginative choice. Thankfully, it was the only award to go to Up in the Air.

Oh no, are we already having an Up in the Air backlash around here? It's one of the movies I'm most looking forward to.

[NickGlass]

Oh no, are we already having an Up in the Air backlash around here? It's one of the movies I'm most looking forward to.

::grinds teeth::

That word! It's heresy!

[NickGlass]

By the way, have these voting bodies seen the other Julia? How Tilda Swinton has failed to pick up one single award from these critics groups vexes me. I'm terribly vexed.

[Ezee E]

Oh no, are we already having an Up in the Air backlash around here? It's one of the movies I'm most looking forward to.
Haha. That's how Match Cut rolls.

[Ezee E]

By the way, have these voting bodies seen the other Julia? How Tilda Swinton has failed to pick up one single award from these critics groups vexes me. I'm terribly vexed.
It was basically straight to DVD. Nobody's probably even heard of it.

But she was very good in it.

[NickGlass]

Haha. That's how Match Cut rolls.

Yeah, you got me. I actually haven't even seen it. That rating down there, and my thoughts in the thread in Upcoming Movie Discuss, are complete lies. I just don't like to see people pleased with populist films, so I trash them blindly.

[balmakboor]

::grinds teeth::

That word! It's heresy!

Okay. Let me see. Am I going to have to start reading thoughts from people who honestly didn't like Up in the Air for good reasons around here before I get a chance to see it? I was kind of enjoying living in its bubble of praise from the critical establishment.

Yeah, "backlash" suggests you're just trying to be contrarian or something.

[number8]

I know I gave it a 7, but I think I'm still not sure if I liked it or not.

[Watashi]

Maybe you should just see the film for yourself and not care what NickGlass or others think.

[balmakboor]

Yeah, you got me. I actually haven't even seen it. That rating down there, and my thoughts in the thread in Upcoming Movie Discuss, are complete lies. I just don't like to see people pleased with populist films, so I trash them blindly.

So, umm, have you not seen it yet? Can I at least trust your fairly favorable rating of A Single Man? I'm crazy with anticipation over that one.

[balmakboor]

Maybe you should just see the film for yourself and not care what NickGlass or others think.

Yeah yeah. And I still don't like WALL-E or Up very much.

[Ezee E]

Yeah, you got me. I actually haven't even seen it. That rating down there, and my thoughts in the thread in Upcoming Movie Discuss, are complete lies. I just don't like to see people pleased with populist films, so I trash them blindly.
I was joking.

Your review in the other thread amused me too.

[Watashi]

Yeah yeah. And I still don't like WALL-E or Up very much.

I have no idea what that has to do with anything, but good for you? Your'e wrong? Go to hell?

[balmakboor]

Good for you? You're wrong? Go to hell?

Yes. No. Probably.

[Yxklyx]

By the way, have these voting bodies seen the other Julia? How Tilda Swinton has failed to pick up one single award from these critics groups vexes me. I'm terribly vexed.

Obviously not! Tilda gave the performance of a lifetime.

It's just stupid awards anyway.

[NickGlass]

Obviously not! Tilda gave the performance of a lifetime.

It's just stupid awards anyway.

Awards are as stupid as they are influential.

[balmakboor]

Hmm. I'd never heard of this before. "The Black List" of unproduced screenplays that Hollywood bigwigs consider to be favorites.

http://www.blcklst.com/tbl/list/2009_black_list.pdf

A few sound interesting -- like the in-production Facebook movie -- but most sound pretty weak. There's got to be better ideas than these laying about in the slush pile.

[baby doll]

Oh no, are we already having an Up in the Air backlash around here? It's one of the movies I'm most looking forward to.I'll most likely take a pass on it completely, just because I don't like Jason Reitman, whose best work to-date was an episode of The Office. Simply put, the guy's a hack, and as far as I can tell, his best director nomination for Juno a few years ago showed that Hollywood is simply grateful to have a competently directed comedy (whether or not it was well written is another matter), and doesn't give a hoot about mise en scène.

[number8]

That's funny, I think mise en scene is about the only thing Reitman is good at.

[baby doll]

That's funny, I think mise en scene is about the only thing Reitman is good at.Maybe I was dozing when I saw Thank You for Smoking and Juno, but I don't remember anything in either that rivaled Jacques Tati.

[NickGlass]

That's funny, I think mise en scene is about the only thing Reitman is good at.

He's better at pandering.

[number8]

He's better at pandering.

http://www.mostlymusic.com/images/Zing300.jpg

[MadMan]

I laugh at anyone who actually gets upset over award shows these days. Most of them are irrelevent, and there have been so many more deserving actors/actresses/directors/movies/etc. that haven't won in the past. Me, I just sit back and either chose to watch (which I should really quit doing, honestly) or I don't tune in at all.

And damnit I enjoyed Thank You For Smoking. The satire was rather weak, but the comedy was quite strong-plus Eckheart rocked the part.

[Winston*]

Me, I just sit back and either chose to watch (which I should really quit doing, honestly) or I don't tune in at all.



Why must you always limit yourself so, MadMan?

[MadMan]

Why must you always limit yourself so, MadMan?I don't see it as limiting myself, so much as giving in to the apathy.

[baby doll]

And damnit I enjoyed Thank You For Smoking. The satire was rather weak, but the comedy was quite strong-plus Eckheart rocked the part.I agree that the satire was weak, but even worse, I thought the zingers were only mildly amusing at best, and even pointed to certain contradictions in the film's overall thesis (we're supposed to be appalled and amused when J.K. Simmons says that teen smoking is the industry's "bread and butter," but then the film argues that smoking is a matter of personal choice, even though the overwhelming majority of people who do smoke begin as teenagers); and not only is this a role Eckhart could pull off in his sleep, but the film tries to make him palatable to a mainstream audience by softening his usual persona to include being a loving father.

[megladon8]

I like watching Awards shows.

I found Hugh Jackman to be a really entertaining host at the Oscars this year. And generally I find the Oscars quite fun to watch.

[Bosco B Thug]

Dancing birds are an integral component of the film's actual climax? Yes, it's an integral part of the tone of Herzog's envisioned climactic moment. It's used in direct juxtaposition and montage, not a seemingly disparate sequence tacked on at the end.

Again, I like BT's ending and love what it does. I just also think it has its pronounced of inadequacies.


