28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[Yxklyx]

Shoeshine is easily my favorite by De Sica. We need access to more of his films. He directed like 35 films and only a handful are available on DVD.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Okay, so now I've seen every single Star Trek movie in the course of two days. Brain overload...

Coolness! My friends posted the time-lapse video on Youtube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8g2zJqUlEg), so now I can remember all my ratings. If you watch, I'm the guy in the grey shirt on Day 1 and the guy in the blank red shirt (GET IT) on Day 2.

The Motion Picture: 6
The Wrath of Khan: 8
The Search for Spock: 8
The Voyage Home: 9
The Final Frontier: 3
The Undiscovered Country: 8
Generations: 6
First Contact: 8
Insurrection: 3
Nemesis: 5
Star Trek: 8

In retrospect, I'd give The Motion Picture and The Search for Spock both 7's, but otherwise those ratings are a fair approximation of how I feel.

[Raiders]

Being a fairly big fan of the original series and original film series (before NexGen) I really want to revisit them. Especially The Search for Spock which I have long remembered as being dramatically stiff and over-serious; failing to recreate, despite its attempts, the successfully emotional moments of Khan. But, I have recently read many good words for it.

[Irish]

Coolness! My friends posted the time-lapse video on Youtube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8g2zJqUlEg), so now I can remember all my ratings.

That video is awesome, and you and your friends rock. I'm a bit surprised to see many high ratings for Motion Picture and Search for Spock, though (especially as I didn't get a feeling that you appreciated the third film that much from your write-up).

I swear, I've seen Search for Spock multiple times, and even within the last year, but I can never remember anything about it except for its most obvious plot elements.

[Dukefrukem]

Coolness! My friends posted the time-lapse video on Youtube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8g2zJqUlEg), so now I can remember all my ratings. If you watch, I'm the guy in the grey shirt on Day 1 and the guy in the blank red shirt (GET IT) on Day 2.

The Motion Picture: 6
The Wrath of Khan: 8
The Search for Spock: 8
The Voyage Home: 9
The Final Frontier: 3
The Undiscovered Country: 8
Generations: 6
First Contact: 8
Insurrection: 3
Nemesis: 5
Star Trek: 8

In retrospect, I'd give The Motion Picture and The Search for Spock both 7's, but otherwise those ratings are a fair approximation of how I feel.

That is so fucking awesome. I see 7 people got First Contact's score correct.

I do not understand the hate of Insurrection and Nemesis.

[Dukefrukem]

Holy crap you guys did a Bondathon too?

[Dead & Messed Up]

That video is awesome, and you and your friends rock. I'm a bit surprised to see many high ratings for Motion Picture and Search for Spock, though (especially as I didn't get a feeling that you appreciated the third film that much from your write-up).

I think jumping directly from movie to movie bounces Search for Spock up, since it's buttressed by arguably the two best Trek movies. When you reflect on the film as its own movie, it's more a collection of images, beginnings, and endings than a film all its own. So in the moment, I thought it an 8, but it doesn't hold up quite as well on reflection.


Holy crap you guys did a Bondathon too?

I wasn't there for that one. In retrospect, I missed out. Would've been a good opportunity to get all those out of the way (I've seen five or six Bond films total).

[Irish]

I do not understand the hate of Insurrection and Nemesis.

<--- Lifelong Star Trek fan. I don't remember what Insurrection was about (even reading a synopsis on IMDb didn't jog any memories) and I never bothered to see Nemesis.


I wasn't there for that one. In retrospect, I missed out. Would've been a good opportunity to get all those out of the way (I've seen five or six Bond films total).

I can't think of anything much more brutal than eight straight hours of Roger Moore.

[Qrazy]

I haven't seen Stardust Memories in too long to debate the specifics, but I don't see how its similarities to 8½ detracts from it - I just remember it as being intensely in-dialogue with Fellini's film rather than lazily derivative of it (unlike, says, Interiors' Bergman pillaging).

Let me assure you then that much like Interiors it is in fact lazily derivative of it. Plenty of sequences are completely lifted. While Fellini's work is startlingly original and the dream sequences have a shell shocked immediacy derived directly from his own psyche... Stardust is merely Allen's application of his own comedy and experiences imposed upon Fellini's reality. I suppose I feel this all the more so because for the most part I consider film's about filmmaking a waste of time. 8 1/2 is the only one I consider essential and the rest are by and large masturbatory exercises but lacking Fellini's capacity for self-awareness.

[Wryan]

There was a Reddit thread about remembering Michael Jeter, and this vid was posted inside.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDc9ul70kyY

Amazing and guaranteed to bring a smile to your face, regardless.

[Spun Lepton]

I was prepared to write a short review for Very Bad Things, titled Very Bad Movie, perhaps finally catching up with the critical consensus from 1998. But, the movie isn't "very" bad. It's just bad.

Dark humor should make you laugh. It should make you laugh and then maybe make you feel a little bad for laughing. Nothing in this flick made me laugh. It was just kind of there. Character reactions to most of the Very Bad Events seemed closer to reality than anything, and I only found myself feeling sorry for many of the characters.

