28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[Thirdmango]

I just watched Zombieland for the first time. It was fun, not amazing. But I still have no idea how people can say it was better then Shaun of the Dead.

[dreamdead]

Watching Geoffrey Wright's MacBeth leads to several questions, few of which are interesting. Why make the three witches goth schoolgirls? Why does MacBeth suddenly yearn for a fourway with them? Why does Wright think that engaging in racial distinctions will yield greater resonance for our ethnically Australian cast, making the Asian characters at the beginning so vacuous? Why have the boyish king-to-be kill the maid? Why voiceover monologues delivered where the character broods, having nothing better to do, until the monologue is done? Why the weird intertextual dependence on De Palma's Scarface at the end, with continuous surveillance cameras and the attack on "home"? Why did I think this film would be a good idea?

Anyhoo. The next week is:

Everyone Else
Cat People
Throne of Blood (rpt)
Casablanca (rpt)
A.I.: Artificial Intelligence (rpt)

[BuffaloWilder]

I didn't have a problem with the concept so much as the execution. It felt posed and too self conciously "the final scene" of the movie.

...what does that even mean? :confused:

[balmakboor]

...what does that even mean? :confused:

Hah. That's for me to know and, err, ...

[Winston*]

Olivier's Richard III was much better than McKellen's. Think if you're going to recontextualise a Shakepeare play in a movie into a different time you've got to do it non-literally, like Titus or whatever, otherwise it doesn't make a lot of sense. I don't know what I'm talking about.

[baby doll]

Weekend:

A Woman of Paris (Charles Chaplin, 1923)
Kapò (Gillo Pontecorvo, 1959)
The American Friend (Wim Wenders, 1977)
Mother (Bong Joon-ho, 2009)

[Fezzik]

Foreign Film Marathon this weekend with the same youngins as this past weekend:

Diabolique
Nuovo Cinema Paradiso
In the Mood for Love
Deathnote
Mostly Martha
Howl's Moving Castle

[RoadtoPerdition]

Foreign Film Marathon this weekend with the same youngins as this past weekend:

Diabolique
Nuovo Cinema Paradiso
In the Mood for Love
Deathnote
Mostly Martha
Howl's Moving Castle

Haven't seen Deathnote or Mostly Martha, but nice selection otherwise.

[balmakboor]

Foreign Film Marathon this weekend with the same youngins as this past weekend:

Diabolique
Nuovo Cinema Paradiso
In the Mood for Love
Deathnote
Mostly Martha
Howl's Moving Castle

Is Deathnote related to the anime series? My daughter loved that.

[balmakboor]

W/E
Dinner for Schmucks or Inception (depends on my mood)
Don't Look Now
An Education

[Skitch]

Need to do some catching up here...

Dial M For Murder was standard Hitchcock fare. Good stuff.

Jonah Hex...caught this at the dollar theater. After the reviews, I HAD to see this. I was planning to mystery science theater this flick, and was shocked to discover its not nearly as horrible as I'd heard. Still, I enjoyed it more than Prince Of Persia and...

...Salt, which was the very definition of mediocrity. Wow. The more I think about it, I'd like to really hate on this flick, but I can't, because its so mediocre, that giving it that much emotion isn't consistant. Its just, meh whatever. The ending brought Push to mind. Total lack of ending. The movie just...stops. Liev Shrieber, you are better than this. C'mon man. Its not like you starred in...

...aw dammit, Repo Men, srsly?! While being a pretty piss poor flick, had some enjoyable moments, and then, wow, maybe one of the biggest "fuck you audience" endings of all time.

[MacGuffin]

Dial M For Murder was standard Hitchcock fare. Good stuff.


It's formulaic and boring and maybe his worst movie (I'm a big fan). Don't mistaken "standard Hitchcock fare" with standard thriller fare.

[Winston*]

Weekend
Revanche
Uncle Boonmee who Can Recall his Past Lives

[Skitch]

It's formulaic and boring and maybe his worst movie (I'm a big fan).

I too, would put it near the bottom of my Hitchcock list, though I still enjoyed it more that Lifeboat, but I still have more of his work to go through.


Don't mistaken "standard Hitchcock fare" with standard thriller fare.

Huh?

[MacGuffin]

I too, would put it near the bottom of my Hitchcock list, though I still enjoyed it more that Lifeboat, but I still have more of his work to go through.



Huh?

I'm saying: Don't let the fact that it's a generic thriller bare too much light on Hitchcock's entire filmography, which is altogether, one of the most stunning I've witnessed.

[Mara]

I would rate Marnie and Suspicion far below Dial M for Murder.

[Derek]

I would rate Marnie ... far below Dial M for Murder.

:|

[B-side]

I would rate Derek... far below Mara.

[Derek]

I would rate Derek... far below Mara.

That's perfectly fine as long as you rate Marnie above Dial M and most other Hitchcock's for that matter.

By the way, I am likely going to TIFF, so I'll be thinking of you during the Ruiz screening if I make it. :)

[soitgoes...]

By the way, I am likely going to TIFF, so I'll be thinking of you during the Ruiz screening if I make it. :)You should just buy the tickets to the Ruiz film, and then don't even go. This will undoubtedly piss Brightside off to no end.

[Derek]

You should just buy the tickets to the Ruiz film, and then don't even go. This will undoubtedly piss Brightside off to no end.

Great idea. I'll post of a picture of me burning the ticket and laughing maniacally.

[B-side]

That's perfectly fine as long as you rate Marnie above Dial M and most other Hitchcock's for that matter.

By the way, I am likely going to TIFF, so I'll be thinking of you during the Ruiz screening if I make it. :)

I declared a feud a while back, so I had to reignite the flame. You understand.

I... haven't seen either of those Hitchcock's. In fact, I've only seen, what, 5 Hitch's? Hm.:|

The Ruiz is 4 and a half hours long, assuming it's the film version. It will undoubtedly be worth it.

[B-side]

Great idea. I'll post of a picture of me burning the ticket and laughing maniacally.

You're killing me, Smalls.:P

[Sven]

This was a huge one. Also, it took a long, long time for him to overcome his cowardice and do the right thing.

Not that I didn't like that - I kinda love it when heroism forces itself upon someone who wants no part of it. Much more rewarding that way.

I argue he was never a hero. All of his actions are motivated by a desire to rid himself of the alien contamination. He never feels compassion, never grows, never learns. All the way up to the end of the film, he's desperately trying to cure himself of the influencing force of an "inferior" culture. It's terribly xenophobic. The actor is terrific, but the character is abominable.

[Bosco B Thug]

I argue he was never a hero. All of his actions are motivated by a desire to rid himself of the alien contamination. He never feels compassion, never grows, never learns. All the way up to the end of the film, he's desperately trying to cure himself of the influencing force of an "inferior" culture. It's terribly xenophobic. The actor is terrific, but the character is abominable. I pretty much agree, although are you saying this is a fault? I also don't like the film, but this is what makes the film better than it is for me. That this character stumbles into activism and even makes the SPOILER omplete-clay ansformation-tray SPOILER despite never actually changing communicates something essential. Not sure what, but I like it.

[MacGuffin]

Bonjour tristesse is like an American French New Wave movie. It's no wonder Cahiers critics all adored it. Myself, I wouldn't call it a masterpiece as it didn't leave me feeling as moved and fulfilled as his other two that I've seen, but it's a very graceful and carefully made film with strong performances. Highly recommended if you get a chance.

[B-side]

I have Laura from Preminger. It'd be my first of his.

[MacGuffin]

I have Laura from Preminger. It'd be my first of his.

It's basically flawless. One of my favorites and right now my favorite of his.

[B-side]

It's basically flawless. One of my favorites and right now my favorite of his.

Intriguing. I may have to watch it tonight, just for you.;)

[MacGuffin]

Intriguing. I may have to watch it tonight, just for you.;)

You still need to watch Diva, by the way.

~

My Preminger ratings so far:

Laura - 10
Angel Face - 9
Bonjour tristesse - 8.5

[B-side]

You still need to watch Diva, by the way.

~

My Preminger ratings so far:

Laura - 10
Angel Face - 9
Bonjour tristesse - 8.5

Ha, you're right. I forgot. I'll, uh, acquire it tonight and try and watch it within the next few days.

[soitgoes...]

I had a very good run with movies lately. Drugstore Cowboy was surprisingly good. I wasn't expecting too much after watching My Private Idaho recently.

Los Angeles Plays Itself should be seen by anyone who has lived in the LA area. I've spent 23 years in Orange County, and I was really able to relate with what Andersen presents. It's a history of Los Angeles and its relationship with film. How film has changed people's conceptions of the city as well as how the city has evolved with film. A wonderful documentary, perhaps the best of last decade.

On the Town was good. As you may know by now musicals and I don't get along, so *** is something exceptional for this genre. Great songs and the always energetic Kelly lead the way. His imagination dance sequence is equal to anything done in Singin' in the Rain.

[B-side]

On the Town was good. As you may know by now musicals and I don't get along, so *** is something exceptional for this genre. Great songs and the always energetic Kelly lead the way. His imagination dance sequence is equal to anything done in Singin' in the Rain.

Give Invitation to the Dance a shot. It's wordless, and it's written, directed and choreographed by Kelly. My favorite "musical".

[Yxklyx]

I had a very good run with movies lately. Drugstore Cowboy was surprisingly good. I wasn't expecting too much after watching My Private Idaho recently.

Los Angeles Plays Itself should be seen by anyone who has lived in the LA area. I've spent 23 years in Orange County, and I was really able to relate with what Andersen presents. It's a history of Los Angeles and its relationship with film. How film has changed people's conceptions of the city as well as how the city has evolved with film. A wonderful documentary, perhaps the best of last decade.

On the Town was good. As you may know by now musicals and I don't get along, so *** is something exceptional for this genre. Great songs and the always energetic Kelly lead the way. His imagination dance sequence is equal to anything done in Singin' in the Rain.

I loved Ann Miller's dance number is this. Another one you should check out is The Music Man.

[Mara]

Another one you should check out is The Music Man.

The Music Man has some nice moments (Marian the Librarian and Lida Rose are good, and The Sadder but Wiser Girl is a downright hoot) but THE ENDING OF THE FILM DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. THERE IS NO POSSIBLE EXPLANATION AND IT DRIVES ME CRAZY!

[Skitch]

Just heard an interview with James Marsden promoting Cats and Dogs. He mentioned he just finished shooting a remake of Straw Dogs. Didn't know that was happening...

[B-side]

http://i30.tinypic.com/2zej7si.jpg

Paris Belongs to Us, Rivette's first feature length film, and my 6th of his, is clearly the sign of an interesting director, though he hasn't quite honed his style here and the cinematography suffers a bit. The material is typical Rivette: a young woman becomes involved in a mystery plot after she becomes entangled in the world of theater. She becomes less passive as the film goes on, slowly gaining confidence and resolve, if only to satisfy her curiosity. The film has a hand in the political spectrum, riffing on the McCarthy era and government conspiracies. While it takes a while to really get going, it's pretty engaging as a whole. The theater in the film is named after Pericles, "a prominent and influential statesman, orator, and general of Athens during the city's Golden Age." According to Wikipedia, he promoted the arts and fostered one of the earliest known democracies, which, I guess, would tie into the political aspect of the film, though I'm too dumb to connect the dots. So, despite dragging a bit and not being as impressive on a technical level, Paris Belongs to Us is a worthy film, and a good primer for later Rivette.