I disagree that Beau travail's ending entirely reworks our perception of the character. I'd say it enlightens or clarifies it: many earlier moments, such as Lavant going to the dance club and wandering alone in the streets, as well as his general envy and infatuation with the younger soldier, all build a portrait of his constant restraint and alienation, such that the final burst of freedom makes perfect sense. Also, the fact that the film is so elliptical makes the final scene seem natural to me—certainly sudden, but not at all out of left field. And as you've said yourself, the ending furthers the film's intellectual points. Well, of course I didn't mean it doesn't add to and enlighten us on the character. And yes, we get the sense dancing in a club is something he'd do and, as I've conceded, it's structurally and emotionally contextualized. But it's the showiness and surprise novelty of the bit that gets to me, too. I said Stroszek's ending furthers its intellectual points - I lean towards the opposite with Beau Travail.

[Pop Trash]

That's funny, I think mise en scene is about the only thing Reitman is good at.

He's good at casting/performances. Keep in mind Ellen Page and Michael Cera were basically unknown (other than Cera in AD) when they were cast for Juno.

[StanleyK]

Not many people have seen Bird. I can't say much though. I haven't seen it either. Been wanting to though.

I've seen it. It's mostly usual biopic fare, but Clint's minimalism works in its favor here, plus Forest Whitaker is really good in it.

1. Unforgiven - **** (10)
2. Letters from Iwo Jima - **** (9.0)
3. Million Dollar Baby - ***½ (8.5)
4. Gran Torino - *** (7.5)
5. Changeling - *** (7.5)
6. Bird - *** (7.0)
7. High Plains Drifter - *** (6.5)
8. The Bridges of Madison County - **½ (6.0)
9. Flags of Our Fathers - **½ (5.5)
10. Bronco Billy - ** (3.5)
11. Space Cowboys - *½ (3.0)

Need to rewatch:

Mystic River, The Outlaw Josey Wales, Pale Rider

[Sycophant]

He's good at casting/performances. Keep in mind Ellen Page and Michael Cera were basically unknown (other than Cera in AD) when they were cast for Juno.

Wait, really? Page had Hard Candy and a host of other credits before Juno, while Cera's role in AD hardly seemed to leave him at unknown status. Juno was one of several projects not too far distant from each other as he started getting film roles.

I won't fault their performances in Juno, though.

[Derek]

Like Madman, I either watch awards shows or don't watch them.

At what point do you not get labeled for being part of a backlash against a awards/critical fave? If you see it before it gets any buzz or is said opinion automatically dismissed as a reaction not to the film but to its perceived reputation no matter what? [/rhetorical]

[Qrazy]

Maybe I was dozing when I saw Thank You for Smoking and Juno, but I don't remember anything in either that rivaled Jacques Tati.

I don't like Reitman much either, but why do you always make these terribly irrelevant comparisons?

[Derek]

I don't like Reitman much either, but why do you always make these terribly irrelevant comparisons?

That's a good question, but not as good as the question David Bordwell tackled on his web site last week.

[Grouchy]

YES! I found the whole ending to be wonderfully unspoken and poetic.
It's really about Solo learning that this guy is not just going through a depression or anything he can solve with his company and a few beers - his is a conscious decision taken a long time ago about ending a life that holds nothing left of value. Whether the old guy is wrong or not (personally I have a hard time understanding suicide mentality) is irrelevant. What's important is that it's the right choice for him and Solo can do nothing about it. Neither can the little kid. At the end, I think he learns to hold his life in even greater appreciation than what he had before.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Just finished Memories of Murder and LOVED it. I'll comment a bit more tomorrow morning. Too tired right now.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Just finished Memories of Murder and LOVED it. I'll comment a bit more tomorrow morning. Too tired right now.

Yes.

[megladon8]

Just finished Memories of Murder and LOVED it. I'll comment a bit more tomorrow morning. Too tired right now.


I'm glad, KF.

It's one of the many movies Jen and I consider "ours" :)

[B-side]

I like watching Awards shows.

I found Hugh Jackman to be a really entertaining host at the Oscars this year. And generally I find the Oscars quite fun to watch.

Yeah, I enjoy them as well. Naturally, I rarely agree with their choices, but I find them entertaining nonetheless.

[Sycophant]

The Oscars are something I thoroughly enjoy every year. Conversely, I probably hate Oscar speculation and buzz more than anyone.

[Boner M]

So who's gonna initiate the Memories of Murder match-cut backlash? I say Spinal.

[Winston*]

So who's gonna initiate the Memories of Murder match-cut backlash? I say Spinal.

I didn't love it but I saw it at 7 in the morning after not sleeping all night, so that might have something to do with it. I should see it again.

[Qrazy]

I haven't seen it yet. I preemptively give it a B.

[Spinal]

I think someone should start a Match Cut Awards thread. Who's up for it?

[B-side]

I think someone should start a Match Cut Awards thread. Who's up for it?

You?

[soitgoes...]

I think someone should start a Match Cut Awards thread. Who's up for it?I will, but I don't necessarily wanna be tally person.

[Dukefrukem]

Yes. Or at least the third one did. I haven't seen any after that.

You're right, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is significantly better than the first two films (also helped with the addition of Gary Oldman). Why did it take so long for Harry to start using more magic?? I can't believe they went through the first two books without him doing jack sqat!!! and why did they recast Dumbledore? It was so obvious when he opened his mouth for the first time. Michael Gambon didn't even make an effort to try and replicate the character that Richard Harris setup in the first two films. Very disappointed. I loved Harris in the Count of Monte Cristo. Loved him as Dumbledore.


edit: oh he died. :( where've I been?

[Mara]

edit: oh he died. :( where've I been?

:lol:

[baby doll]

I don't like Reitman much either, but why do you always make these terribly irrelevant comparisons?Maybe it's a stretch, but he was the first example that came to mind of a comedic filmmaker whose mise en scène doesn't suck out loud. Reitman is essentially a TV director (boring compositions, too many close-ups, invisible edits--your conventional script and actor-driven approach to cinema, which views the medium merely as a device for recording pro-filmic content), while Tati is able to guide the viewer's gaze through his elaborate long shots in deep focus purely through composition and sound cues.

[Raiders]

To be fair to Reitman (and most comedy directors for that matter), Tati's mise-en-scène pretty much *is* the comedy. I haven't seen it yet, but I don't think Clooney in Up in the Air is a Hulot-like character and the comedy isn't coming, well not mostly anyway, from his physical interaction with the set pieces.

I'm not excusing lazy filmmaking, but that really isn't a comparison that makes a whole lot of sense.

[Ezee E]

Up in the Air is more Billy Wilder than Jacques Tati.

[balmakboor]

Maybe it's a stretch, but he was the first example that came to mind of a comedic filmmaker whose mise en scène doesn't suck out loud. Reitman is essentially a TV director (boring compositions, too many close-ups, invisible edits--your conventional script and actor-driven approach to cinema, which views the medium merely as a device for recording pro-filmic content), while Tati is able to guide the viewer's gaze through his elaborate long shots in deep focus purely through composition and sound cues.