4/10

[Derek]

Sad, lonely vote for Zelig.

I love Zelig. Top 3 or 4 for me.


though I have to confess that my exposure to classic Allen is woefully limited.

And between 1977 and 2011, 1981 is the only year Woody didn't direct a film, so you may have to wait a while. ;)

Preferring Stardust to 8 1/2 is baffling to me, though to be fair to the Woodster, I did see the former on like a 13" tv.

[megladon8]

I always thought 8 1/2 must have been an enormous influence on Terry Gilliam.

[Sven]

Go ahead, Boner. Be assured by Qrazy.

[Watashi]

Purple Rose of Cairo and Hannah and Her Sisters are probably my favorites.

[Rowland]

And between 1977 and 2011, 1981 is the only year Woody didn't direct a film, so you may have to wait a while. ;)And there's still a good two dozen or so films from the year I'm actively interested in viewing. But I do intend on opening up my viewing log a bit, especially now that I've almost run out of material from the year that clocks in around 90 minutes. :lol:

[Yxklyx]

I always thought 8 1/2 must have been an enormous influence on Terry Gilliam.

I caught a Gilliam vibe while watching Ken Russell's The Devils. I think the Monty Python crew hung out with Russell at that time.

[MadMan]

I still want to know why people think so highly of The Voyage Home. The whole thing with the whales was really lame, and only some of the humor actually worked. I was entertained, but the more I think about it the more I wonder if my rating for it is actually too high.

While I haven't seen a ton of Woody Allen movies, I'd say my favorite so far is Sleeper.

[elixir]

The narration and interviews in Husbands and Wives really kept it from being a personal favorite. Don't get me wrong, I still really liked it, but I wish those two things would have been excised completely. (By the way, the movie can be viewed for free on Hulu, though it expires in five days.)

[Watashi]

Beauty and the Beast (Jean Cocteau, 1946) 4

The shit?

[Pop Trash]

Husbands and Wives seems to be oft cited as the last great Woody Allen, but I watched it for the first time recently and it didn't blow me away. Good, but not great. I feel like I need to have gone through a marriage and possibly a divorce to really 'get' it though. As a point of comparison, I actually like Manhattan Murder Mystery, Deconstructing Harry, Sweet and Lowdown, and Match-Point more than H&W.

Children behave. Before this turns into a Woody Allen pissing contest, I meant POST Husbands & Wives since it seems to be C.W. that it's his last 'great' film (whether you agree or not).

[Pop Trash]

Harlan County U.S.A. (Barbara Kopple, 1976) 9
Eyes Without a Face (Georges Franju, 1960) 4
Sans Soleil (Chris Marker, 1983) 4


Oh, and why ya gotta give me MIXED FEELINGS friend?!

[Spinal]

Children behave. Before this turns into a Woody Allen pissing contest, I meant POST Husbands & Wives since it seems to be C.W. that it's his last 'great' film (whether you agree or not).

Where did this conventional wisdom come from? Never heard this distinction before.

[Spinal]

Lord of the Flies (Peter Brook, 1963) 5

While we're calling out elixir's ratings, might as well throw this one in too.

[elixir]

Oh, and why ya gotta give me MIXED FEELINGS friend?!

Well, at least I'm your friend.

I posted thoughts on Harlan County and Sans Soleil in the past few days, but as far as the latter goes, maybe I would like it more if I thought life were like a Pac-Man game.

Eyes Without a Face was lifeless and mechanical. No sense of atmosphere. No real drama, no sense of any emotional drive from the characters (didn't get any feeling of love from the doctor to his daughter, or anything that led up to the daughter's actions at the end). The conclusion with the doctor at the end is too tidy. An obnoxious score. Stiff acting. There were some good scenes though (e.g. surgeries, burying in the graveyard).

[elixir]

While we're calling out elixir's ratings, might as well throw this one in too.

I don't care about fidelity in adaptations and I try my best not to just say "the book's better," but that may have affected my evaluation of the film in all honestly. Still, though...horrible child acting. I found it quite bland visually and didn't really have any sense of tension or horror communicated on the screen. Another obnoxious score. I do find its thematic concerns quite intriguing and I quite like the story, but it all felt inert to me.

[Spinal]

Eyes Without a Face was lifeless and mechanical. No sense of atmosphere. No real drama, no sense of any emotional drive from the characters (didn't get any feeling of love from the doctor to his daughter, or anything that led up to the daughter's actions at the end). The conclusion with the doctor at the end is too tidy. An obnoxious score. Stiff acting. There were some good scenes though (e.g. surgeries, burying in the graveyard).

I'll support you on this one. Don't really understand the appeal beyond the fact that it has a surprising amount of gore for the era.

[Pop Trash]

Where did this conventional wisdom come from? Never heard this distinction before.

Most recently, the recent AV Club discussion on 'late-period' Woody Allen, but I've heard it from others too. I also think it was the last Allen that made the M.C. top ten of it's respective year, but I might be wrong about that.

[Raiders]

No sense of atmosphere??? WTF? That's the opposite of truth.

[elixir]

The shit?