[Raiders]

The Music Man has some nice moments (Marian the Librarian and Lida Rose are good, and The Sadder but Wiser Girl is a downright hoot) but THE ENDING OF THE FILM DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. THERE IS NO POSSIBLE EXPLANATION AND IT DRIVES ME CRAZY!

I haven't seen the film but unless it is wildly different than the stage musical, I have no idea what you're talking about.

[Mara]

I haven't seen the film but unless it is wildly different than the stage musical, I have no idea what you're talking about.

After stealing the money and not teaching the boys to play the instruments, the boys play badly until suddenly, miraculously learn to play perfectly with beautiful costumes, marching up and down the streets. How did they learn to play? How did they get costumes if Harold stole all the money?

[Raiders]

After stealing the money and not teaching the boys to play the instruments, the boys play badly until suddenly, miraculously learn to play perfectly with beautiful costumes, marching up and down the streets. How did they learn to play? How did they get costumes if Harold stole all the money?

This seems film specific. My recollection of the stage musical...

... ends right after they play "76 Trombones" horribly and they let Harold free. I don't remember any shift to the future with them being good.

[Mara]

This seems film specific. My recollection of the stage musical...

... ends right after they play "76 Trombones" horribly and they let Harold free. I don't remember any shift to the future with them being good.

If it was a shift to the future, I'd understand it better. But it just kind of... happens.

[Raiders]

Now that I think about it, my recollection may be off...

according to wikipedia, they play Beethoven's Minuet in G terribly, though it does support me in that there is no grand parade with 76 Trombones being played beautifully. Maybe it happens as an exit piece and the production I saw excluded it?

Hm. Dunno.

[megladon8]

Death Sentence was just terrible. One of the worst films I've seen this year.

James Wan is just, really, not very good.

[Mysterious Dude]

The Music Man has some nice moments (Marian the Librarian and Lida Rose are good, and The Sadder but Wiser Girl is a downright hoot) but THE ENDING OF THE FILM DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. THERE IS NO POSSIBLE EXPLANATION AND IT DRIVES ME CRAZY!
In the version of the play that I saw on stage, when the kids are playing in the end, the parents don't hear how terrible they are (exclaiming things like "That's my Jimmy playing!" and such), and then the music gradually gets better until they sound good, and the audience can hear what the parents are hearing. I found it quite sweet.

I think the movie exaggerates this to point where, as you say, it makes no sense. It's not real. It's a fantasy.

[Raiders]

In the version of the play that I saw on stage, when the kids are playing in the end, the parents don't hear how terrible they are (exclaiming things like "That's my Jimmy playing!" and such), and then the music gradually gets better until they sound good, and the audience can hear what the parents are hearing. I found it quite sweet.

Yes. I remember now that this is what happened.

[Dukefrukem]

Weekend:

Toy Story 3 and a bunch of horror movies that I've been wanting to watch for a long time.

[MacGuffin]

wE ARE PARENTS OF THE lADY, i MEANS lADY WHO CREATED THIS FILM AND THE vICENT gALLO ASS, PRICK DO NOT PAY HER JOB

Apparently, the original writers of the new Vincent Gallo movie are unhappy with the final results. (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001252/board/flat/160409216)

[Spinal]

Weekend:

Toy Story 3

Watch A Town Called Panic instead. Or additionally. :)

[Mara]

Watch A Town Called Panic instead. Or additionally. :)

I am totally watching that this weekend. The little bit I saw was beyond charming.

[Stay Puft]

I will echo the love for A Town Called Panic. I'm pretty sure I singled out the first ten minutes of that film as one of my favorite scenes of the year in another thread. Saw it at a festival screening with a decent size crowd, and the entire place was roaring with laughter while Cheval was brushing his teeth and taking a shower and so on. Its manic energy and matter-of-factness is delightful.

[Stay Puft]

Oh, and I watched Lau Kar Leung's Drunken Master III this week, and it was uber disappointing. Right at the bottom of his filmography, I'd say. Gordon Liu looked like he was having fun, and Wong Fei Hung skateboarding on an abacus was hilarious, but otherwise... meh. Even the climactic fight sequence, though enjoyable and competently executed, is little more than a whimper compared to his other films.

[Grouchy]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_t6ViPr-6yPw/S7nRhDV-SoI/AAAAAAAABow/3vGawUN20E8/s1600/doshermanos.JPG

Burman's Dos Hermanos [Two Brothers] is a pretty good movie. A lot of the merit also rests on the actors he chose as brothers, Antonio Gasalla and Graciela Borges. With his uncanny ear for turning grotesque and sinister into comedy, Gasalla has a lot of fun as the long-suffering, shy and obviously gay male brother, while Borges is right at home as the mythomanic, booze-happy and hurtful younger sister. The movie is basically a series of scenes showcasing interaction between and of these two characters as they live the few months following their mother's death. Each time I thought I was getting tired of it, though, I found either a small moment that was deeply moving or a laugh that was timed to perfection. Burman does go on for a few minutes after reaching a perfect ending, but he has made an unusual film that's worth watching.

[Dukefrukem]

Watch A Town Called Panic instead. Or additionally. :)

I'm in. And sweet avatar.

[MacGuffin]

How many of you all like arthouse movies where they sit at tables with their heads in their hands sighing?

[Sycophant]

How many of you all like arthouse movies where they sit at tables with their heads in their hands sighing?

*raises hand*

[number8]

How many of you all like arthouse movies where they sit at tables with their heads in their hands sighing?

It wouldn't be arthouse if they didn't do that, would it? Silly question.

[Derek]

How many of you all like arthouse movies where they sit at tables with their heads in their hands sighing?

Why, that's my favorite kind of arthouse movie behind slowly-moving-camera-expands-time-ensuring-maximum-boredom. You know, cuz I've got shit to do and getting 3 hours of boredom packed into an excruciating 90 minutes is a real time-saver!

[Spinal]

The sighing was added later due to pressure from producers who wanted the films to have more mainstream appeal. I prefer the movement in its purest form. No emoting please!

[megladon8]

I also like to refer to a film by its French title, even if it's an American film.

Or if it's a case where the title is still the same in French (ie Hulk), I like to pronounce it like there are accents on the vowels.

[Derek]

I also like to refer to a film by its French title, even if it's an American film.

Or if it's a case where the title is still the same in French (ie Hulk), I like to pronounce it like there are accents on the vowels.

You mean Le Monstre Vert Fâché?

[Derek]

The sighing was added later due to pressure from producers who wanted the films to have more mainstream appeal. I prefer the movement in its purest form. No emoting please!

Like so, monsieur?

http://auteursnotebook.s3.amazonaws.c om/multiple%20images/Louise%20from%20Memory/LfM16_Pickpocket.jpg

[megladon8]

You mean Le Monstre Vert Fâché?


Or just Hülk.

[Dead & Messed Up]

The Sugarland Express goes off Instant Watch tomorrow, so I squeezed in a viewing tonight. Good stuff. Diet Dog Day Afternoon, but involving and interesting for its slightly detached perspective on the moron heroes. Seems like Spielberg got a lot more emotional after this film.

[Spinal]

Well, this is awkward. I was all geared up to finally watch La vie en rose and came away very disappointed. Piaf endured a lot in her life to be sure. But the film kind of just strings these painful events together artlessly and with little sense for why this story needs to be told. Piaf is such a miserable wretch from start to finish that it's hard to mourn her passing. It is simply a relief.

I'm not even sure if I can fully embrace Cotillard's performance. There are times when she is extraordinary. But there are also many moments that register as inauthentic. I appreciate that she has committed to Piaf's physicality. However, as a young street singer, Cotillard's Piaf comes across as - there's no delicate way to say this - kinda retarded. Curiously, she fares better as the older Piaf. Perhaps she is aided significantly by the makeup. But still, she is a bit more affecting and convincing.

The songs are moving, but the songs really don't need this film's help.

[Mara]

Well, this is awkward. I was all geared up to finally watch La vie en rose and came away very disappointed. Piaf endured a lot in her life to be sure. But the film kind of just strings these painful events together artlessly and with little sense for why this story needs to be told. Piaf is such a miserable wretch from start to finish that it's hard to mourn her passing. It is simply a relief.

I honestly couldn't finish it. Even though there were good moments, the overall product was kind of a mess.

[Raiders]

The Sugarland Express goes off Instant Watch tomorrow, so I squeezed in a viewing tonight. Good stuff. Diet Dog Day Afternoon, but involving and interesting for its slightly detached perspective on the moron heroes. Seems like Spielberg got a lot more emotional after this film.

Yeah, I love this film. Hard to say someone like Spielberg has underrated films, but this one is and so is my favorite of his (Empire of the Sun).

[MacGuffin]

Even though Cotillard's a promising actor I know not to go into "generic biopic" territory. Shame on you, Spinal.

[Spinal]

Even though Cotillard's a promising actor I know not to go into "generic biopic" territory. Shame on you, Spinal.

Eh, there are good films in all genres. I don't subscribe to this notion that biopics can't be good.

[MacGuffin]

Eh, there are good films in all genres. I don't subscribe to this notion that biopics can't be good.

I don't, but I guess going by first impressions La vie en rose looked pretty generic to me (and being a biopic nominated for Oscars only further has me subscribing to those notions). "Generic biopics" are the type that typically only exist to try and open the subject up to wider audiences, rather than say anything of any value.

[Mara]

A good weekend for stop-motion animation.

I finished A Town Called Panic last night and it was nonsensical, manic joy from beginning to end. It may have the best visual sight gags of just about any film I've seen, particularly in the way it plays with speed and scale. Delightful.

This morning I tried out The Fantastic Mr. Fox, and seen so soon after ATCPanic it started off feeling rote and joyless, but once I relaxed into the story I enjoyed it. Given that the genre and medium are different from anything he's done previously, Wes Anderson still makes it a distinctly "Wes Anderson Film," using his trademark dry sense of humor, visual style, and excellent music.

Two criticisms: the celebrity voice casting hurt the film more than it helped. The voices were too recognizeable, which I felt kept interrupting the fiction. Willem Defoe is a notable exception: his voice as Rat was perfect.

Secondly, if you're striving for a genuinely sentimental moment, don't do it by giving us an extreme close-up of the face of a puppet, particularly if it's crying. It just looks creepy.

[Spinal]

I don't, but I guess going by first impressions La vie en rose looked pretty generic to me (and being a biopic nominated for Oscars only further has me subscribing to those notions). "Generic biopics" are the type that typically only exist to try and open the subject up to wider audiences, rather than say anything of any value.