I think you're making some questionable assumptions here. Is it really possible, generally speaking, to have too many close-ups? Sounds ridiculous to me. A masterpiece could be made out of nothing but close-ups. Are invisible edits inherently bad? Saying that is like condemning the bulk of classical Hollywood cinema. Boring compositions? I think a composition should serve its purpose and then get out of the way. I'm not a fan of compositions that are interesting just for the sake of being interesting.

And I don't think any of that brands Reitman as a "TV director" necessarily, just a certain type of director who strives to invisibly serve a story.

While there are exceptions, for me the difference between TV and cinema is one of telling versus showing. Watch most any TV show and the bulk of the information is conveyed through dialog. Some character is almost always talking, telling us what's going on. Watch most any movie -- including those by Reitman -- and the ratio of screen time without talking to screen time with talking goes way up. We are much more shown things rather than told things.

Of course, the reason for this is television viewers -- classically -- don't stare constantly at the screen. They have many distractions, they may be eating dinner, etc. But as long as their ears can continue receiving information they can pretty much follow the show. In the theater, people do -- for the most part -- continuously look at the screen. Now that movies are more and more being consumed on DVD at home, I wouldn't be surprised to see a drift toward more telling and less showing in the cinema as well.

[balmakboor]

I guess to me television is often like radio with an optional visual component. And that's why I don't watch very much.

[baby doll]

Up in the Air is more Billy Wilder than Jacques Tati.This is probably a better comparison, since Wilder started out as a writer, and turned to directing reportedly only to preserve the integrity of his scripts. However, Reitman hasn't been getting scripts (at least not in his first two films) on par with Double Indemnity, Ace in the Hole, The Apartment, or Avanti! Come to think of it, Wilder himself made some pretty terrible movies, depending on the quality of the material (I had to turn off The Seven Year Itch after forty minutes because it was so resoundingly awful).

[baby doll]

I think you're making some questionable assumptions here. Is it really possible, generally speaking, to have too many close-ups? Sounds ridiculous to me. A masterpiece could be made out of nothing but close-ups. Are invisible edits inherently bad? Saying that is like condemning the bulk of classical Hollywood cinema. Boring compositions? I think a composition should serve its purpose and then get out of the way. I'm not a fan of compositions that are interesting just for the sake of being interesting.

And I don't think any of that brands Reitman as a "TV director" necessarily, just a certain type of director who strives to invisibly serve a story.Regarding close-ups, it depends--and probably more on the acting than on the editing itself. (To make another ridiculously unfair comparison, Ellen Page is no Falconetti.) The thing about Reitman's film is that it leaves nothing to chance; it tells us exactly what to think at every moment, and I think that's part of what made it so insufferable for me. When Allison Janey flips out at the ultra-sound technician (telling her at one point to go back to wherever it is she came from), the majority of the (almost exclusively white) audience that I saw the film with thought this racist tirade was something to cheer about, which is clearly the intent.

What exactly is the point of any composition, except to convey certain information? And there are plenty of ways of doing that, from the elaborate group shots of Feuillade, Mizoguchi, and the late Dreyer to filmmakers like Hitchcock, Lang, and Ozu who favor simpler compositions with more camera movement (at least in the case of Hitchcok and Lang) and edits. Not to get fancy or anything, but I think it was Roland Barthes who said that the signified can never exhaust the signifier.

The larger point I'm trying to make is that Reitman's films are aesthetically boring, plain and simple, as opposed to the best classical Hollywood cinema from Sternberg to Welles to Wes Anderson.


While there are exceptions, for me the difference between TV and cinema is one of telling versus showing. Watch most any TV show and the bulk of the information is conveyed through dialog. Some character is almost always talking, telling us what's going on. Watch most any movie -- including those by Reitman -- and the ratio of screen time without talking to screen time with talking goes way up. We are much more shown things rather than told things.

Of course, the reason for this is television viewers -- classically -- don't stare constantly at the screen. They have many distractions, they may be eating dinner, etc. But as long as their ears can continue receiving information they can pretty much follow the show. In the theater, people do -- for the most part -- continuously look at the screen. Now that movies are more and more being consumed on DVD at home, I wouldn't be surprised to see a drift toward more telling and less showing in the cinema as well.I dunno, I think the funniest thing about Arrested Development are Justin Bateman's reaction shots.

[balmakboor]

I dunno, I think the funniest thing about Arrested Development are Justin Bateman's reaction shots.

If all of television was as good as Arrested Development, I'd probably watch more television.

Maybe Ellen Page ain't no Falconetti -- actually I agree with that totally for better and for worse -- but I'd sure rather spend time looking at Page.

[baby doll]

Maybe Ellen Page ain't no Falconetti -- actually I agree with that totally for better and for worse -- but I'd sure rather spend time looking at Page.You know, I've met so many lesbians who used to hang out with her in high school. Just sayin'.

Also, one girl I know said she went out with her.

[balmakboor]

You know, I've met so many lesbians who used to hang out with her in high school. Just sayin'.

Also, one girl I know said she went out with her.

You make it sound like I want to date her. Sheesh, I'm 47 years old. How big of a creeper do you think I am?

Uh, don't answer that.

---

Actually, I just find her a very appealing though somewhat limited screen presence. Kinda the same way that I like Amy Adams.

[Sycophant]

The Band Wagon is really considered one of the best musicals ever? Really? Really?

I missed this when it happened, but yes, few films make me feel more alive than The Band Wagon. It's bliss.

[Grouchy]

I will, but I don't necessarily wanna be tally person.
I wanna be a shorty person.

[Grouchy]

By the way, while I haven't seen nearly enough movies to join in the 2009 thread (based on the fact that I still have The Hangover on the Top10) I recently had some changes in my best of 2008 list:

1. Let the Right One In
2. The Dark Knight
3. WALL-E
4. Rachel Getting Married
5. Hunger
6. Goodbye Solo
7. Gomorra
8. Pineapple Express
9. Redbelt
10. Synecdoche, New York

11. The Wrestler
12. Gran Torino
13. Iron Man
14. Martyrs
15. Blindness
16. Waltz with Bashir
17. Repo! The Genetic Opera
18. Tokyo Gore Police
19. Vicky Cristina Barcelona
20. Transsiberian

[ledfloyd]

I missed this when it happened, but yes, few films make me feel more alive than The Band Wagon. It's bliss.
i missed it as well. and second your thoughts. if shoe shine, the faust stuff and the girl hunt ballet don't do it for you wats i don't know what to tell you.

[eternity]

You know, I've met so many lesbians who used to hang out with her in high school. Just sayin'.

Also, one girl I know said she went out with her.
:cool:

[Sycophant]

i missed it as well. and second your thoughts. if shoe shine, the faust stuff and the girl hunt ballet don't do it for you wats i don't know what to tell you.