I think the ending is shit. So, if you love someone ugly, they will turn into someone handsome and you guys will fly off together to live in a mansion? Hm..okay. Not to mention that the central romance is the least convincing one I've seen in quite some time--she falls in love with him...why? I also hate the introduction. And I imagine this film feels magical to many people, but I'm not seeing that...I admit I'm not all too big on fairy tales, but the drama and dialogue were too melodramatic for me. The sets were nice.

[elixir]

No sense of atmosphere??? WTF? That's the opposite of truth.

Well, I'm not sure what to say...for me, it is the truth. I didn't feel anything--horror, tension, unease--nothing.

[Raiders]

Golly. I don't know how to even defend it; it's there in practically every scene. The creepy opening with its grotesque, carnival-esque score and dimly lit body bad shifting around; the surgery, an epitome of clinical, cold precision that is unflinching in its portrayal; the finale with the girl walking as the birds fly around her... heck, every single time the emotionless face but unblinking eyes are forced to watch what she as unwittingly wrought.

I can understand someone feeling disconnected from the work and I can sympathize with disappointed feelings, but to say it has no atmosphere is just so strange a thought to me.

[DavidSeven]

Eyes Without a Face was lifeless and mechanical.

Spot on. These are the exact descriptors I've been using for this film from jump. Glad that more people have come around to the CON side on this one over the years.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I remember thinking the film was eerie and had some striking images, and that's about all I remember.

[Watashi]

I think the ending is shit. So, if you love someone ugly, they will turn into someone handsome and you guys will fly off together to live in a mansion? Hm..okay. Not to mention that the central romance is the least convincing one I've seen in quite some time--she falls in love with him...why? I also hate the introduction. And I imagine this film feels magical to many people, but I'm not seeing that...I admit I'm not all too big on fairy tales, but the drama and dialogue were too melodramatic for me. The sets were nice.

It's Beauty and the Beast... not The Wire.

You seem not to be too big in a lot of stuff that makes cinema so great.

[elixir]

It's Beauty and the Beast... not The Wire.

You seem not to be too big in a lot of stuff that makes cinema so great.


:|

[Watashi]

:|
Comedies, War movies, now fairy tales? I bet you hate Pixar and Jesus too.

[elixir]

Comedies, War movies, now fairy tales? I bet you hate Pixar and Jesus too.

Well, I do like comedies, though I admit I'm not too big on traditional war movies (but I still like plenty...Paths of Glory, The Thin Red Line, etc.).

I like Pixar. Jesus, I don't really care for, though I don't hate the guy.

[Sven]

Hey, I'll rep you for an excellent Black Orpheus score. I'd give it another point or two, but won't give you grief.

[MadMan]

No sense of atmosphere??? WTF? That's the opposite of truth.I thought it was creepy, well made, and quite eerie. I also love the movie's score. Anyways, I side with Raiders here, and I'm glad I own it on Criterion. Although I first saw it on TCM.

[elixir]

Hey, I'll rep you for an excellent Black Orpheus score. I'd give it another point or two, but won't give you grief.

It's possible I'm underrating it, though that score from me still means that I pretty much loved it. Its sense of locale, use of music, and palpable energy is hard to match.

[Scar]

Undiscovered Country > First Contact

[Spinal]

Watching Stop Making Sense with my son. God, this movie is brilliant. There is nothing else like it.

[Sven]

Watching Stop Making Sense with my son. God, this movie is brilliant. There is nothing else like it.

I've only seen it once, but I've listened to the soundtrack innumerable times and watch the Psycho Killer opening whenever I need a boost.

[Dukefrukem]

I still want to know why people think so highly of The Voyage Home. The whole thing with the whales was really lame, and only some of the humor actually worked. I was entertained, but the more I think about it the more I wonder if my rating for it is actually too high.

While I haven't seen a ton of Woody Allen movies, I'd say my favorite so far is Sleeper.

I liked the time travel aspect, helping the engineer at the plexiglass factory, breaking in to the nuclear sub... There's a lot going on which I find interesting.

[Dukefrukem]

Undiscovered Country > First Contact

:|

wait


:frustrated:

[Sven]

Gonna watch a movie with K tonite. Were crippled by choice because I have a lot to choose from. It was stated that she'd never seen Seven Chances and I was like "That's IT!" So we're gonna watch that after some Neti pot action.

[Dukefrukem]

While we're calling out elixir's ratings, might as well throw this one in too.

Coincidently, I just watch it too. How's my rating? :P

[Spinal]

So we're gonna watch that after some Neti pot action.

That's hot.

[Scar]

:|

wait


:frustrated:

Wait.

Undiscovered Country >>> First Contact

Fixed.

[Spinal]

I've only seen it once, but I've listened to the soundtrack innumerable times and watch the Psycho Killer opening whenever I need a boost.

My only complaint would be that the Tom Tom Club number interrupts the flow and momentum of Byrne's vision. In concert, you'd understand it to be a resting point for Byrne. In a film, it seems like an unnecessary detour.