Milk was good. Capote was good. I guess I was hoping for something like that.

[MacGuffin]

Milk was good. Capote was good. I guess I was hoping for something like that.

I didn't think either of those movies were anything to write home about, although the latter is more successful than the former. Aside from a few good performances (great performances?) from Sean Penn and Philip Seymour Hoffman, are the films themselves that good?

[Spinal]

I didn't think either of those movies were anything to write home about, although the latter is more successful than the former. Aside from a few good performances (great performances?) from Sean Penn and Philip Seymour Hoffman, are the films themselves that good?

Yes, I would say they are. Capote is successful because it focuses on a specific relationship and reveals Capote's character through that interaction. Milk is successful because it is a compelling American tragedy with a flawed, but likable hero and an intriguing villain with complex psychology. La vie en rose is comparatively piecemeal. But it didn't have to be.

Monster is another film of this ilk that is successful. That one works because the thematic intent (to demonstrate how Aileen's life was a shared failure) is articulated clearly. I'm not sure that La vie en rose has a thematic purpose that is clearly stated.

[MacGuffin]

I think Capote mildly works because Hoffman propels it singlehandedly. Milk has a good script and some nice performances, so it's watchable, but like Capote, it didn't really make me think. I'll keep waiting for a mainstream biopic to meet the artistic and intellectual grandeur of I'm Not There.

[Spinal]

I'll keep waiting for a mainstream biopic to meet the artistic and intellectual grandeur of I'm Not There.

Oh god.

[Yxklyx]

Yeah, I love this film. Hard to say someone like Spielberg has underrated films, but this one is and so is my favorite of his (Empire of the Sun).


Talk about underrated - one of Spielberg's best. When Goldie starts screaming her head off towards the end I got chills down my spine.

[Spinal]

I wonder if some of the Academy voters thought Cotillard was actually singing.

[Dukefrukem]

What do you guys think of the Bourne movies, specifically Ultimatum? Just watched it. This whole trilogy bugs me.

[Melville]

I think Capote mildly works because Hoffman propels it singlehandedly. Milk has a good script and some nice performances, so it's watchable, but like Capote, it didn't really make me think. I'll keep waiting for a mainstream biopic to meet the artistic and intellectual grandeur of I'm Not There.
The Aviator >> I'm Not There.

Capote made me think Capote was really obnoxious.

Milk made me think Gus van Sant is a pretty great stylist. And that James Franco should be in every movie.

I'm Not There made me think semiotics should be banned from film. Unless Kenneth Anger is involved.

[megladon8]

I find fictional biopics pretty interesting, too.

[MacGuffin]

The Aviator >> I'm Not There.


I actually like The Aviator, but don't agree with that by any means.

[Melville]

I actually like The Aviator, but don't agree with that by any means.
Put another way, existential phenomenology >> semiotics, explosive earnestness >> glibness, and tragic falls into madness >> artists reduced to symbols by the public consciousness. Obviously these are my personal predilections.

[transmogrifier]

What do you guys think of the Bourne movies, specifically Ultimatum? Just watched it. This whole trilogy bugs me.

The second one is the best. I don't think therre was nearly enough meat on the bones of the story to propel 3 films, so in the end the trilogy is somewhat samey and unmemorable. As a stand-alone, the 2nd film would be awesome.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Talk about underrated - one of Spielberg's best. When Goldie starts screaming her head off towards the end I got chills down my spine.

When the film started, I thought to myself, "This seems like a role Anna Faris might do today." By the end of the film, I thought to myself, "Nevermind, she could never match Hawn."

I thought any scene inside the car with those three mains was fantastic. What a revelatory performance from William Atherton. What a shame that he fell into the "smarmy villain" archetype.

[Dukefrukem]

The second one is the best. I don't think therre was nearly enough meat on the bones of the story to propel 3 films, so in the end the trilogy is somewhat samey and unmemorable. As a stand-alone, the 2nd film would be awesome.

I'm not very found of any of them. But I do remember the second being okay; the ending especially.

[baby doll]

Put another way, existential phenomenology >> semiotics, explosive earnestness >> glibness, and tragic falls into madness >> artists reduced to symbols by the public consciousness. Obviously these are my personal predilections.I'd love to get in on this, but I really don't have a clue what you're talking about.

[baby doll]

Capote made me think Capote was really obnoxious.Wait, wasn't that the whole freakin' point of the movie?

[baby doll]

I'll keep waiting for a mainstream biopic to meet the artistic and intellectual grandeur of I'm Not There.If you're looking for a mainstream biopic with the artistic and intellectual grandeur of I'm Not There., see I'm Not There. because it's pretty mainstream. If I'm Not There. isn't mainstream, then Haynes' Superstar: The Karen Carpenter Story must be on dry land, or in the middle of the ocean, I'm not sure which.

[megladon8]

I thought the Bourne films ranked among the best action films ever. Particularly when Greengrass took over.

The second may very well be my favorite, though the third is incredible as well.

[MacGuffin]

If you're looking for a mainstream biopic with the artistic and intellectual grandeur of I'm Not There., see I'm Not There. because it's pretty mainstream. If I'm Not There. isn't mainstream, then Haynes' Superstar: The Karen Carpenter Story must be on dry land, or in the middle of the ocean, I'm not sure which.

I just used mainstream to describe biopics that follow typical structural and stylistic conventions.

[megladon8]

I just used mainstream to describe biopics that follow typical structural and stylistic conventions.


That's not what mainstream means at all.

[MacGuffin]

That's not what mainstream means at all.

I know, but that's the word I chose to use because most movies that are mainstream typically don't veer too much from the classical filmmaking style. I'm alright with this generalization because it's not necessarily negative and is true for the most part. How many big studio films have you seen lately that have employed experimental or radical techniques?

[Winston*]

Todd Haynes is good at making biopics where you can hear a one sentence outline and be like "Okay, I get it" and then you don't need to watch the actual movie.

[MacGuffin]

Todd Haynes is good at making biopics where you can hear a one sentence outline and be like "Okay, I get it" and then you don't need to watch the movie.

You can explain any movie in one sentence. I dare you (or anyone else here) to try to find one where you cannot.

[megladon8]

I know, but that's the word I chose to use because most movies that are mainstream typically don't veer too much from the classical filmmaking style. I'm alright with this generalization because it's not necessarily negative and is true for the most part. How many big studio films have you seen lately that have employed experimental or radical techniques?


What exactly constitutes "experimental or radical"? I feel like I could list at least a dozen since 2000, but don't know if they will mesh with what you're asking.

Hulk was certainly a big one.

[Dukefrukem]

I dislike most biopics.

*walks by whistling*

[MacGuffin]

What exactly constitutes "experimental or radical"? I feel like I could list at least a dozen since 2000, but don't know if they will mesh with what you're asking.

Hulk was certainly a big one.

Because it was a remake of a movie released less than a decade ago? I don't if that necessarily counts. I'm Not There isn't mainstream, but it takes a very experimental approach to narrative. The same can be said for Irreversible or even Memento (to cite a film you enjoy).

[megladon8]

Because it was a remake of a movie released less than a decade ago? I don't if that necessarily counts. I'm Not There isn't mainstream, but it takes a very experimental approach to narrative. The same can be said for Irreversible or even Memento (to cite a film you enjoy).


I think you're confusing Hulk with The Incredible Hulk.

Have you seen Ang Lee's Hulk?

And Memento, while yes experimental and in some ways "radical", was in no way a big studio movie. Nor was Irreversible. Or I'm Not There, for that matter.

[MacGuffin]

I think you're confusing Hulk with The Incredible Hulk.

Have you seen Ang Lee's Hulk?

You're probably right, I was getting them confused. I figured you were going to try and convince me the Hulk remake made some sort of meta commentary on the original.

[MacGuffin]

And Memento, while yes experimental and in some ways "radical", was in no way a big studio movie. Nor was Irreversible. Or I'm Not There, for that matter.

I wasn't implying that they were, hence me asking you earlier to name big studio movies that are even somewhat experimental or radical.

[megladon8]

You're probably right, I was getting them confused. I figured you were going to try and convince me the Hulk remake made some sort of meta commentary on the original


Lee's Hulk was very experimental. Probably the most literal rendition of a "comic book movie" to come out of the superhero craze.

[MacGuffin]

Lee's Hulk was very experimental. Probably the most literal rendition of a "comic book movie" to come out of the superhero craze.

I don't think I'd classify "being faithful to original material" as experimental or radical.

[Winston*]

You can explain any movie in one sentence. I dare you (or anyone else here) to try to find one where you cannot.

Of course you can, you generally can't give everything the movie has to give in that one sentence though.

[MacGuffin]

Of course you can, you generally can't give everything the movie has to give in that one sentence though.

Agreed.

[megladon8]

I wasn't implying that they were, hence me asking you earlier to name big studio movies that are even somewhat experimental or radical.


But I don't understand this desire to have big studio movies that are experimental or radical.

That's not part of big-studio business.

If you want your films to be this way, you should look elsewhere. Experimental films are readily available, but if you're looking to Hollywood marquees for them, you're looking in the wrong place.

I also do not think that a film that uses experimental or radical storytelling/filming/editing techniques is necessarily any better or more valuable than a film that's told in a more classic, straight-forward manner but told really well.

Look at Pixar. It's not like their films are loaded with obscurely drawn characters and situations, and off-the-wall experimental filming techniques. The stories they tell are almost elemental in their simplicity, but told so damn well and with such passion that Pixar has become one of the greatest film studios out there.

This is reminding me of the (fucking horrible) film I saw recently, Death Sentence, which on more than one occasion uses random tracking shots and experimental photography. But it's all so pointless, so soulless, and contributes absolutely nothing to the story, themes or film itself. They're there just so Wan can point out the 3-story tracking shot he did. It's all pointless and just technical masturbation.

[megladon8]

I don't think I'd classify "being faithful to original material" as experimental or radical.


My god, man, you're not even trying to engage with my points.

Seriously, have you even seen the movie? It's not faithful to the source material at all.

I'm talking about the film's editing, pans, zooms, staging and overall look actually mimicking a comic book. Having characters interact with each other through different comic book panels on the screen. Page turns to show scene changes.

It's nothing if not experimental.

[MacGuffin]

I also do not think that a film that uses experimental or radical storytelling/filming/editing techniques is necessarily any better or more valuable than a film that's told in a more classic, straight-forward manner but told really well.

Let's not lose track of what we were originally discussing: I was talking more of biopics eventually becoming formulaic and always taking the same approach to material. I was suggesting that certain biopics only exist to give the subject more exposure to wider audiences. There is nothing wrong with mainstream movies sticking with classic structures, but this gets boring after awhile when there's not something interesting to go with it.

Is Fincher's Zodiac considered a biopic? I'd consider that experimental and radical.

[MacGuffin]

My god, man, you're not even trying to engage with my points.

Seriously, have you even seen the movie? It's not faithful to the source material at all.