I watch "Shoe Shine" frequently and repeatedly, because of how happy it makes me.

Also, the "Dancing in the Dark" number is ethereal.

[Sycophant]

Screw you, American distributor. I just bought Tokyo Sonata from Hong Kong.

Getting Bong Joon-Ho's Mother, too, as well as Tetsuya Nakashima's latest.

[Dukefrukem]

By the way, while I haven't seen nearly enough movies to join in the 2009 thread (based on the fact that I still have The Hangover on the Top10) I recently had some changes in my best of 2008 list:

1. Let the Right One In
2. The Dark Knight
3. WALL-E
4. Rachel Getting Married
5. Hunger
6. Goodbye Solo
7. Gomorra
8. Pineapple Express
9. Redbelt
10. Synecdoche, New York

11. The Wrestler
12. Gran Torino
13. Iron Man
14. Martyrs
15. Blindness
16. Waltz with Bashir
17. Repo! The Genetic Opera
18. Tokyo Gore Police
19. Vicky Cristina Barcelona
20. Transsiberian

I'm in the same boat. I've viewed over 200 movies in 2009, but only 30 were released this year.... still a lot i need to see. Inglourious Basterds, Moon, 500 Days of Summer... Thirst...

[Derek]

TinyMixTapes Top 25 Films of '09 (http://www.tinymixtapes.com/2009-Favorite-25-Films-of-2009) (of which I wrote 2 blurbs). It actually turned out to be a pretty interesting list. [/shameless plug]

[balmakboor]

TinyMixTapes Top 25 Films of '09 (http://www.tinymixtapes.com/2009-Favorite-25-Films-of-2009) (of which I wrote 2 blurbs). It actually turned out to be a pretty interesting list. [/shameless plug]

Afterschool sounds interesting. Never heard of it before.

[Derek]

Afterschool sounds interesting. Never heard of it before.

It's fantastic - one of the more incisive and artful examinations of youth in the internet age. Stylistically, it's relatively similar to Haneke and Antonioni if that floats your boat.

[NickGlass]

TinyMixTapes Top 25 Films of '09 (http://www.tinymixtapes.com/2009-Favorite-25-Films-of-2009) (of which I wrote 2 blurbs). It actually turned out to be a pretty interesting list. [/shameless plug]

Oddly enough, I think the middle-to-bottom section of that list is exceptional (Summer Hours, 35 Shots of Rum, Tokyo Sonata, Afterschool, The Beaches of Agnes, Fantastic Mr. Fox, Lorna's Silence, Humpday), while the actual top choices are middling.

[Derek]

Oddly enough, I think the middle-to-bottom section of that list is exceptional (Summer Hours, 35 Shots of Rum, Tokyo Sonata, Afterschool, The Beaches of Agnes, Fantastic Mr. Fox, Lorna's Silence, Humpday), while the actual top choices are middling.

Nothing surprising about that. I imagine most of those choices were loved by those who watched them, but remained unseen by enough to bump them into the top 5-10.

[ledfloyd]

aside from i love you man, that's a quality list.

[Derek]

aside from i love you man, that's a quality list.

I actually liked the inclusion of that one. I didn't vote for it, but it would be in my own top 25 as of now. I'd much rather see that on the list than The Hangover.

[ledfloyd]

I actually liked the inclusion of that one. I didn't vote for it, but it would be in my own top 25 as of now. I'd much rather see that on the list than The Hangover.
true.

[Stay Puft]

I'm in the "Up in the Air is bad to mediocre" camp (somewhere between Nick and 8, I guess). Saw it at TIFF, found it mildly diverting, didn't ultimately care much for it. It's typical Reitman Junior weaksauce. Simply dull and blunt where it should be sharp or incisive, just like Juno and Thank You For Smoking.

And, yeah, don't get the crazy praise for the performances.

[Melville]

Yes, it's an integral part of the tone of Herzog's envisioned climactic moment. It's used in direct juxtaposition and montage, not a seemingly disparate sequence tacked on at the end.
I'm not seeing the difference between the two endings. In each one, the penultimate scene is a very restrained depiction of the protagonist's implied suicide. (It's left more ambiguous in Beau travail, but the connotation of suicide, either literal or figurative, is still evident.) And then, in each movie, the final scene comes as a sudden burst of frenetic song and dance. Both final scenes hence provide a direct juxtaposition that forms an integral part of the tone of the ending as a whole. The only substantial difference that I see is the difference in meaning(s) and pursuant emotional impact of the two scenes.


But it's the showiness and surprise novelty of the bit that gets to me, too.
How can anything have more surprise novelty than a dancing chicken? That's about as surprising and novel as it gets.


I said Stroszek's ending furthers its intellectual points - I lean towards the opposite with Beau Travail.
You said in an earlier post that Beau travail's ending

contrasts the entirety of the film around it, made up of routine and ellipses, with this sustained moment of freedom and jubilance. Also... the film focuses on the movement of the body and ends with it, now on a different level.
I took that to mean that you agreed that the ending furthers the film's intellectual points. The whole film is a study of distances and alienations: between the bright, vast, arid, yellow desert and the dark, cramped, lively, blue dance club; between the (male) Legionnaires and the (female) local citizens; between the rigid, baseless routine of the Legionnaires and the presumably more purposeful, utile actions of the women; between the nominal military purpose of the Legion and its actual role as pure ritual and performance; between the rigidly ascribed bodily movements of the military training and the anxious freedom of movement and interaction in the dance club; between body and mind, emphasized by Lavant's internal thoughts and the visuals' almost exclusive focus on bodily movements; between Lavant and the other Legionnaires; between the self-conscious, self-alienated, aged, unattractive Lavant and the simple (in the philosophical sense), whole, youthful, beautiful ideal of a Legionnaire, as represented by Grégoire Colin; and between Lavant and himself—self-as-body and self-as-mind, the ideal he wishes of himself and the version of himself that he views as the "real" one, the judging Being-for-itself (judging Colin, whom he initially says is unsuitable for the Legion) and the judged Being-for-others (judged by his own self, by the other Legionnaires, and especially by the godlike figure of his commander), etc. (Okay, that's a needlessly long and repetitive list, but I can't be bothered to pare it down now that I've written it.)

The film's elliptical editing accentuates and itself represents these distances by eliding traditional connective tissues of narrative and character. The ending is a culmination of that structural technique, suddenly and explosively emphasizing the distance between many of the above elements—particularly between Lavant and the simple/united, ideal, free Self that he wishes he were. It is also foreshadowed somewhat by the earlier role of the dance club: a place where many of the distances were reduced, where the Legionnaires and women mixed, where their fixed, rigid roles were supplanted by something like freedom, where they had fewer roles and ideals to be alienated from. (Though in reality a dance club brings with it even more opportunities for such alienation, what with all those eyes upon you and their expectations of gender roles and dancing ability; but note that in the final scene, Lavant is alone.)