[MadMan]

I liked the time travel aspect, helping the engineer at the plexiglass factory, breaking in to the nuclear sub... There's a lot going on which I find interesting.Well those scenes are actually why the movie gets a positive rating from me. Those are the ones with the highest amount of entertainment value. And I did laugh when Spock and Kirk have that encounter with the young punk rocker on the bus.

Stop Making Sense is relatively flawless, although I think there are a few songs featured that I'm not a huge fan of. The big suit is funny and awesome all at the same time. I need a time machine so I can go back to the 80s and see The Talking Heads perform live in their prime.

[Boner M]

Speaking of Eyes Without a Face, I will proceed to make you all want to seek out Franju's Judex in 3 minutes.

_HM_hN6uDvk

[Derek]

Watching Stop Making Sense with my son. God, this movie is brilliant. There is nothing else like it.

David Byrne > Jesus

By the end Stop Making Sense, I actually believed Byrne could've brought the apocalypse if he chose to.


Children behave. Before this turns into a Woody Allen pissing contest, I meant POST Husbands & Wives since it seems to be C.W. that it's his last 'great' film (whether you agree or not).

Uh, pretty sure conventional wisdom is that Crimes & Misdemeanors is his last great film. They're wrong since Sweet & Lowdown is even better, but that's beside the point.

[Derek]

Speaking of Eyes Without a Face, I will proceed to make you all want to seek out Franju's Judex in 3 minutes.

_HM_hN6uDvk

That looks awesome. I'll bet elixir gives it a 4.

[megladon8]

I loved both Eyes Without a Face and Cocteau's Beauty and the Beast.


You know what's a very eerie, creepy, frightening horror film from the '60s? Carnival of Souls. Man, that movie has some nightmare stuff in it.

[Boner M]

But back to EWaF, I'd say it's one of the few films in which 'lifeless and mechanical' are positive descriptors (although 'sterile and methodical' are probably more accurate).

Also, like yr rating for GMGW, Derek.

[Boner M]

Which seat can I take, etc.

The Profound Desires of the Gods (Imamura)
Dying at Grace (King)
Under the Sun of Satan (Pialat)
Archangel & Careful (Maddin)

[Irish]

I still want to know why people think so highly of The Voyage Home. The whole thing with the whales was really lame, and only some of the humor actually worked. I was entertained, but the more I think about it the more I wonder if my rating for it is actually too high.

I think it just might be the strongest of the original-cast series, outside of VI.

It's one of the few Star Treks that is grounded in an original, interesting scifi premise that harkens back to the original series, at least in spirit (non-humanoid alien species that comes to earth, but not to communicate with humans).

It's one of the few that gives supporting cast their own moments, with humor that's very similar in tone to the original series.

It's not directly tied to any existing plot elements or mythology around the show, making it a bit more accessible.

The others are much more of a run-and-gun kind of scifi, more similar to Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, and Star Wars than they are to the original Star Trek, or require existing knowledge of the series in order to work well.

[Morris Schæffer]

BHAHAHAHA

http://www.empireonline.com/images/features/movie-poster-mash-up/tom-cruise/9.jpg

http://www.empireonline.com/images/features/movie-poster-mash-up/tom-cruise/19.jpg

http://www.empireonline.com/images/features/movie-poster-mash-up/tom-cruise/29.jpg

[B-side]

That looks awesome. I'll bet elixir gives it a 4.

It's not great.

[Dukefrukem]

Speaking of Eyes Without a Face, I will proceed to make you all want to seek out Franju's Judex in 3 minutes.

_HM_hN6uDvk

Queued on Netflix!

Edit: Not Queued... "Saved" - Netflix doesn't have it. :(

Is it on youtube or somewhere?

[Dukefrukem]

That looks awesome. I'll bet elixir gives it a 4.

:lol:

[Boner M]

It's not great.
I... agree. But that scene is awesome. Worth duping these shitty people for

[Derek]

I... agree. But that scene is awesome. Worth duping these shitty people for

I don't expect much, but I've always planned to watch Feuillade's and Franju's back-to-back.

[D_Davis]

Great article by Ebert on the state of film projection, and of how bad it sucks.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/05/the_dying_of_the_light.html

[Spun Lepton]

From Paris with Love is an extravaganza of, "What, really?" From Rhys-Meyers's douchebag VanDyke to a bodega that apparently has an attic filled with mounds of cocaine to one of the most ridiculous twists I've seen in a while. At least the shootouts were fun. 3/10

[B-side]

I... agree. But that scene is awesome. Worth duping these shitty people for

Yeah, I'm with you there. Definitely one of the highlights of the film.

[StanleyK]

Jackie Brown doesn't have as much meat on its bones as Tarantino's first two efforts, but as a caper film it's brilliantly executed and a lot of fun. It's his most 'mature' film up to that point in the sense that he restrains his self-indulgent impulses, and the plotting is the tightest with little excess. I'm not against excessiveness in cinema at all, mind you, but it seems to me that Tarantino does it less to bare his soul and essence on the screen (which is one of the biggest pleasures of art for me, like, say, what PT Anderson does) and more to please himself with his quirks. I prefer this more subdued approach from him; pretty much all of the dialogue felt essential and successful at building distinct personalities for its characters, and the cinematography was less functional, not a tool for telling the story but an ingrained part of it. Like I said, it's probably not as thematically rewarding as Reservoir Dogs or Pulp Fiction, but it's the most cinematic and entertaining of the three, and I wouldn't be surprised if it sticks with me- I already can't stop thinking about the ending, or that wonderful long shot following Jackie after the bag exchange at the mall, the soundtrack augmenting her projected nervousness to an almost unbearable level.