I'm talking about the film's editing, pans, zooms, staging and overall look actually mimicking a comic book. Having characters interact with each other through different comic book panels on the screen. Page turns to show scene changes.

It's nothing if not experimental.

No need to get defensive, dude. You just didn't explain how it was experimental. I think it's arguable whether or not that could be considered experimental.

Think Godard's 60s output: very classical narratives with very avant-garde techniques for the time these films were released.

[megladon8]

Let's not lose track of what we were originally discussing: I was talking more of biopics eventually becoming formulaic and always taking the same approach to material. I was suggesting that certain biopics only exist to give the subject more exposure to wider audiences. There is nothing wrong with mainstream movies sticking with classic structures, but this gets boring after awhile when there's not something interesting to go with it.

Is Fincher's Zodiac considered a biopic? I'd consider that experimental and radical.


I have yet to see Fincher's Zodiac.

I see what you're saying with biopics, but again, if you're looking for something experimental and radical, I doubt you're going to get it with a biopic film about a famous movie star/musician directed by a big-name director and released widely in theatres. It's just common sense. In the end, the studio wants to make money on this film. They're not going to if they do something crazy and "weird" with it. They also have to take into account that if a lot of people are going to be seeing this movie, they don't want to potentially insult fans or relatives of this person by, say, focusing too much on a risque part of their life, or taking liberties which may be seen as defaming them.

Which is why I often find fictional biopics more interesting than real ones. Citizen Kane is a prime example - though everyone knows it was based on a real news mogul, Welles created his own film, his own story, out of this man's life.

[MacGuffin]

I see what you're saying with biopics, but again, if you're looking for something experimental and radical, I doubt you're going to get it with a biopic film about a famous movie star/musician directed by a big-name director and released widely in theatres. It's just common sense. In the end, the studio wants to make money on this film. They're not going to if they do something crazy and "weird" with it. They also have to take into account that if a lot of people are going to be seeing this movie, they don't want to potentially insult fans or relatives of this person by, say, focusing too much on a risque part of their life, or taking liberties which may be seen as defaming them.

But this takes me back to my original point: Why can't these techniques be employed in the mainstream? Although I haven't seen it, if anything, Inception has proved audiences like to think. Why can't mainstream biopics be more than just history lessons?

[megladon8]

No need to get defensive, dude. You just didn't explain how it was experimental. I think it's arguable whether or not that could be considered experimental.


See this is what I meant when I wrote...

"What exactly constitutes "experimental or radical"? I feel like I could list at least a dozen since 2000, but don't know if they will mesh with what you're asking."

You say that Hulk's editing techniques could arguably be not experimental, then list a Godard film as being so because it takes a standard story and tells it in an avant-garde fashion.

Lee's Hulk took a standard story and filmed and edited it in a way that no one had done before or since.

What qualifies Godard's film as experimental and Lee's as not? Is it just your own personal prejudice because you refuse to acknowledge a big-budget superhero movie as having anything of cinematic value?

I think Godard is one of the most overrated and frankly ridiculous filmmakers of the modern era, but I do recognize his films' impact on film culture and other filmmakers.

[MacGuffin]

A movie is experimental or radical, Mr. Megladon, when it looks at something in a way it has not been looked at before. That is why Mr. Godard's 60s output can be considered "experimental" or "radical" and why Mr. Lee's Hulk, based on what you have told me, very likely could not.

[megladon8]

But this takes me back to my original point: Why can't these techniques be employed in the mainstream? Although I haven't seen it, if anything, Inception has proved audiences like to think. Why can't mainstream biopics be more than just history lessons?


But Inception is the exception, not the rule.

Hundreds of "intelligent" (even moreso than Inception) films have been released to wide audiences over the years and completely failed.

Generally, wide audiences don't want to be challenged. Very few moviegoers would enjoy discussing a film the way we do here - they go to the theatre to be entertained and nothing more.

[megladon8]

A movie is experimental or radical, Mr. Megladon, when it looks at something in a way it has not been looked at before. That is why Mr. Godard's 60s output can be considered "experimental" or "radical" and why Mr. Lee's Hulk, based on what you have told me, very likely could not.


So you admit you haven't even seen the movie?

This conversation should be over, then.

Lee's Hulk employs experimental techniques to tell its story. It does. Case closed. I'm sorry you refuse to accept it when you haven't even seen the movie.

[MacGuffin]

they go to the theatre to be entertained and nothing more.

Yes, and I'm arguing that they were entertained by Inception because it made them think. I'm saying they should release more movies that make audiences think because I'd rather see a pseudo-intellectual movie than an unambitious one.

[MacGuffin]

So you admit you haven't even seen the movie?

This conversation should be over, then.

Lee's Hulk employs experimental techniques to tell its story. It does. Case closed. I'm sorry you refuse to accept it when you haven't even seen the movie.

:lol:

Seriously, dude? I thought I made it clear that I hadn't seen the movie when I asked you for some mainstream movies that you thought were experimental and radical.

[MadMan]

Inception was, well, great, but I'm not really surprised. More thoughts to come in the seperate thread.

Also, Salt was surprisingly good and highly entertaining, logic be damned. It was somewhat smarter than your average action movie, and it kept up a high degree of tension. Plus it features a rather brutal and exciting fight scene that was something else I didn't expect.

[baby doll]

I know, but that's the word I chose to use because most movies that are mainstream typically don't veer too much from the classical filmmaking style. I'm alright with this generalization because it's not necessarily negative and is true for the most part. How many big studio films have you seen lately that have employed experimental or radical techniques?I'm Not There. doesn't veer at all from classical filmmaking any more than any other multi-protagonist film. (Is Love, Actually an avant-garde film? Of course not.) Nor does it break from traditional continuity editing. As a system, classical filmmaking is flexible enough to accommodate Haynes' playfulness. Whether it's technically a Hollywood feature or an indie is beyond irrelevant, since the actual result (not to mention how the film was made, with a professional union crew, huge stars, and millions and millions of dollars) is exactly the same, regardless of where the money comes from.

[MacGuffin]

[...] exactly the same, regardless of where the money comes from.

I suppose. I'm just saying it'd be nice to have even more options, rather than having to worry about whether or not the newest summer blockbuster is formulaic.

[baby doll]

Lee's Hulk employs experimental techniques to tell its story. It does. Case closed. I'm sorry you refuse to accept it when you haven't even seen the movie.Except that split-screens have been employed in classical narrative features since the 70s. Brian De Palma, anyone? Obviously Lee's using the technique in a different way for different purposes, but that doesn't mean he's expanding the possibilities of commercial filmmaking--and certainly not to the same degree as a Bresson or a Godard or a Tati.

[MacGuffin]

Look, you all can please excuse me if my posts are a tad verbose, the only points I truly feel worth the bother to get across are:

Most mainstream biopics (the kind that get Oscar attention, the kind that feature big actors as leads) need to work more on being less formulaic and finding more depth to the subject and their story, as oppose to just trying to expose them to a wider audience by selling the subject with a realistic performance.

That's all I originally wanted to say when I was conversing with Spinal.

[megladon8]

:lol:

Seriously, dude? I thought I made it clear that I hadn't seen the movie when I asked you for some mainstream movies that you thought were experimental and radical.


What is with you? Ever since you came to this board your needlessly dick-ish behaviour has been perplexing.

I couldn't tell whether or not you'd seen the film based on your posts before, because you were dismissing my claims of its experimental content the way that one only should when they've, you know, seen the movie.

[MacGuffin]

Are you serious? Ever since I came back here I've sucked up and have tried to be as nice as possible to everyone, even though I knew there'd be some shadowy bias toward me. I basically agree with what Amnesiac said a few weeks ago about this board. I think there are some great posters here with consistently interesting and insightful things to say, but way too much animosity and people taking offense over tastes.

[StanleyK]

Today I watched the MC banner. Pretty great; structured like a conventional romance, but it delves into the power that poetry, and art in general, has to portray the culture and viewpoints of people of its age.


The second one is the best. I don't think therre was nearly enough meat on the bones of the story to propel 3 films, so in the end the trilogy is somewhat samey and unmemorable. As a stand-alone, the 2nd film would be awesome.

I agree that Supremacy is the best, but I also think the story gets more compelling as it goes on; if Ultimatum wasn't shot so poorly, it would be my favorite.

[baby doll]

Are you serious? Ever since I came back here I've sucked up and have tried to be as nice as possible to everyone, even though I knew there'd be some shadowy bias toward me. I basically agree with what Amnesiac said a few weeks ago about this board. I think there are some great posters here with consistently interesting and insightful things to say, but way too much animosity and people taking offense over tastes.I think Match-Cut should get its own Jersey Shore-style reality show. I call Snookie, simply because I'm the most tan (and the biggest slut).

[megladon8]

Are you serious? Ever since I came back here I've sucked up and have tried to be as nice as possible to everyone, even though I knew there'd be some shadowy bias toward me. I basically agree with what Amnesiac said a few weeks ago about this board. I think there are some great posters here with consistently interesting and insightful things to say, but way too much animosity and people taking offense over tastes.


I don't take offense to differing tastes, I take offense to arguing about the merit of a film you haven't even seen.

When I say I dislike Godard, I at least have the decency to do so having seen a good handful of his films.

[MacGuffin]

I don't take offense to differing tastes, I take offense to arguing about the merit of a film you haven't even seen.

When I say I dislike Godard, I at least have the decency to do so having seen a good handful of his films.

First of all, I never said I disliked the Hulk. I know that superheroes are dear to you and whether you are being overly sensitive, I don't know. I don't care. I just want a good movie, and I'm sure you will agree with that.

Second of all, my making claims that something sounds or doesn't sound very experimental...


and why Mr. Lee's Hulk, based on what you have told me, very likely could not.



I think it's arguable whether or not that could be considered experimental.

...based on a short, paragraph long assessment of the movie's style is in no way even arguing the merit of it, much less it it saying I dislike it. In fact, what I was doing is comparable to what everyone else does in the upcoming film threads. So please... even though we are talking about something that is very dear to you, please don't prematurely sound the alarms for red alert when I say something that is initially negative sounding (even though I meant no dismissal of the film, I was merely expressing a general preference).

[megladon8]

Except that split-screens have been employed in classical narrative features since the 70s. Brian De Palma, anyone? Obviously Lee's using the technique in a different way for different purposes, but that doesn't mean he's expanding the possibilities of commercial filmmaking--and certainly not to the same degree as a Bresson or a Godard or a Tati.


And someone like Godard (won't comment on the other two as I've not seen any of their films) who employs avant garde film stylings was undoubtedly influenced by the cinema verite movement in French-Canada in the late '50s, early '60s.

This discussion of what constitutes "experimental" or "radical" has devolved into semantics.

[megladon8]

First of all, I never said I disliked the Hulk. I know that superheroes are dear to you and whether you are being overly sensitive, I don't know. I don't care. I just want a good movie, and I'm sure you will agree with that.