In short, I think that just as the ending of Stroszek provides a potent symbol of the absurdity of existence, the ending of Beau travail provides a potent symbol of the ideal selves that we perpetually wish for but are perpetually displaced from. (Not that I wish to reduce either ending to those single meanings.)

[Adam]

Hey, what are some relatively lesser known Altman films worth checking out?

I have seen and enjoyed

MASH
Brewster McCloud
McCabe & Mrs Miller
The Long Goodbye
California Split
Nashville
Popeye
Secret Honour
The Player
Short Cuts
Gosford Park

[Winston*]

A Wedding, 3 Women, Buffalo Bill and the Indians.

[Russ]

You might enjoy HealtH. I know Sven's a big fan. It's cut from the same huge-ensemble cloth as Nashville and A Wedding. I suppose I should give it another view (I hated it first time around). But what do I know?.. I love the universally reviled Beyond Therapy.

[balmakboor]

Hey, what are some relatively lesser known Altman films worth checking out?

I'm still waiting for Criterion to release Come Back to the Five and Dime, Jimmy Dean, Jimmy Dean so people can finally see how great it is.

Also check out Tanner '88. I loved it to death.

[Bosco B Thug]

I'm not seeing the difference between the two endings. In each one, the penultimate scene is a very restrained depiction of the protagonist's implied suicide. (It's left more ambiguous in Beau travail, but the connotation of suicide, either literal or figurative, is still evident.) And then, in each movie, the final scene comes as a sudden burst of frenetic song and dance. Both final scenes hence provide a direct juxtaposition that forms an integral part of the tone of the ending as a whole. The only substantial difference that I see is the difference in meaning(s) and pursuant emotional impact of the two scenes. Well, I probably should make it clear I've not been trying to proclaim Stroszek's ending. I do not think it is the absolute apex of brilliance (it's not, far from it) while Beau Travail's ending is the opposite (likewise, it's not).

I have been trying to express that Stroszek's ending is acceptable in particular ways that, with Beau Travail's ending, I've taken issue with.

There's the ambiguous "metaphysical" nature of Beau Travail's ending. It exists only to extend to us another point of emotional gratification and resolve, which I do not find entirely intellectually "deepening." Neither is the chicken, but at least it is not asking us to newly contextualize an entire emotional facet of a character, which she's decided to throw at us with a surprise, completely isolated scene of abstract indulgence.

The chicken exists. The film diverts its attention to it to make some weird point, but in it's narrative diagesis and without BT's presumption of its main character, the abstractness is less"showy."

I understand that in powerful thematic ways we see his dance coming, but I've just been trying to get to the fact it strikes me as a bit too opportunistic and gratifying in a pandering way.


How can anything have more surprise novelty than a dancing chicken? That's about as surprising and novel as it gets. I think an interpretive performative piece is inherently the more novel. It's like those movies that end with "creative closing credits," like - ugh, please don't think I'm condemning BT's ending to this extent - Slumdog Millionaire's end credits dance number.


You said in an earlier post that Beau travail's ending

I took that to mean that you agreed that the ending furthers the film's intellectual points. Nope... I feel as if there's a distinction between a thematic resonance being "intellectually dense" and it being, I don't know, "emotionalist," or something else like that. I bet a lot of cinephiles would take issue with this.


The whole film is a study of distances and alienations: between the bright, vast, arid, yellow desert and the dark, cramped, lively, blue dance club; between the (male) Legionnaires and the (female) local citizens; between the rigid, baseless routine of the Legionnaires and the presumably more purposeful, utile actions of the women; between the nominal military purpose of the Legion and its actual role as pure ritual and performance; between the rigidly ascribed bodily movements of the military training and the anxious freedom of movement and interaction in the dance club; between body and mind, emphasized by Lavant's internal thoughts and the visuals' almost exclusive focus on bodily movements; between Lavant and the other Legionnaires; between the self-conscious, self-alienated, aged, unattractive Lavant and the simple (in the philosophical sense), whole, youthful, beautiful ideal of a Legionnaire, as represented by Grégoire Colin; and between Lavant and himself—self-as-body and self-as-mind, the ideal he wishes of himself and the version of himself that he views as the "real" one, the judging Being-for-itself (judging Colin, whom he initially says is unsuitable for the Legion) and the judged Being-for-others (judged by his own self, by the other Legionnaires, and especially by the godlike figure of his commander), etc. (Okay, that's a needlessly long and repetitive list, but I can't be bothered to pare it down now that I've written it.)

The film's elliptical editing accentuates and itself represents these distances by eliding traditional connective tissues of narrative and character. The ending is a culmination of that structural technique, suddenly and explosively emphasizing the distance between many of the above elements—particularly between Lavant and the simple/united, ideal, free Self that he wishes he were. It is also foreshadowed somewhat by the earlier role of the dance club: a place where many of the distances were reduced, where the Legionnaires and women mixed, where their fixed, rigid roles were supplanted by something like freedom, where they had fewer roles and ideals to be alienated from. (Though in reality a dance club brings with it even more opportunities for such alienation, what with all those eyes upon you and their expectations of gender roles and dancing ability; but note that in the final scene, Lavant is alone.)


In short, I think that just as the ending of Stroszek provides a potent symbol of the absurdity of existence, the ending of Beau travail provides a potent symbol of the ideal selves that we perpetually wish for but are perpetually displaced from. (Not that I wish to reduce either ending to those single meanings.) Great post here, especially when you're not talking about the ending. ;) No, seriously; my one viewing of the film did confuse me a good deal, and it's good to get some specific words to support the touchy emotional issues that underlie Lavant's masculine insecurity (like, that it can in fact be said to entail a whole confusion of envy on Lavant's part - of both the physical and mental of Colin - and your distillation of Lavant's character fault as an instinct to judge and a over-sensitivity to the judgment of others). My small quibbles with the ending stands, in spite of your articulate defense.

[Melville]

Nope... I feel as if there's a distinction between a thematic resonance being "intellectually dense" and it being, I don't know, "emotionalist," or something else like that.
I'm not exactly sure what that means. In both films, the final scenes provide richly textured illustrations of ideas that touch on the very nature of our existence, and which have dominated much of the philosophical thought of the last two centuries; how is that not intellectually dense?

I think at this point I'm simply going to have to concede that I can't fathom your position.

[Raiders]

Hey, what are some relatively lesser known Altman films worth checking out?

Not sure if it's "lesser known" but I absolutely love The Company. Probably my second favorite (after McCabe).

[Derek]

Not sure if it's "lesser known" but I absolutely love The Company. Probably my second favorite (after McCabe).