[Irish]

Hm. Jackie Brown is on Netflix Instant. I've only seen it once. I think I will watch it again.

[Dukefrukem]

Hm. Jackie Brown is on Netflix Instant. I've only seen it once. I think I will watch it again.

QT's worst, most boring, movie.

[Spun Lepton]

QT's worst, most boring, movie.

:crazy:

[Dukefrukem]

We've already had this discussion. Do we want to revisit it?

[Sven]

Death Race is awesome. First film of Anderson's I've seen with chops.

[Raiders]

Death Race is awesome. First film of Anderson's I've seen with chops.

Yeah I need to see this. Can't be the resident crazy if I haven't seem 'em all!

[StanleyK]

My Life to Live is pretty great. I think I definitely prefer this movie's long takes and inquisitive close-ups to the frantic jump cuts of Breathless, although I love that movie as well. I also loved how, even as the movie gets darker and Nana's situation worse, she remains generally cheerful and the movie's tone vaguely comic (this is basically the antithesis to the dreary Lilja 4-Ever, another film about young prostitution which makes the viewer miserable while providing no insight beyond the obvious). Godard's movie is clever without glorifying its own cleverness and very, very alive.

[Rowland]

Anderson's Death Race is kinda okay-ish, but I much prefer the Bartel original.

[Irish]

Death Race is waaaay over the top and completely cheesy. It'd be unwatchable without Statham.

But I agree it's probably the closest PT Anderson has ever come to being interesting and coherent, ie "good."

[Rowland]

I haven't seen Event Horizon in too long to really stick by it, but that used to be my favorite Anderson film. Considering those that I've actually seen in the last decade, my favorite is probably his most unabashedly cheesy, Mortal Kombat.

[Sven]

Death Race is waaaay over the top and completely cheesy. It'd be unwatchable without Statham.

If you're averse to to over the top and cheesy, I don't know why you're watching "Death Race" in the first place.

[Ezee E]

Frat House, which was Todd Phillips' first movie to get him recognized certainly glorifies the dark, ridiculous side that you hear about in fraternities. Unfortunately, the movie doesn't point out that the fraternities were not recognized by the University, and that some of the hazing is staged and/or reshot.

Still effective and engrossing throughout. Highlights are seeing a breakdown from one of the "Brothers" as he screams at the Phillips' over the phone and while they are inside a van.

[Irish]

If you're averse to to over the top and cheesy, I don't know why you're watching "Death Race" in the first place.

Who said anything about aversion? Over the top and cheesy can still be entertaining.

[Russ]

Over the top and cheesy can still be entertaining.
Yes, it certainly can be.


Who said anything about aversion?
Your qualifier about Statham in your quote below, following on the heels of your remark about the film being over the top and cheesy, seemed to imply it.


Death Race is waaaay over the top and completely cheesy. It'd be unwatchable without Statham.

[Scar]

If you're averse to to over the top and cheesy, I don't know why you're watching "Death Race" in the first place.

Death Race is quality cheese entertainment, especially when you've been on the road all week.

[Irish]

Your qualifier about Statham in your quote below, following on the heels of your remark about the film being over the top and cheesy, seemed to imply it.

An attempt at temperance, because in no way, shape or form is Death Race "awesome."

It's twinkie entertainment. You might enjoy the consumption and get a rush from it, but you'll also forget all about it 5 minutes later.

[Sven]

It's twinkie entertainment. You might enjoy the consumption and get a rush from it, but you'll also forget all about it 5 minutes later.

Using the second person when talking about films should be grounds for banishment.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Using the second person when talking about films should be grounds for banishment.

A very specific kind of banishment...

http://www.crossfitnmb.com/uploads/northmiamibeach/image/blog%20photos/Winter%20Wod%202/mad_max_beyond_thunderdome.jpg

[elixir]

My Life to Live is pretty great. I think I definitely prefer this movie's long takes and inquisitive close-ups to the frantic jump cuts of Breathless, although I love that movie as well. I also loved how, even as the movie gets darker and Nana's situation worse, she remains generally cheerful and the movie's tone vaguely comic (this is basically the antithesis to the dreary Lilja 4-Ever, another film about young prostitution which makes the viewer miserable while providing no insight beyond the obvious). Godard's movie is clever without glorifying its own cleverness and very, very alive.

I love this movie. My favorite Godard, in fact. I'm not really a huge fan of Breathless; it's actually one of my least favorite of his, though it's the first one I saw, so maybe I owe it a rewatch.

This movie has so many great segments, my favorite being Nana's dance and her watching The Passion of Joan of Arc. And I have a huge crush on Anna Karina, but I definitely think that this is her best performance. I'm getting an itch to watch this again now.