Second of all, my making claims that something sounds or doesn't sound very experimental...

...based on a short, paragraph long assessment of the movie's style is in no way even arguing the merit of it, much less it it saying I dislike it. In fact, what I was doing is comparable to what everyone else does in the upcoming film threads. So please... even though we are talking about something that is very dear to you, please don't prematurely sound the alarms for red alert when I say something that is initially negative sounding (even though I meant no dismissal of the film, I was merely expressing a general preference).


I'm not being overly sensitive or defensive of superhero films. I was referencing a single instance where I felt "experimental" was a justified descriptor.

I even readily admit that Hollywood superhero movies are not where to go for experimentation. Nor are Hollywood movies in general.

Which goes back to your original argument of "why can't Hollywood mainstream films employ experimental or radical filmmaking?" And the answer is - because Hollywood, unlike some independent or foreign film production areas, is based on profit. And general audiences, those they are trying to attract, do not take kindly to anything weird, abstract or confusing. It doesn't sell. It's the same reason why the novels of Thomas Pynchon are never going to make the sales that Dean Koontz or Stephanie Meyer do - Pynchon's books are too dense, too confusing and too hard to follow for most readers to really enjoy.

This is a generalization of course. Filmmakers like Kubrick or (some) Spielberg show that you can be experimental, radical and though-provoking and attain commercial success. But like my comment regarding Inception, this is the exception, not the rule. Look at Francis Ford Coppola. He used to be quite a bankable name, up there with the Spielbergs, Scorseses and Kubricks. His Godfather films are still legendary. But for nearly the whole decade from 2000-2010, his films have fallen completely under the radar. And it's because these have been some of his most experimental years as a director. Films like Tetro and Youth Without Youth do not hold widespread appeal. Many consider these past few years to have been some of Coppola's most intimate and impressive, he had to sacrifice commercial "sell-ability" for this.

It's just not ever going to be possible for Hollywood films - whether they be biopics, action, sci-fi or horror - to experiment as much as indie or foreign films, because with experimentation comes a much higher chance of failure. And when a film has more than $100million to make back plus make more to profit, the studio can't afford to make it a weird, meditative experiment because people won't like it.

To put it plainly: if you want the avant-garde experimentation of Godard, or the dynamic staging and photography of Tati, then go watch Godard or Tati. Because (unfortunately) you're not going to find it at an AMC, and that's not going to change any time soon.

[baby doll]

And someone like Godard (won't comment on the other two as I've not seen any of their films) who employs avant garde film stylings was undoubtedly influenced by the cinema verite movement in French-Canada in the late '50s, early '60s.

This discussion of what constitutes "experimental" or "radical" has devolved into semantics.With regards to Godard, and in particular his later films which are, yes, more radical, David Bordwell recently made a good point that Godard isn't making essay films, as he's sometimes said to be (his videos are, of course, another matter), but rather he's still telling stories as he did in his '60s work. However, his eschewal of exposition, his separation of sound from image, and his odd framings and heavy backlighting all contribute to make a film like Passion or Notre musique nearly impossible to follow as storytelling on first viewing. In other words, unlike Haynes (a former avant-gardist who sometimes incorporates a-g techniques into what is still a traditional narrative, as in some of the trippier sequences in I'm Not There.)--or for that matter, Fritz Lang in Die Nibelungen and Metropolis--Godard is really going against the bedrock assumptions of the vast majority of commercial films (chiefly, that the story should be easily comprehensible to everyone on first viewing). So in that sense, I would say that he is a radical filmmaker.

[Derek]

Todd Haynes is good at making biopics where you can hear a one sentence outline and be like "Okay, I get it"

Hmm...


you generally can't give everything the movie has to give in that one sentence though.

Thanks for doing the work for me W.

[Raiders]

Jesus christ.

[megladon8]

With regards to Godard, and in particular his later films which are, yes, more radical, David Bordwell recently made a good point that Godard isn't making essay films, as he's sometimes said to be (his videos are, of course, another matter), but rather he's still telling stories as he did in his '60s work. However, his eschewal of exposition, his separation of sound from image, and his odd framings and heavy backlighting all contribute to make a film like Passion or Notre musique nearly impossible to follow as storytelling on first viewing. In other words, unlike Haynes (a former avant-gardist who sometimes incorporates a-g techniques into what is still a traditional narrative, as in some of the trippier sequences in I'm Not There.)--or for that matter, Fritz Lang in Die Nibelungen and Metropolis--Godard is really going against the bedrock assumptions of the vast majority of commercial films (chiefly, that the story should be easily comprehensible to everyone on first viewing). So in that sense, I would say that he is a radical filmmaker.


See, this is a great post. And in fact makes me want to revisit a couple of the Godard films I've seen, and explore a few I haven't. I definitely did find many of his images (and as you pointed out, his separation of sound from image) striking, but admittedly had a hard time with the films themselves, trying to figure out what Godard wanted me to think and feel.

It's been nearly 5 years since I've seen most of the stuff by him that I have. The most recent viewing was Contempt and I believe that was nearly 3 years ago now.


I do admit that I find myself feeling sometimes like I do need to be defensive. My love of things like superheroes and comic books in general is something that I sometimes feel is ridiculed, or that I am patronized due to it.

"That's meg, he still reads Superman comics and loved Batman Begins. Oh, he really liked a Bergman film...how cute!"

Because I do find great depth in several of the superhero stories I've seen told in films (though also recognize that the subgenre as a whole is mediocre at best) I think my thoughts and opinions regarding these films - these stories - and the depth within are seen as, well, pathetically funny.

I remember back when I first saw The Dark Knight someone said it was "so much better than a Batman movie had the right to be" which I smiled and agreed with at the time, but with later thought came to realize how very wrong I thought this statement was. "So much better than a Batman movie had the right to be"? What does that mean? That a Batman film shouldn't be capable of thematic depth? Political commentary? Rich characterizations? That a Batman movie will always be inherently silly and therefore shouldn't strive to pass that?

I think any character, any setting, any story can be told in a fashion that propels it to the status of being "brilliant", whether it be the story of a man playing chess with Death, or of a silent film starlet who has fallen into a a reclusive life, or of an indestructible man from Krypton who falls in love with a human woman.

So yes, I do sometimes feel that I need to defend my thoughts and opinions more than others may have to due to them not being taken very seriously.

[EyesWideOpen]

I'm getting kind of annoyed in alot of recent comedies where they use the term "faggot" or "fag" (Jonah Hill's characters tend to do this) towards someone but their not using it in what would be considered it's usual context. Hearing Rob Cordory's character in Hot Tub Time Machine walk up to his wife and son and say "What's up faggots" is in no way funny and I find it almost more offensive then if he was saying it in it's normal context. At least that way it would just be offensive the way their using it is almost like their trying to make it be a normal cuss word that people should call each other for laughs.

[baby doll]

Yeah, I don't know how anyone could adequately describe films as multi-faceted as Superstar: The Karen Carpenter Story and I'm Not There. in a single sentence, but I'll give it a try:

1. A forty-five minute avant-garde featurette juxtaposing scenes from the life of Karen Carpenter with 1970s Barbie dolls (in order to illustrate how gender is constructed in mass culture) with documentary segments linking anorexia to fascism and interrogating the social meaning of The Carpenters' music in relation to the 1960s counterculture and its aftermath.

2. A commercial feature that moves between six stories, each distinguished by being photographed in a different style (ranging from pseudo-documentary to a pastiche of Fellini's 8 1/2), which center on characters (all played by different actors) intended to represent a different aspects of Dylan's public persona, particularly as his music relates to the 1960s counterculture.

That was f'-ing tough, and I still clearly failed.

[megladon8]

I'm getting kind of annoyed in alot of recent comedies where they use the term "faggot" or "fag" (Jonah Hill's characters tend to do this) towards someone but their not using it in what would be considered it's usual context. Hearing Rob Cordory's character in Hot Tub Time Machine walk up to his wife and son and say "What's up faggots" is in no way funny and I find it almost more offensive then if he was saying it in it's normal context. At least that way it would just be offensive the way their using it is almost like their trying to make it be a normal cuss word that people should call each other for laughs.


I feel similarly about the word "nigger" and its use by young blacks and latinos as a term of endearment.

That whole "it's our word; we took it back" thing is so very childish.

[Winston*]

Hmm...



Thanks for doing the work for me W.
Meh.

[Derek]

I feel similarly about the word "nigger" and its use by young blacks and latinos as a term of endearment.

I don't believe latinos use that term regularly. I also don't see what's childish about taking a word that originated from hatred and bigotry and appropriating it in a positive context. Not to say it's not used immaturely, but the whole "we can use it, you can't" is essentially the same reasoning people use when they believe they can say/do certain things to family members that strangers can't.

And I just realized I'm in the Film Discussion Thread...yeesh.

[Duncan]

I watched A Nos Amours the other day and it was really good.

[megladon8]

I don't believe latinos use that term regularly. I also don't see what's childish about taking a word that originated from hatred and bigotry and appropriating it in a positive context. Not to say it's not used immaturely, but the whole "we can use it, you can't" is essentially the same reasoning people use when they believe they can say/do certain things to family members that strangers can't.

And I just realized I'm in the Film Discussion Thread...yeesh.


I spend a lot of time in the Bronx. Latinos use it just as much as blacks, and the two use it with each other.

I also think it's silly that if a white person says it they can actually get killed.

Is it really worth killing someone over a word?

[balmakboor]

The family watched Dinner for Schmucks today. We laughed pretty much all the way through it.

[transmogrifier]

Jesus christ.

Too conventional. Lowly carpenter who makes it big, capped with rousing back from the dead finale? It would be yet another typical, mainstream, non-art house bio pic.

[Derek]

I spend a lot of time in the Bronx. Latinos use it just as much as blacks, and the two use it with each other.

I also think it's silly that if a white person says it they can actually get killed.

Is it really worth killing someone over a word?

It's a tough time for us white men, megs. I'm with ya there.

[Raiders]

Too conventional. Lowly carpenter who makes it big, capped with rousing back from the dead finale? It would be yet another typical, mainstream, non-art house bio pic.

But wait... cast a donkey as Jesus! Extreme-imental!

[transmogrifier]

But wait... cast a donkey as Jesus! Extreme-imental!

No, five donkeys as Jesus, and a pack of cards as Mary Magdalene.

[Melville]

I'd love to get in on this, but I really don't have a clue what you're talking about.
The Aviator treats Howard Hughes' story in terms of the world as he experiences it and his relationship to objects, to himself, and to others (more thoughts here (http://match-cut.org/showthread.php?p=113757#post11 3757)). I'm Not There treats Bob Dylan's story in terms of symbols, primarily in the different representations of him constructed by him and by the media and public consciousness, but also in the use of cultural symbols to codify events (e.g. the machine gun firing on the audience, the cage—at least I vaguely recall a cage—the cowboys and indians). The first is an existential and phenomenological approach to biography, while the other is a semiotic approach. I'm assuming the other inequalities were clear enough.