That'd be my pick too from the oft-considered "lesser Altman's". California Split is pretty great too.

[Qrazy]

I'm not exactly sure what that means. In both films, the final scenes provide richly textured illustrations of ideas that touch on the very nature of our existence, and which have dominated much of the philosophical thought of the last two centuries; how is that not intellectually dense?

I think at this point I'm simply going to have to concede that I can't fathom your position.

His position as I understand it is this. He feels that the ending of BT insofar as it reflects upon and changes our understanding of the film's protagonist, was not sufficiently developed/warranted by the preceding film. You have given some points of reference for the conclusion which he has acknowledged, but he still does not feel they are sufficient as such.

On the other hand he feels that Stroszek's focus on the chicken may also be a narrative digression (similar in this way to BT) but that the difference is the chicken communicates something about the protagonist of Stroszek, which was sufficiently established by the preceding film.

Sorry Bosco if I'm not properly communicating your position.

[Fezzik]

So, I saw 17 Again tonight.

Didn't expect too much, but I was pleasantly surprised. Nothing award-worthy or anything, but not a waste of time.

Thomas Lennon was great.

Zac Efron surprised the hell out of me. I understand now why so many people were talking about his comic timing and "star quality" when this first came out.

[Melville]

His position as I understand it is this.
Sorry, I should have clarified which aspects of his position I can't fathom:

how the ending fundamentally changes our understanding of or relationship to the character
why such a change would be a bad thing
how the ending is not "intellectually dense" while Stroszek's is
why the physical presence of the chicken at the location of Stroszek's climactic scene makes the ending somehow better than that of Beau travail
how Herzog's point is "weird"



On an unrelated subject, I watched the first half of Toby Dammit. Great so far.

[Qrazy]

On an unrelated subject, I watched the first half of Toby Dammit. Great so far.

Nice! :D

Fellini is my hero.

[megladon8]

I really want to get my Altman viewings up to snuff.

Of his filmography this is what I've seen...

Gosford Park - 9
A Prairie Home Companion - 8
The Long Goodbye - 7.5
The Player - 7
MASH - 6

Which I feel to be unacceptable, considering how much he's done.

[Derek]

I really want to get my Altman viewings up to snuff.

Of his filmography this is what I've seen...

Gosford Park - 9
A Prairie Home Companion - 8
The Long Goodbye - 7.5
The Player - 7
MASH - 6

Which I feel to be unacceptable, considering how much he's done.

Not having seen McCabe & Mrs. Miller is completely unacceptable. Aren't you a fan of westerns as well?

[Adam]

Yeah, McCabe & Mrs Miller, Short Cuts and Nashville are pretty essential

I'm not cuckoo for MASH, either, though. Easily my least favorite of his I've seen

[megladon8]

Not having seen McCabe & Mrs. Miller is completely unacceptable. Aren't you a fan of westerns as well?


A HUGE fan of westerns, at that.

I know. I'm a bad person.

[Bosco B Thug]

I'm not exactly sure what that means. In both films, the final scenes provide richly textured illustrations of ideas that touch on the very nature of our existence, and which have dominated much of the philosophical thought of the last two centuries; how is that not intellectually dense? I'm not saying its empty of intellectual thought - I think Denis is a superb thinker, and BT's ending does show that. I'm just saying, I don't feel trotting out the actor for a symbolic dance at the end is so much her making another concrete intellectual point as it is just providing artful emotional payoff.


His position as I understand it is this. He feels that the ending of BT insofar as it reflects upon and changes our understanding of the film's protagonist, was not sufficiently developed/warranted by the preceding film. You have given some points of reference for the conclusion which he has acknowledged, but he still does not feel they are sufficient as such.

On the other hand he feels that Stroszek's focus on the chicken may also be a narrative digression (similar in this way to BT) but that the difference is the chicken communicates something about the protagonist of Stroszek, which was sufficiently established by the preceding film.

Sorry Bosco if I'm not properly communicating your position. No, it's good, thanks... well, just that, I do think the dance in BT does communicate something about the protagonist, equal to if not more than the random performing animals. My problems with BT remain with the "showiness" I complain about, which me and Melville are probably fine just never agreeing on. :)


how the ending is not "intellectually dense" while Stroszek's is The animals are Herzog making a direct link between his subject and the analytical, caustic metaphor. The intellectual point is there: people, especially immigrants, are dancing chickens (or whatever, it's been a while).

The dance has some analytical aspects which we've parsed out, but for me, serves mostly emotional manipulation (inasmuch as that is a bad thing - I also think the dance scene is wonderfully elating and lovely).

why the physical presence of the chicken at the location of Stroszek's climactic scene makes the ending somehow better than that of Beau travail It's not an oh-so-meaningful metaphysical ploy. ... It's similarly a bit over-the-top and obvious, but there's also the punchy context of Stroszek's actions being what set off the dancing animal machines in the first place.

how Herzog's point is "weird" I just threw that word in there because I didn't want to get into analyzing Stroszek.

[B-side]

Altman fans need to see Images. Very underrated and underseen.

[Bosco B Thug]

Altman fans need to see Images. Very underrated and underseen. Rad. I too am quite taken by Images.

I think Winston* got the essential 3 leftover of vintage Altman.

And coincidentally, I should be seeing Fool For Love this weekend. That one's definitely a lesser known one.

[B-side]

Rad. I too am quite taken by Images.

I think Winston* got the essential 3 leftover of vintage Altman.

And coincidentally, I should be seeing Fool For Love this weekend. That one's definitely a lesser known one.

Always nice to encounter another fan.:D

[Philosophe_rouge]

The Time of the Wolf is pretty good, my second Haneke and so far, my favourite. The last few scenes are my favourite, though in a way, they almost counter so much of the mundane and cold view that precedes it. Something happened and society has collapsed. There is a lot of waiting, and a lot of scrounging. Eating becomes a ritual observed in slow silence, and yet, the conflicts of family life remain very much the same. Then we have moments of intense emotion spread-out throughout, though always prevented with a slight alteration to our expectations. An extremely painful performance of a mother weeping for her dead child does not feature a close-up or medium shot, we simply here her weeping and screaming, and we see her family from the waist down standing by a grave. The second to last scene is between strangers, it is well... strange, and yet so familiar and moving. It parallels beautifully an earlier scene in both "narrative" and "theme". I think I like this film more in retrospect, it is at times alienating, but all at once filled with a strange kind of hope, if not that we are fundamentally good, that we are bred to need and love one another... even if it's buried deep inside, and we are not all capable of letting those "feelings" out of control, even for an instance.

[Qrazy]

I kind of like the atmosphere of Images, but I also find it exposes some of Altman's worst traits as a director (which are fully exemplified in Quintet). The script and characters are thinly sketched and when it's not being enjoyably creepy it sustains a masturbatory ponderousness which begins to grate on the nerves.