[StanleyK]

This movie has so many great segments, my favorite being Nana's dance and her watching The Passion of Joan of Arc. And I have a huge crush on Anna Karina, but I definitely think that this is her best performance. I'm getting an itch to watch this again now.

Oh yes, she's magnificent in it. She can command the screen with the back of her head, and hold her own in a scene featuring footage of Maria Falconetti's performance; that's just about the highest praise I can think of for an actress.

[Irish]

Using the second person when talking about films should be grounds for banishment.

Hm. One would will accept banishment if it means one would not have to hear the opinions of those who think movies like Deathrace are "awesome."

To put it another way: You try and meet people half way, yet you still end up on a donkey wearing a Mardi Gras mask.

[Derek]

Using the second person when talking about films should be grounds for banishment.

Yeah, you've gotta be extra careful about that.


Millennium Mambo (Hou Hsiao-Hsien, 2001) 8

:pritch:

[Sven]

Hm. One would will accept banishment if it means one would not have to hear the opinions of those who think movies like Deathrace are "awesome."

By all means, go. ;)


To put it another way: You try and meet people half way, yet you still end up on a donkey wearing a Mardi Gras mask.

Telling other people how they are going to feel is the worst way to get one's point across. You tell me I'll forget about it five minutes later. It's been several hours and I'm still thinking about it, so... that's the end of you being right.

[Scar]

Hm. One would will accept banishment if it means one would not have to hear the opinions of those who think movies like Deathrace are "awesome."

To put it another way: You try and meet people half way, yet you still end up on a donkey wearing a Mardi Gras mask.

When the Hell do you try and meet people half way?

[StanleyK]

Fried Green Tomatoes was pretty dull. Aside from the acting and a few moments of inspired visual wit in an otherwise purely functional direction, I didn't find anything interesting about the film's story and how it conveys its themes. I mean, it's really easy to make your main character look good when pitted against ridiculous strawmen; and the flashback narrative, which seems to have little to do with the present-day story, is populated by thin, platitude-spouting cliché characters.

[Winston*]

Hey Sven, wasn't it great in Death Race when they bring out that giant death truck?

[Mara]

You know, the book was actually pretty good. Very different. Completely lacked that weird "Oh, HER all along" twist at the end.


..the flashback narrative, which seems to have little to do with the present-day story, is populated by thin, platitude-spouting cliché characters.

They also took out all the lesbianism.

[Irish]

You tell me I'll forget about it five minutes later. It's been several hours and I'm still thinking about it, so... that's the end of you being right.

When people tell you "I'll be back in a minute," do you whip out a stopwatch and time them?

I was speaking metaphorically, and I'm pretty sure you know that.

[Sven]

Hey Sven, wasn't it great in Death Race when they bring out that giant death truck?

...prompting one of the greatest things in movies I've seen recently:

Joan Allen delivering the line "Release the Dreadnought!" Its destruction by the Death's Head spike wall was spectacular demolition porn.

[Winston*]

I've forgotten almost all of almost all of the movies I've ever seen.

[Scar]

...prompting one of the greatest things in movies I've seen recently:

Joan Allen delivering the line "Release the Dreadnought!" Its destruction by the Death's Head spike wall was spectacular demolition porn.

I remember giggling a lot during this movie, and I think I certainly was during this part.

:pritch:

[Winston*]

...prompting one of the greatest things in movies I've seen recently:

Joan Allen delivering the line "Release the Dreadnought!" Its destruction by the Death's Head spike wall was spectacular demolition porn.

Oh man, I forgot it was called that. So funny.

[Sven]

I was speaking metaphorically, and I'm pretty sure you know that.

Metaphorically, like, you are me? Or I am you? Five minutes represents however long I remember it? Exaggeration is not a metaphor.

Anyway, I can't speak for you, but I find it very obnoxious when people tell me what I think and what I will and won't do. That's all I was getting at. Second person in critical contexts is like lemon juice on a canker sore.

[Sven]

I remember giggling a lot during this movie, and I think I certainly was during this part.

:pritch:

Ah, the memories!

:pritch:

[Bosco B Thug]

An attempt at temperance, because in no way, shape or form is Death Race "awesome."

It's twinkie entertainment. You might enjoy the consumption and get a rush from it, but you'll also forget all about it 5 minutes later. That's quite a segue between acknowledging Russ's gracious moderating, and further tirading. ;) Now has anyone declared Death Race a timeless masterpiece yet? What, no one has?

To side with Irish, though, I use that 2nd person address a lot when I'm trying to make a point.

In conclusion: Death Race is satisfying gross spectacle.

[Sven]

To side with Irish, though, I use that 2nd person address a lot when I'm trying to make a point.

I understand that to many, it is an easy go-to figure of speech. However, it is one that must be eradicated.

[Winston*]

What's worse in film criticism: second person or first person plural?

[Bosco B Thug]

I understand that to many, it is an easy go-to figure of speech. However, it is one that must be eradicated. Pish posh, let me condescend snappily to the people now and then, why don't you.