Wait, wasn't that the whole freakin' point of the movie?
I don't know about it being the whole freakin' point, but yeah, presenting Capote as an obnoxious self-aggrandizer, and seeing the ramifications of that in his involvement in the crime story, seemed to be a central point. Thinking him obnoxious isn't a criticism; it was just my only real reaction to the film.

[EyesWideOpen]

I spend a lot of time in the Bronx. Latinos use it just as much as blacks, and the two use it with each other.

I also think it's silly that if a white person says it they can actually get killed.

Is it really worth killing someone over a word?

I've lived in California and Arizona all my life and have grew up/been friends with Hispanics/Latinos and I have never heard one use the term "nigger" in anything but the negative context. I've seen fights break out over a Latino calling a black person "nigger" so they definitely don't use the term "as much as blacks". And most would be just as offended to hear a Latino saying the word then they would a white person.

And this also doesn't really have to do with what I was originally talking about. I'm not talking about real life people using the term. I'm not talking about gay movie characters calling each other "fag" and reclaiming the word. I'm talking about straight characters using the term as a "funny cuss word" to call each other.

[megladon8]

I guess California and Arizona are different from NYC because hispanics most definitely use the word with and around blacks there.

It was something I was kind of taken aback by.

[Ezee E]

Negro means black in Spanish.

[Ezee E]

Watched the first half of The Last Mistress. Got tired, so time for bed. Good stuff so far. Hard to imagine Breillat finding a better person to work for her than Asia Argento. They're perfect for each other.

[Sycophant]

http://match-cut.org/image.php?u=13&dateline=1280028617

[baby doll]

The Aviator treats Howard Hughes' story in terms of the world as he experiences it and his relationship to objects, to himself, and to others (more thoughts here (http://match-cut.org/showthread.php?p=113757#post11 3757)). I'm Not There treats Bob Dylan's story in terms of symbols, primarily in the different representations of him constructed by him and by the media and public consciousness, but also in the use of cultural symbols to codify events (e.g. the machine gun firing on the audience, the cage—at least I vaguely recall a cage—the cowboys and indians). The first is an existential and phenomenological approach to biography, while the other is a semiotic approach. I'm assuming the other inequalities were clear enough.Yeah, I guess just have a simpler way of looking at things. Even though The Aviator seems to me the most entertaining of Scorsese's recent blockbusters, in relation to I'm Not There., it's relatively conventional as a biopic in that it has a single protagonist named Howard Hughes, whereas what's interesting to me about Haynes' film is that it has six characters who aren't named Bob Dylan, and it tasks the viewer with trying to reconcile them into a single person. And the fact that they don't fit together, and that the various time lines overlap with one another, creates a kind of tension that is really intriguing. I don't know much about semiotics, but I think the fundamental difference between the two films is that we're supposed to come away from Scorsese's movie feeling like we've learned something about the life of Howard Hughes (his mother instilled in him a fear of germs at a young age, and that explains everything), whereas with Haynes' film, which is this collection of sometimes very fanciful myths inspired by the life of Bob Dylan, when we see the clip of him performing at the end of the movie, I'm like, "Who is this guy?" And in the movie, the various Dylans are all in hiding, in one fashion or another, so it's appropriate that the film views him as an enigma, which to me is more interesting.

[soitgoes...]

Two episodes into Carlos and so far so fantastic. It'll be interesting to see if Assayas can keep the momentum going through Carlos' "less interesting" years. The first hour of the second episode offers some straight up great filmmaking.

[Skitch]

What about The Doors? Would that qualify as an experimental bio-pic?

[StanleyK]

La Dolce Vita (Fellini 60) - ***

You're missing a star there.

[B-side]

http://i30.tinypic.com/30kambp.jpg

Modern Times reference ftw

[Qrazy]

The Aviator treats Howard Hughes' story in terms of the world as he experiences it and his relationship to objects, to himself, and to others (more thoughts here (http://match-cut.org/showthread.php?p=113757#post11 3757)). I'm Not There treats Bob Dylan's story in terms of symbols, primarily in the different representations of him constructed by him and by the media and public consciousness, but also in the use of cultural symbols to codify events (e.g. the machine gun firing on the audience, the cage—at least I vaguely recall a cage—the cowboys and indians). The first is an existential and phenomenological approach to biography, while the other is a semiotic approach. I'm assuming the other inequalities were clear enough.


Ehh... but each segment in I'm Not There also stands alone as a narrative moment. Each individual representation of Dylan functions as a fleshed out character. As a result any symbolic associations don't act as an oppressive force, rather they are icing on the layered cake.

[Qrazy]

I guess California and Arizona are different from NYC because hispanics most definitely use the word with and around blacks there.

It was something I was kind of taken aback by.

Perhaps they are mixed African rather than Hispanic?

[MacGuffin]

Just realized I have about eight more Kiyoshi Kurosawa movies to see. All are unreleased in America and some are actually considered good!

[megladon8]

Perhaps they are mixed African rather than Hispanic?


Nope.



Just realized I have about eight more Kiyoshi Kurosawa movies to see. All are unreleased in America and some are actually considered good!


The few Kurosawa I've seen I've really, really dug. I'm kind of scared to look at more of his work because (at least from the consensus on him here) the few I've seen are his very best and I have nowhere to go but down from here. :sad:

[Dead & Messed Up]

I got Tokyo Sonata from Netflix on Friday, so I approve of all the Kiyoshi love.

[MacGuffin]

The few Kurosawa I've seen I've really, really dug. I'm kind of scared to look at more of his work because (at least from the consensus on him here) the few I've seen are his very best and I have nowhere to go but down from here. :sad:

I'm curious what you've seen. If you've liked the ones you've seen, I have no reason to doubt you'll basically like the rest. He has this distinctive moody tone in all of his movies that's just so Kiyoshi Kurosawa. Plus all of his movies are exceedingly original. ;) My favorite three are Bright Future (coming-of-age drama/natural disaster movie/supernatural), Doppelganger (black comedy/sci-fi) and Tokyo Sonata (a family drama where family is to Tokyo as Tokyo is to the world).

[megladon8]

I'm curious what you've seen. If you've liked the ones you've seen, I have no reason to doubt you'll basically like the rest. He has this distinctive moody tone in all of his movies that's just so Kiyoshi Kurosawa. Plus all of his movies are exceedingly original. ;) My favorite three are Bright Future (coming-of-age drama/natural disaster movie/supernatural), Doppelganger (black comedy/sci-fi) and Tokyo Sonata (a family drama where family is to Tokyo as Tokyo is to the world).


I often regret that I passed up the opportunity to see Tokyo Sonata in theatres...though it was either that, or see Videodrome, which was incredible to see on the big screen.

So I haven't seen that one yet.

The Kurosawa I've seen I would rate/rank as follows...

Pulse - 10
Cure - 10
Seance - 8
Retribution - 6
Doppelganger - 6

I really cannot stress how incredible Pulse and Cure are. I found them both to be so very evocative and rich. When a good chunk of my DVD collection received water damage, Pulse was one of the ones whose case was completely, utterly ruined and it really pissed me off.

[MacGuffin]

Pulse isn't my favorite Kiyoshi but I will admit it has some eerie, well-calculated moments (the scene with the ghost in the room, the airplane, the suicide). I think Cure would be my fourth favorite Kiyoshi, but that could go up. The awesome thing is is that it feels like a vehicle for Koji Yakusho, one of my fav. actors.

I don't recall reading whether or not you've upgraded to Blu yet, but if so, MoC put out a fantastic region-free Blu-ray of Tokyo Sonata in the UK. I have that, and highly recommend it. Otherwise, I think Koch Lorber put it out in the US just recently and it's probably an interlaced transfer, but at least you get to see it. Try to see Bright Future as well. It's easy to find, and I think you might like that one.

[megladon8]

Pulse isn't my favorite Kiyoshi but I will admit it has some eerie, well-calculated moments (the scene with the ghost in the room, the airplane, the suicide). I think Cure would be my fourth favorite Kiyoshi, but that could go up. The awesome thing is is that it feels like a vehicle for Koji Yakusho, one of my fav. actors.

I don't recall reading whether or not you've upgraded to Blu yet, but if so, MoC put out a fantastic region-free Blu-ray of Tokyo Sonata in the UK. I have that, and highly recommend it. Otherwise, I think Koch Lorber put it out in the US just recently and it's probably an interlaced transfer, but at least you get to see it. Try to see Bright Future as well. It's easy to find, and I think you might like that one.


I will definitely try to check out Bright Future and Tokyo Sonata.

Have you seen Seance? If so what did you think? And have you seen the original film it was based on, Seance on a Wet Afternoon?

[number8]

I can confirm that here in NYC, I've heard Latino kids liberally call each other "nigga" in public (usually subways) and no one would say anything.

I've actually heard Asian kids do the same.

The common denominator seems to be that they are teenagers and they like hip hop.

To be fair, I don't think if some white kids do it, they'd get much flak either.

[Ezee E]

Down south, it's pretty rampant amongst everyone. Although the whites say it like they did in the 60's I imagine. A lot of hate behind it. Not the gangster rap way.

[megladon8]

I want white people to start using "cracker" and "honkey" endearingly with each other, and respond to blacks saying it the same way that they respond to whites saying "nigger" - with violence.

Because it makes about as much sense.

[number8]

TG4f9zR5yzY

[Spinal]

Whites do not have the same history of enslavement and predjudice. Not saying that I really enjoy the word, but I don't think it's as easy as flipping one side for the other.

[megladon8]

Whites do not have the same history of enslavement and predjudice. Not saying that I really enjoy the word, but I don't think it's as easy as flipping one side for the other.


But there is NO WORD IN EXISTENCE whose power should be strong enough that if the wrong person says it (in this case a white person) they could be MURDERED.

Does its history make it offensive? Of course. Do I think it's in terrible taste and, again, very offensive for a white person to say it in regards to a black person? Most definitely.

Should it be seen as "understandable" that a black person kill a white person for saying it? Fuck no.

[Sycophant]

Spin this shit out, plz.

[number8]

Murder is wrong. What causes it is irrelevant.

[Sycophant]

Murder is wrong. What causes it is irrelevant.

Yes.

[megladon8]

Murder is wrong. What causes it is irrelevant.


Agreed.

But it being over a word is particularly ridiculous.

[megladon8]

Spin this shit out, plz.


Huh?

[Spinal]

Should it be seen as "understandable" that a black person kill a white person for saying it? Fuck no.

That is not what I was arguing and I don't think that argument really exists.

[Sycophant]

That is not what I was arguing and I don't think that argument really exists.

Also yes.

[Spinal]

Huh?

The discussion really has little to do with film at this point, so what he's saying is it doesn't belong here. He's probably right.

[Sycophant]

Huh?

I want this out of the FDT if it's not too much trouble to any mods. Alternately, it could just end and I'd be ok with that.

[megladon8]

Continuing in Random Thoughts, then...