It's a film for people who enjoy Roeg's cinema.

[Qrazy]

The Time of the Wolf is pretty good, my second Haneke and so far, my favourite. The last few scenes are my favourite, though in a way, they almost counter so much of the mundane and cold view that precedes it. Something happened and society has collapsed. There is a lot of waiting, and a lot of scrounging. Eating becomes a ritual observed in slow silence, and yet, the conflicts of family life remain very much the same. Then we have moments of intense emotion spread-out throughout, though always prevented with a slight alteration to our expectations. An extremely painful performance of a mother weeping for her dead child does not feature a close-up or medium shot, we simply here her weeping and screaming, and we see her family from the waist down standing by a grave. The second to last scene is between strangers, it is well... strange, and yet so familiar and moving. It parallels beautifully an earlier scene in both "narrative" and "theme". I think I like this film more in retrospect, it is at times alienating, but all at once filled with a strange kind of hope, if not that we are fundamentally good, that we are bred to need and love one another... even if it's buried deep inside, and we are not all capable of letting those "feelings" out of control, even for an instance.

Agreed. It's my favorite from him as well. I admire elements of his other work but this is the only one which effectively eschews the condescension I feel plagues many of his other films. Kind of ironic that by bringing so critical of humanity on a more general level he's actually able to lay some of his judgmentalness aside for once.

[Derek]

Agreed. It's my favorite from him as well. I admire elements of his other work but this is the only one which effectively eschews the condescension I feel plagues many of his other films. Kind of ironic that by bringing so critical of humanity on a more general level he's actually able to lay some of his judgmentalness aside for once.

Have you seen Code Unknown?

[Qrazy]

Have you seen Code Unknown?

Nope. I've only seen The Piano Teacher, Funny Games (original), Time of the Wolf and Cache.

[Bosco B Thug]

I kind of like the atmosphere of Images, but I also find it exposes some of Altman's worst traits as a director (which are fully exemplified in Quintet). The script and characters are thinly sketched and when it's not being enjoyably creepy it sustains a masturbatory ponderousness which begins to grate on the nerves.

It's a film for people who enjoy Roeg's cinema. Woot, Altman and Roeg! My cinema Old Masters.

Images is kind of thin, though, yes.

[B-side]

Woot, Altman and Roeg! My cinema Old Masters.

Images is kind of thin, though, yes.

High-five for Roeg love!

[balmakboor]

Saw Bright Leaves last night. This McElwee guy is definitely my cup of tea.

[Raiders]

Saw Bright Leaves last night. This McElwee guy is definitely my cup of tea.

Yeah, it's really good (http://www.match-cut.org/showthread.php?t=1859).

[balmakboor]

Yeah, it's really good (http://www.match-cut.org/showthread.php?t=1859).

Cool. I've also seen and loved Charleen, Sherman's March, and Time Indefinite.

[B-side]

Festen was just... whoa. What an incredibly draining experience. I never thought I'd see such acrobatic camera work in a Dogma 95 film. What an ensemble cast, too. Not a weak performance in the bunch. Some rather jarring cuts had me reeling a bit, and kinda confused, but I think I put it all together. How did they pull off that swinging zoom to Mette after her and Michael had sex? Insane. Oh, and that look of sympathy on Christian's face at the end really hammered it all home.

[Raiders]

Hmm. I'd never heard of this before. "The Black List" of unproduced screenplays that Hollywood bigwigs consider to be favorites.

http://www.blcklst.com/tbl/list/2009_black_list.pdf

A few sound interesting -- like the in-production Facebook movie -- but most sound pretty weak. There's got to be better ideas than these laying about in the slush pile.

Guess I'm late to the party. I didn't know Sorkin's Facebook movie was currently shooting, being directed by David Fincher and starring Jesse Eisenberg and Justin Timberlake.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1285016/

[Kurosawa Fan]

Festen was just... whoa. What an incredibly draining experience. I never thought I'd see such acrobatic camera work in a Dogma 95 film. What an ensemble cast, too. Not a weak performance in the bunch. Some rather jarring cuts had me reeling a bit, and kinda confused, but I think I put it all together. How did they pull off that swinging zoom to Mette after her and Michael had sex? Insane. Oh, and that look of sympathy on Christian's face at the end really hammered it all home.

Yep. An all-time great for me. I felt physically ill through most of the film, which I think was intended and appropriate.

[Ezee E]

Guess I'm late to the party. I didn't know Sorkin's Facebook movie was currently shooting, being directed by David Fincher and starring Jesse Eisenberg and Justin Timberlake.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1285016/
Really intrigues me that Fincher goes from such a huge budget movie in Button, and then takes this one on, which may have his smallest budget to date.

[Ezee E]

Also, watched The Hangover again. While I didn't have any dying laughing parts this time around, I was still consistently laughing throughout it all, and without an audience around me. It's a rare comedy where I have to say there isn't a missing beat or a boring part to it.

[Fezzik]

Also, watched The Hangover again. While I didn't have any dying laughing parts this time around, I was still consistently laughing throughout it all, and without an audience around me. It's a rare comedy where I have to say there isn't a missing beat or a boring part to it.

I'm almost in complete agreement, except for Ken Jeong's character. His initial reveal is inspired, but every time he showed up after that, he grated on me.

[Melville]

Hey, Sycophant, have you seen Love Exposure? It just occurred to me that it's exactly the kind of mix of crazy Asian antics and emotionalism that you'd love. Could be wrong, though.

[soitgoes...]

Hey, Sycophant, have you seen Love Exposure? It just occurred to me that it's exactly the kind of mix of crazy Asian antics and emotionalism that you'd love. Could be wrong, though.I have this and really look forward to seeing it, especially after seeing Suicide Club, but it's hard to sit down and watch a 4 hour long film. I need to be in the right mindset.

[Sycophant]

Hey, Sycophant, have you seen Love Exposure? It just occurred to me that it's exactly the kind of mix of crazy Asian antics and emotionalism that you'd love. Could be wrong, though.

I have not, but thank you for reminding me! It's one I keep running into articles about, but never remember to follow through on seeking it out. With this kind of recommendation, I'm gonna make it top priority. Thanks!

[Scar]

I may have briefly dated a chick similiar to the lady in Repulsion.....

Yeah, I ran.

[ledfloyd]

love exposure is amazing.

[Derek]

Nope. I've only seen The Piano Teacher, Funny Games (original), Time of the Wolf and Cache.

I could see you liking that one. It's a bit more restrained and lacking in the supposed condescension many see in his films. Plus, Binoche is stellar. I also highly recommend The Seventh Continent, which is Haneke at his most Bressonian, though you would likely be turned off by it's attitude towards the bourgeois family.