[Bosco B Thug]

Also, Sven, I see you thought Tucker & Dale vs. Evil was a "stupid" movie. It is. It doesn't quite create an air of irreverence enough (in fact, it's somewhat incompetent at it) to not make all the fatal mishaps anything but eye-rolling.

But, to the supporters and those who think they might like this, I'll admit to enjoying the genre-deconstructing premise and characters and film overall a good bit, though. It's quite likable.

And I'm wondering why this is having such a hard time getting to DVD, it was out in Sundance a year ago.

[Sven]

Also, Sven, I see you thought Tucker & Dale vs. Evil was a "stupid" movie. It is.

Oh man. Forgot all about that one. Lovable lunkheads, sure, but something so incompetently executed is hard for me to recommend.

[Irish]

Anyway, I can't speak for you, but I find it very obnoxious when people tell me what I think and what I will and won't do. That's all I was getting at. Second person in critical contexts is like lemon juice on a canker sore.

Collective use of "you" versus the personal. Difference.


Metaphorically, like, you are me? Or I am you? Five minutes represents however long I remember it? Exaggeration is not a metaphor.

Metaphor and hyperbole are used to create emphasis and effect. (Remember high school English?)

For example, when Bosco says ...


Now has anyone declared Death Race a timeless masterpiece yet? What, no one has?

... he's using hyperbole (and sarcasm) for a specific effect.

(And no, Bosco, nobody called it anything approaching a masterpiece. My only point was that calling Death Race "awesome" -- both in its strict dictionary definition and its slang meaning -- is an enormous reach.

That's why I tried to temper Sven's enthusiasm with the words "entertaining," "cheesy," and "forgettable," lest anyone actually think this movie is good.)

[Sven]

Collective use of "you" versus the personal. Difference.

No less presumptive and certainly no less obnoxious. That it's even up for question is weird. It's irritating English. But I can drop this if you can.


Metaphor and hyperbole are used to create emphasis and effect. (Remember high school English?)

Yes, but you weren't using metaphor. Is all I'm saying. And I know you were exaggerating about five minutes. Still, it's a silly thing to insist that I will forget about the film. You have no idea what kind of retaining power my brain has.


That's why I tried to temper Sven's enthusiasm with the words "entertaining," "cheesy," and "forgettable," lest anyone actually think this movie is good.)

Lest anyone decide to take Irish's word for it, I am going to go ahead and repeat my claim of the film's awesomeness, knowing full well how that word is defined, and I'm going to go one further and suggest it is also good, in the traditional sense.

[Ezee E]

So Somewhere. Forty minutes in and I've decided to call it a night. I'll watch the rest tomorrow and hope it improves.

[Henry Gale]

So Somewhere. Forty minutes in and I've decided to call it a night. I'll watch the rest tomorrow and hope it improves.

Nah, you probably already got the gist of it.

Just imagine some more scenes of Dorff and Fanning playing Guitar Hero, eating, or sitting together comfortably for long, uninterrupted shots as Coppola presses play on her iPod / husband. But don't forget, just because they haven't spend a whole lotta time together before doesn't mean they can't start now!

[transmogrifier]

Using the second person when talking about films should be grounds for banishment.

Making silly proclamations about simple rhetorical devices should be grounds for a severe wet-willy.

The difference between "you can't help but feel confused" and "the movie is confusing" = 0.

I like how the second person reads.

[Boner M]

Australian rating certificates on DVD/Blus are the most annoying thing ever.

http://cdn2.fishpond.co.nz/9322225085121-crop-325x325.jpg

FFUUUUUUUUUU

[transmogrifier]

I understand that to many, it is an easy go-to figure of speech. However, it is one that must be eradicated.

Whatever. You find it creates a more intimate relationship between the reader and the writer - subtly calling you in to the conversation and making the discussion seem more universal.

I mean, when someone says "Man, you can't help but wonder what goes into a sausage" do you get all indignant and shout "I have never wondered that! Stop thinking for me!"

Because that would be crazy.


No less presumptive and certainly no less obnoxious. That it's even up for question is weird. It's irritating English.


It's up for question because, luckily, your word is not law. Because if it was, you'd find the English language to be a whole lot less interesting.

[Scar]

From Paris with Love is an extravaganza of, "What, really?" From Rhys-Meyers's douchebag VanDyke to a bodega that apparently has an attic filled with mounds of cocaine to one of the most ridiculous twists I've seen in a while. At least the shootouts were fun. 3/10

Man, I absolutely LOVE this movie. Absoultely, gloriously over the top.

[B-side]

Australian rating certificates on DVD/Blus are the most annoying thing ever.

http://cdn2.fishpond.co.nz/9322225085121-crop-325x325.jpg

FFUUUUUUUUUU

Wow. Completely murders the aesthetic of that cover, which would have otherwise been very pleasing.

Nice World's Greatest Dad rating, btw.

[dmk]

Come on, World's Greatest Dad is maudlin shite.

I'm proud of Australia's ratings. And obviously OFLC are too, as our covers carry the largest fucking certificates in the world.