[EyesWideOpen]

I want this out of the FDT if it's not too much trouble to any mods. Alternately, it could just end and I'd be ok with that.

The saddest thing is that my original post did have to do with movies and not a single person responded to it. It got taken somewhere else.

[megladon8]

Picnic at Hanging Rock is a very good film.

Anyone agree? Disagree?

[MacGuffin]

I will definitely try to check out Bright Future and Tokyo Sonata.

Have you seen Seance? If so what did you think? And have you seen the original film it was based on, Seance on a Wet Afternoon?

It's pretty good, but I have to see it again. I haven't watched the original.

[megladon8]

CoR2CGTKCL4

[Pop Trash]

Winter's Bone was wonderful. Beyond the authenticity of the Ozark landscape and people (and a great cast of unknowns, particularly the lead actress), I loved the way it wove both film noir and feminist tropes into the story without ever once feeling forced or contrived (I'm looking at you Brick). It's just about perfect, with the exception of the 8mm B&W dream sequence; that seemed out of place and took me out of the movie.

[Fezzik]

Is Deathnote related to the anime series? My daughter loved that.

Yes! It's a live action film based on the Manga.

We had to change our schedule somewhat based on Netflix queue gaffes and a power outage:

Yesterday:

Om Shanti Om: Bollywood ridiculousness, of course, but if you go in knowing that, its fun. I really do want to know what's in the water over there, though. Every single woman in this movie is drop. dead. gorgeous. Also, I don't know if it was an injoke for this movie or a Bollywood thing, but they refrained from ever saying "fuck" - they subtituted "fish" every time. "Fish this!" "What the fish?" Was quite amusing.

Night Watch: I may need to pick up the books because the movie was kinda all over the place. I sorta got the idea, but it was just so messy that I am sure something was lost in the translation. Pretty gory in parts, but its definitely a different angle on vampire lore. And its Russian!

Cinema Paradiso: Nobody else in the group had seen it, but they all loved it. I adore the film to death, really, so there's not much to add but...ahh....that ending. <3

Death Note: I've never read the Manga, but I was surprised at how much I liked this. It's not a great film by any stretch, but I was into it. I kept making jokes about how Ryuk looked like an Undead Warlock from World of Warcraft which fell flat since nobody else in the group played it. Bonus: Takeshi Kaga, the Chairman on the original Japanese Iron Chef, plays the Police Chief. His character was pretty cool. So, at one point, I couldn't resist. After he did something slick, I intoned "And today's secret ingredient is awesome." The film was engaging, even if watching a dozen or so people die on screen from heart attacks was a bit unnerving for me right now.


Today:

Day Watch: The Chalk of Fate: The sequel to Night Watch. What a mess. I mean, yeah, I'm sure the mythology is complicated, and explained in the books, but damn, c'mon people, coherence would be nice. There were a few really cool scenes, though, especially anything in the Gloom, and they obviously had a bigger budget than for the first film. Decent, I guess, but I think it needed a better director.

Death Note: The Last Name: The sequel to the first Death Note that covers the second half of the Manga. They apparently ditch a character that a lot of people didn't like from the book and instead keep another alive that they originally kill...so I dunno which version is better. Rem, a 2nd God of Death, is introduced, and I think it ended the only way it could have. I liked it enough that I need to go find the manga. Impressive story, if a bit unsettling.

[StanleyK]

I realized today that I hadn't seen a Kubrick movie in well over a year; I was like, "what?"

To remedy this, I'll go through his filmography again in order, (I'll just skip Fear and Desire) starting with Killer's Kiss. While I didn't love it like I did at first (I have to admit that most of the dialogue and acting is really amateurish, and the ending really feels tacked on), I still think it's a solid, underrated movie; Kubrick has always been good at slowly building tension, and with a short running time he makes the most from a simple story, with an interestingly framed flashback, long wordless passages and (particularly for such a low budget) really impressive cinematography.

[B-side]

I thought the live action Death Note movie was terrible.

[DavidSeven]

Dinner for Schmucks was torturous. Absolutely painful. Carrel is nearly unbearable in this, and his performance sucks away most of the goodwill he had left with me as a comedic performer. Rudd seemed completely disengaged.

[Derek]

Dinner for Schmucks was torturous. Absolutely painful. Carrel is nearly unbearable in this, and his performance sucks away most of the goodwill he had left with me as a comedic performer. Rudd seemed completely disengaged.

Ditto. I chuckled a few times, but boy does this thing draaag. Why, oh why, was it nearly 2 hours long?

[Sxottlan]

Caught most of Vertigo tonight on a movie channel. It suddenly sparked a memory.

Didn't some rock band do a music video that spoofed Vertigo? Instead of Midge's character, they had a real effeminate guy.

I want to say Foo Fighters, but I really don't remember now.

[Sven]

A little bummed that Intermission was such a disappointment.

[Rowland]

the few I've seen are his very best and I have nowhere to go but down from here. :sad:You might surprise yourself.

Cure ****
Pulse ****
Serpent's Path ***½
Bright Future ***½
License to Live ***½
Eyes of the Spider ***½
Seance ***
Barren Illusion ***
Retribution ***
~Doppelganger **½
~Charisma **
~Loft *
Guard from the Underground *

~These three require re-viewings. I'm pretty confident in my memory of the bottom one sucking.

I hope more of his rare stuff is widely released. If anyone with Netflix is feeling adventurous, he also directed a short entitled House of Bugs for a Japanese horror compilation (http://www.netflix.com/Movie/Kazuo_Umezz_s_Horror_Theater_V ol._1/70048831?trkid=226871). He didn't write it, so I haven't exactly prioritized it, but I'll probably check it out eventually for the sake of completionism.

[Dukefrukem]

Time to start rating the movies I saw over the weekend. It's amazing, when you don't play video games, I actually have time to watch movies.... funny how that works.

[B-side]

http://i27.tinypic.com/t705ci.jpg

The opening scene of Ruiz's The Golden Boat reveals a pair of feet walking amongst empty pairs of shoes on a New York street. Eventually, those shoes stumble upon a man sitting on a curb. The man on the curb says, "This, my son, is not my place," then proceeds to stab himself in the abdomen. The strangeness does not stop there, I assure you. This is by far the most bizarre of the Ruiz's I've seen, perhaps of any film I've seen. Adding to that strangeness is the risible dialogue and hilariously inept acting. Knowing Ruiz, this could very well be some odd experiment in parody. The previously mentioned "man on the curb" kills randomly out of some misguided sense of duty. The protagonist has his life and apartment invaded by strangers with various missions of their own. A laugh track plays a few times throughout the film, at one point after the line "There are plenty of gentlemen in the world," or something similar to that. Oblique angles and unique framing are Ruiz's bread and butter, and he certainly doesn't disappoint in that department, though the film does look pretty cheap. Shot on a shoestring budget, it was our dear director's first American film, and maybe he felt he had an obligation to his fans to not dumb it down, and thus we are left with this near-nonsensical foray into fatalism, art, identity and acting.

[number8]

Dinner for Schmucks was torturous. Absolutely painful. Carrel is nearly unbearable in this, and his performance sucks away most of the goodwill he had left with me as a comedic performer. Rudd seemed completely disengaged.

I agree with this:

http://www.slate.com/id/2260340/

[dreamdead]

Godard's Made in U.S.A. already bears signs of not being interested in sustaining its generic narrative, folding in its noir/political mystery for more esoteric semiotic games and experiments with sound. And while these latter traits have been around in even Godard's most traditional filmmaking, something here is still plenty unique. Some of it's the most basic issue of gender roles, with Anna Karina being both the victimized and the victimizer, dual roles accentuated by the divorce she and Godard had two years prior, but other bits suggest a general sadness of how politics really can't escape its binary of left/right political framework. It's a film that tries to shatter binaries, to suggest the liminal ideas behind language, but it remains more caught than it would first believe in its structural system.

Everyone Else, meanwhile, is highly recommended to anyone seeking adventurous fare about romantic relationships. Plenty of philosophical musing, beautiful studies of the sexes, and with an ending that will leave you questioning what has come before...

[NickGlass]

Picnic at Hanging Rock is a very good film.

Anyone agree? Disagree?

I disagree. I think it's a great film.

This is the type of film I would love to see in a dark field, projected on a large screen. The woozy atmosphere is so palpable, and perfectly complements the hazy, mesmerizing mystery at the core. It's my favorite type of mystery: one where it's hardly significant what the mystery is about, or if it will ever be solved.

[MacGuffin]

Picnic at Hanging Rock is on Netflix Instant Watch. Hmm...

[number8]

Was gonna post this in the horror thread, but probably better here.

Without a conscious decision and only realized through a series of retroactive examinations, I've concluded that the movies I cherish most are the ones that make me sad, upset or angry. It might explain my continuing waning interest in comedies, cult movies and trashy horror, all of which I used to convince myself I adore. Either I've been fighting my original pretentious nature or I'm subconsciously preparing myself for an easily explainable mass murder.

[D_Davis]

Based on my recently updated Top 100, my top 10 for the decade looks like this:

1. Mind Game
2. Old Boy
3. Hero
4. Funky Forest: First Contact
5. Tekkonkinkreet
6. The Descent
7. Inglorious Basterds
8. Ping Pong
9. The Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill
10. Exiled

[Spinal]

Asian cult!

[D_Davis]

Asian cult!

I know, right? I'm like a reverse banana.

[Watashi]

Based on my recently updated Top 100, my top 10 for the decade looks like this:

1. Mind Game
2. Old Boy
3. Hero
4. Funky Forest: First Contact
5. Tekkonkinkreet
6. The Descent
7. Inglorious Basterds
8. Ping Pong
9. The Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill
10. Exiled
Needs more Pixar plz.

[number8]

I know, right? I'm like a reverse banana.

You are my Bizarro.

[D_Davis]

Needs more Pixar plz.

Well, there couldn't possibly be any less Pixar.

[Skitch]

This may be met with some hostility, but I can't ignore it any longer. I've come to the conclusion that outside of maybe Teddy KGB, John Malkovich is really only good at portraying John Malkovich.

[Sven]

The Zamfir pipes in Picnic @ H.R. drive me crazy, but otherwise the film is great. Oh, and the fat girl student... so annoying: "Miranda!" *shiver

[Mysterious Dude]

I sure haven't made much of an effort to see comedies these last few years: Superbad, The Hangover, Knocked Up, Tropic Thunder, Zombieland, Pineapple Express... all unseen by me.

I think it might be because when I was living at home, my mom had 500 channels, and I now I'm on my own and have only 70 channels or something, so before I moved out, there was a good chance I'd see something like Napoleon Dynamite or Meet the Parents eventually, so I didn't prioritize them. That's less likely to happen these days, so perhaps I should change my habits.

[megladon8]

Based on my recently updated Top 100, my top 10 for the decade looks like this:

1. Mind Game
2. Old Boy
3. Hero
4. Funky Forest: First Contact
5. Tekkonkinkreet
6. The Descent
7. Inglorious Basterds
8. Ping Pong
9. The Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill
10. Exiled


You also very heartily recommend the "Tekkonkinkreet" comic, amirite?