[Boner M]

love exposure is amazing.Word.

[Qrazy]

I could see you liking that one. It's a bit more restrained and lacking in the supposed condescension many see in his films. Plus, Binoche is stellar. I also highly recommend The Seventh Continent, which is Haneke at his most Bressonian, though you would likely be turned off by it's attitude towards the bourgeois family.

Cool I'll check them out. In relation to the bourgeois don't get me wrong. I like Bunuel's lampoonings (Exterminating Angel, Discreet Charm, etc) a great deal. I have no problem with artists being critical of a 'bourgeois' mentality, but when they're judged and condemned utterly, that's what bothers me.

[Grouchy]

I may have briefly dated a chick similiar to the lady in Repulsion.....

Yeah, I ran.
Catherine Deneuve? Seriously? How similar?

[Scar]

Catherine Deneuve? Seriously? How similar?

I was more referring to a rather crazy lady I briefly dated, not her looks.

But I did date a couple cute blondes back in the day, but they didn't quite look like Catherine Deneuve.

[Melville]

love exposure is amazing.
Pretty much. I liked the zaniness of the first half a lot more than the melodrama of the second half, but even the second half (especially the very ending) was great.

[Grouchy]

I was more referring to a rather crazy lady I briefly dated, not her looks.

But I did date a couple cute blondes back in the day, but they didn't quite look like Catherine Deneuve.
Ah, ok.

I guess all things considered, I've been with girls with hotter bodies than hers, but never with such a classical beauty.

[ledfloyd]

Pretty much. I liked the zaniness of the first half a lot more than the melodrama of the second half, but even the second half (especially the very ending) was great.
the only part i really have any qualms about is when he goes all kill bill on the 'scientologists'. i understand he was sacrificing himself to save her, but it seemed out of tune with the rest of the film and him shedding so much blood didn't quite jibe with the humanist in me.

[Philosophe_rouge]

Agreed. It's my favorite from him as well. I admire elements of his other work but this is the only one which effectively eschews the condescension I feel plagues many of his other films. Kind of ironic that by bringing so critical of humanity on a more general level he's actually able to lay some of his judgmentalness aside for once.
Yea, the kind of smug condescension in Funny Games kinda turned me off, and I think, even held Haneke back as far as being able to really explore the ideas and feelings he had about violence in popular culture. It seemed like an easy way out, and even seemed to undermine it's purpose, because it only served to alienate the audience he was quite obviously trying to communicate with.

[B-side]

I find I like Funny Games less and less the more I think about it.

[Derek]

I don't like either version of Funny Games at all, but fortunately, everything else I've seen from him ranges from good to great.

[Melville]

I still think Funny Games is Haneke's best film, and I disagree with the criticisms of it. (Some of my reasoning is in this post (http://www.match-cut.org/showthread.php?p=44905#post449 05), which you've all probably read already—though, reading over that post, I realize that I only indirectly address the idea that the film condescends to its audience. Anyway, I don't think it does.)

He's a damn consistent director in my view:
Funny Games - 8
Code Unknown - 7.5
The Piano Teacher - 7.5
The Seventh Continent - 7.5
Cache - 7
71 Fragments of a Chronology of Chance - 7



the only part i really have any qualms about is when he goes all kill bill on the 'scientologists'. i understand he was sacrificing himself to save her, but it seemed out of tune with the rest of the film and him shedding so much blood didn't quite jibe with the humanist in me.
I thought the whole thing with the cult was less effective than the stuff in the first half; the movie didn't sell the seriousness with the same frantic enthusiasm that it sold the spiritual art of upskirt photos.

[BuffaloWilder]

I'm partial to Time of the Wolf a bit, myself.

[ledfloyd]

I thought the whole thing with the cult was less effective than the stuff in the first half; the movie didn't sell the seriousness with the same frantic enthusiasm that it sold the spiritual art of upskirt photos.
indeed. though my favorite scene is in the second half. the beach scene.

[Philosophe_rouge]

indeed. though my favorite scene is in the second half. the beach scene.

My favourite scene too.

[MadMan]

Even though I think The Departed is the much stronger movie, Infernal Affairs is far more tightly paced, and Tony Leung is better than Leo. Plus I prefer Affairs' ending since unlike The Departed's the bad guy actually gets away, and is not arrested. Thus, corruption and decit is not properly punished. Even though Leu felt conflicted at the end.
A rather solid effort, and one that I actually enjoyed-the second act is far stronger, for one thing. Its just that Marty managed to not only bring to the table some of his own material, but dafty intrigrate some of the original's elements and scenes into his own movie. Funny that the Academy finally gives him the Best Director and Picture Oscars for a movie that was his least original.

[soitgoes...]

It's weird to me that some people think Haneke's Time of the Wolf is his best work. It's not a bad film, but it is one of my least favorites of his.

[Rowland]

Haneke:

Cache - ****
Funny Games (remake) - ***½
Time of the Wolf - **½
Funny Games (original) - **

[Skitch]

I may have briefly dated a chick similiar to the lady in Repulsion.....

Yeah, I ran.

Every chick I've dated turned into that lady...

[Yxklyx]

I was more referring to a rather crazy lady I briefly dated, not her looks.

But I did date a couple cute blondes back in the day, but they didn't quite look like Catherine Deneuve.

Most likely they were more attractive. Why people think Ms. Deneuve is such a looker is beyond me.

[B-side]

So Blow Out was good...

[Dukefrukem]

Finished Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire last night. Wasn't bad but wasn't the best entry... this has been a pretty mediocre franchise.

[Fezzik]

Finished Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire last night. Wasn't bad but wasn't the best entry... this has been a pretty mediocre franchise.

Artistically, #3 (Azkaban) and #6 (Half-Blood Prince) were probably the best.

In fact Half-Blood Prince is one of the best looking films I've ever seen. The cinematography in that is top shelf (I'd love to see Delbonnel nominated for an Oscar, but I doubt it will happen).

[Dukefrukem]

Artistically, #3 (Azkaban) and #6 (Half-Blood Prince) were probably the best.

In fact Half-Blood Prince is one of the best looking films I've ever seen. The cinematography in that is top shelf (I'd love to see Delbonnel nominated for an Oscar, but I doubt it will happen).

#3 (Azkaban) was pretty cool, and I really like the way characters show up for a movie, then don't return the next movie, but make appearances in other movies. It's an interesting universe, but there isn't much payoff. I liked #3 (Azkaban) a lot more than the others because of the werewolves and dementors. The first appearance of the dementor on the train was fantastic.

Also, if Harry is supposed to have so much potential and power, why does he get knocked unconscious so many times? I've counted six times in four movies. It's like his excuse for escaping danger....