[D_Davis]

You also very heartily recommend the "Tekkonkinkreet" comic, amirite?

Yeah - it's great.

[megladon8]

WB is remaking Deep Blue Sea.

WTF? Of all the movies to remake, why this on-...oh, wait a minute now...Rachel Weisz? In a wetsuit?

I approve.

[number8]

WB is remaking Deep Blue Sea.

WTF? Of all the movies to remake, why this on-...oh, wait a minute now...Rachel Weisz? In a wetsuit?

I approve.

Errrrrr, it's not the shark movie. It's a 1955 Vivian Leigh movie.

[megladon8]

Errrrrr, it's not the shark movie. It's a 1955 Vivian Leigh movie.


You see my dreams?

You step on them time and time again.

Soon I'm just going to stop baring them for you. And then where will we be?

[BuffaloWilder]

Yay, I might be writing for The House Next Door.

[megladon8]

I also see no reason why a remake of the '55 Vivien Leigh Deep Blue Sea could not prominently feature Rachel Weisz in a wetsuit.

[MadMan]

I also see no reason why a remake of the '55 Vivien Leigh Deep Blue Sea could not prominently feature Rachel Weisz in a wetsuit.I agree 100%.


Was gonna post this in the horror thread, but probably better here.

Without a conscious decision and only realized through a series of retroactive examinations, I've concluded that the movies I cherish most are the ones that make me sad, upset or angry. It might explain my continuing waning interest in comedies, cult movies and trashy horror, all of which I used to convince myself I adore. Either I've been fighting my original pretentious nature or I'm subconsciously preparing myself for an easily explainable mass murder.Hopefully the former, but probably the latter :P
But hey, when you complete the murder spree we'll all be able to look back and say "Whoa, I knew that guy. He posted on Match-Cut." No idea if that would be a good thing, but oh well...

[Dead & Messed Up]

Yay, I might be writing for The House Next Door.

Dude!

That's awesome!

[number8]

Don't worry, you'll be able to say the same thing when I win the Palme d'Or.

[Henry Gale]

I sure haven't made much of an effort to see comedies these last few years: Superbad, The Hangover, Knocked Up, Tropic Thunder, Zombieland, Pineapple Express... all unseen by me.

Honestly, for me, those are some of the most enjoyable mainstream comedies of the last few years. The Hangover, even though it's far and away the most successful of them, is the weakest of that bunch. But even then I've found myself throwing it on during a couple of lazy afternoons for light, mindless fun (helpfully fueled by Galifianakis' moments).

[StanleyK]

Burn After Reading remains hilarious, but it doesn't seem nearly as smart on a second viewing. The Coens place themselves and the audience as superior to the characters (the opening and closing scenes suggest some high intelligence swooping down to Earth, surveying a few of its locals and then leaving in disgust), and so the movie doesn't even bother trying to make something insightful from their zany misadventures, settling instead in a comfortable "look at how dumb these people are!" ironic misanthropy. It's certainly very well-shot, written and acted, as is to expected by the arguably best living mainstream directors, but considering their output (and particularly sandwiched as it is between the masterpieces No Country for Old Men and A Serious Man), it's really lacking.

[soitgoes...]

The Paleface (Bob Hope version) was horribly racist and unfunny.I agree, though the racism goes hand in hand with a lot of early comedy. It was a waste of 90 minutes, and as my first exposure to Bob Hope's golden years of comedy, I'd have to say I don't quite get it. A couple chuckles here and there, but overall he seemed to be reaching. It doesn't help that Russell's only assets were her breasts. She was an awful actress.

[Spinal]

The Coens place themselves and the audience as superior to the characters (the opening and closing scenes suggest some high intelligence swooping down to Earth, surveying a few of its locals and then leaving in disgust), and so the movie doesn't even bother trying to make something insightful from their zany misadventures, settling instead in a comfortable "look at how dumb these people are!" ironic misanthropy.

The film allows you to understand each of the character's motivations and allows you to understand why they are acting the way they are. However, it suggests that from the outside, all of this stuff would seem crazy. I think it falls well short of misanthropy and is nothing to get worked up over. It's basically a paraphrase of 'Lord, what fools these mortals be.' You may as well accuse Shakespeare of misanthropy for writing A Midsummer Night's Dream. But then, you're the one who thinks Buster Keaton is a hateful asshole, so maybe you would.

[BuffaloWilder]

Dude!

That's awesome!

I know - huzzah!

:pritch:

[Watashi]

Just saw The Box. Awesome movie.

I can't believe Warner Bros. had faith thinking this film would have mass appeal.

[Dukefrukem]

Was gonna post this in the horror thread, but probably better here.

Without a conscious decision and only realized through a series of retroactive examinations, I've concluded that the movies I cherish most are the ones that make me sad, upset or angry. It might explain my continuing waning interest in comedies, cult movies and trashy horror, all of which I used to convince myself I adore. Either I've been fighting my original pretentious nature or I'm subconsciously preparing myself for an easily explainable mass murder.

This is exactly why I love horror movies so much. I made a post about this a few months ago... in a particular thread. I don't think it either of those; I just think those emotions are more commonly shared among people, which is why we want to see revenge in movies, why we want to feel fear and why we want continue to support disaster movies. We are violent by nature.

[Ivan Drago]

Just saw The Box. Awesome movie.

I can't believe Warner Bros. had faith thinking this film would have mass appeal.

Yes, yes, yes, yes, YES.

What'd you think of the score from The Arcade Fire?

[Sycophant]

This is exactly why I love horror movies so much. I made a post about this a few months ago... in a particular thread. I don't think it either of those; I just think those emotions are more commonly shared among people, which is why we want to see revenge in movies, why we want to feel fear and why we want continue to support disaster movies. We are violent by nature.

Your assessment seems pretty off to me. Remember, you like these things more than a lot of other people. And being somewhat titillated by violent images does not reveal all of humanity to be fundamentally violent. Not to deny that violence is a strong component of human nature by any means, but this strikes me as cynical and possibly self-justifying.

[BuffaloWilder]

It might sound like a pretty vague cliche, but I've always thought that we like violent horror films because they remind us that we're alive - because they're visceral, often both visually and emotionally. Gets the adrenaline pumping, gets the juices flowing. I don't think there's any inherent attraction to the violence by itself, though.

[RoadtoPerdition]

Just saw The Box. Awesome movie.

I can't believe Warner Bros. had faith thinking this film would have mass appeal.

I've been wanting to see this ever since it came to theaters but haven't had the chance. It's going to premiere on, I think, Cinemax this weekend, so I'll be catching it then. I was surprised at how bad the reviews were for this, but I love movies and shows based on Richard Matheson stories, so I don't imagine it's that bad.

[number8]

Who gave it a positive review? Meeeee.

[Skitch]

I've been wanting to see this ever since it came to theaters but haven't had the chance. It's going to premiere on, I think, Cinemax this weekend, so I'll be catching it then. I was surprised at how bad the reviews were for this, but I love movies and shows based on Richard Matheson stories, so I don't imagine it's that bad.

People either seem to love it or hate it. I personally thought it was fantastic and can't wait to pick it up on bluray. Pretty much every friend I have (generally the more mainstream type) did NOT like it. I understand, though. Its not a clear cut written film, but that's why I like it. I like when a film pushes me to solve the plot on my own.

[Derek]

Yeah, I liked The Box more than I ever thought I'd like a Richard Kelly film. Not great, but an odd, intriguing film.

[StanleyK]

The film allows you to understand each of the character's motivations and allows you to understand why they are acting the way they are. However, it suggests that from the outside, all of this stuff would seem crazy. I think it falls well short of misanthropy and is nothing to get worked up over. It's basically a paraphrase of 'Lord, what fools these mortals be.' You may as well accuse Shakespeare of misanthropy for writing A Midsummer Night's Dream. But then, you're the one who thinks Buster Keaton is a hateful asshole, so maybe you would.

Yeah, but all their motivations are so shallow. Cox writes a memoir just to get back at the CIA, Harry wants to have sex with tons of women while still being with his wife, Chad wants money and a cheap thrill, Linda thinks she's worthless without cosmetic surgery... They're simple, one-note characters, made to be mocked.

[transmogrifier]

The Box starts well, but gets worse and worse and worse as it goes along. By the end, I was actively annoyed by it.

The Coens have yet to make a comedy that has caused me to laugh out loud. Their "comedies" are genial, well-drawn, immersive....but not all that funny.

[BuffaloWilder]

Man, trans - you don't like anything good. Except for A Serious Man and Where The Wild Things Are, apparantly.

[Skitch]

The Coens have yet to make a comedy that has caused me to laugh out loud. Their "comedies" are genial, well-drawn, immersive....but not all that funny.
Their comedies are, imo, their best work.


The Box starts well, but gets worse and worse and worse as it goes along. By the end, I was actively annoyed by it.

This is how I feel about the Coens highly reguarded drama, I.e. No Country and Fargo.

[Spinal]

Yeah, but all their motivations are so shallow. Cox writes a memoir just to get back at the CIA, Harry wants to have sex with tons of women while still being with his wife, Chad wants money and a cheap thrill, Linda thinks she's worthless without cosmetic surgery... They're simple, one-note characters, made to be mocked.

You're basically talking about the entire history of farce.

[Rowland]

I thought The Box was fine, but nothing to get worked up over. A considerable improvement over Southland Tales, in any case.

While we're on the topic, what was the deal with the "Choose Your Bubble" scene?

[Philosophe_rouge]

With exception of A Serious Man, I'm not a fan of the Coen comedies... I am mostly indifferent to their body of work outside No Country and A Serious Man though.

[MacGuffin]

Border Incident is great if uneven. In any case, the scene where the American and the undercover agent rendezvous probably makes it into in my top 50 scenes ever.

[Watashi]

Aren't ALL Coen movies comedies?

Am I missing something?

[Sycophant]

Would you consider No Country a comedy?

[Watashi]

Would you consider No Country a comedy?
There's a lot of classic Coen comedic moments in there. I mean, it's not Raising Arizona, but it has the laughs.

[Derek]

Aren't ALL Coen movies comedies?

Am I missing something?

No and yes, apparently.

Blood Simple and No Country for Old Men are not comedies. Fargo, The Man Who Wasn't There and Miller's Crossing have comedic elements, but it'd be a stretch to call them comedies.

[Winston*]

I don't consider A Serious Man a comedy.

[Watashi]

Coens just have various types of comedies from screwball, dark, slapstick, and satire.

Fargo being a dark comedy doesn't make it less comedic than a screwball comedy like The Hudsucker Proxy.

[Derek]

I don't consider A Serious Man a comedy.

That and Barton Fink both walk a thin line, but I can at least understand why someone would classify them as comedies.

[MacGuffin]

How do you all get that sleek half symbol? Tell me your secret.