[B-side]

Come on, World's Greatest Dad is maudlin shite.

Maudlin is about the last word I'd use to describe that movie.

[Spun Lepton]

Maudlin is about the last word I'd use to describe that movie.

Agreed.

[Sven]

The difference between "you can't help but feel confused" and "the movie is confusing" = 0.

The subject of those two statements is different. One is talking about the movie and the other is talking about the viewer. Also, one is uglier. Hint: it's the one with more words that makes fewer assumptions.


You find it creates a more intimate relationship between the reader and the writer - subtly calling you in to the conversation and making the discussion seem more universal.

And if I don't? There's nothing subtle about it at all. Universal? Dictatorial.


It's up for question because, luckily, your word is not law. Because if it was, you'd find the English language to be a whole lot less interesting.

Would I, though? And "interesting" is not the way I'd describe your use of the second person here.

[Qrazy]

Sunday Bloody Sunday - Love me some Schlesinger.

[soitgoes...]

Sunday Bloody Sunday - Love me some Schlesinger.

Schlesinger fails me.

And yes I know, I fail you. Or my mom fails me. Or something.

[Qrazy]

Schlesinger fails me.

And yes I know, I fail you. Or my mom fails me. Or something.

You just don't get him. :lol: ;)

[transmogrifier]

The subject of those two statements is different. One is talking about the movie and the other is talking about the viewer. Also, one is uglier. Hint: it's the one with more words that makes fewer assumptions.


Wow, your paranoia runs deep on this issue. Both statements are talking about the movie - just in different ways using different rhetorical devices. I may have teased you in the past about your love for certain movies, but this is the first time I actually think you are totally off-base.

It is a RHETORICAL device. The use of "you" does NOT literally mean that the reader will absolutely feel confused when they come to watch the movie. Seriously, it just doesn't. Never has, never will.

EDIT: To help you out, in general the use of "you" in the simple present tense in writing (e.g. This restaurant always treats you well) indicates that "you" is being used like "anyone", or referring to an unspecified individual or group of individuals. This is a very common usage, been around for centuries ("You know, the more you think about it, the more common it appears")

However, used in the future tense, "you" almost always indicates a specific person (in the case of criticism, the reader)

So there is a clear difference between:

"This movie grabs you by the throat and never lets go"
and
"This movie will grab you by the throat and never let go"

Some reviewers may well be guilty of using the latter, and fair enough for disliking it. But the former, the one that I've been using, is common, non-threatening or assumptive, and in many ways very elegant (though my example is not; I do not condone the use of that particular phrase, just the use of "you" within it).

So, in other words, get over it.

[dmk]

Maudlin is about the last word I'd use to describe that movie.
Agreed.
You are kidding, right? The film with Robin Williams? The one where his son dies and everyone gives him a high-five and a hug in slow-motion to instrumental music?

It’s 40% dick jokes and 60% sap. This is Bobcat’s style and basis, you can’t just deny it like you deny your existence. Sleeping Dogs Lie is meeker, evenly supplying jokes about bestiality with its saccharine sentiment, but even then it's tonally half-assed. I guess it’s a little interesting as a result. Also, a lot of people with bad taste loved it at MIFF last year, so I'll have that as a backup.

[balmakboor]

I didn't realize Miss Congeniality was such a collector's item. It is selling used for one billion dollars.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=amb_link_85221991_11?ie=UT F8&rs=130&bbn=130&rnid=387545011&rh=n%3A130%2Cp_n_binding_brows e-bin%3A387546011&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=left-1&pf_rd_r=09153V61145YH4B0EYPH&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=1299020482&pf_rd_i=130#/ref=sr_st?bbn=130&qid=1306548668&rh=n%3A130&sort=-price

[Idioteque Stalker]

The one where his son dies and everyone gives him a high-five and a hug in slow-motion to instrumental music?

It works brilliantly because of the context of his relationship with his son/writing career. The only reason that movie isn't completely awesome is Williams' revelation and what not near the end, in which your misplaced criticism is warranted.

[Russ]

I didn't realize Miss Congeniality was such a collector's item. It is selling used for one billion dollars.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=amb_link_85221991_11?ie=UT F8&rs=130&bbn=130&rnid=387545011&rh=n%3A130%2Cp_n_binding_brows e-bin%3A387546011&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=left-1&pf_rd_r=09153V61145YH4B0EYPH&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=1299020482&pf_rd_i=130#/ref=sr_st?bbn=130&qid=1306548668&rh=n%3A130&sort=-price
Well it *is* the deluxe edition.

[Dead & Messed Up]

It is a RHETORICAL device. The use of "you" does NOT literally mean that the reader will absolutely feel confused when they come to watch the movie. Seriously, it just doesn't. Never has, never will.

I can understand Sven's frustration. I try to avoid the second-person altogether, since it has an assumptive quality that disagrees with me. Other ways of writing work better. I don't think that it's bunching-of-the-undies worthy, though; I reserve that level of anger for "needless to say" and "could care less."

[Boner M]

You are kidding, right? The film with Robin Williams? The one where his son dies and everyone gives him a high-five and a hug in slow-motion to instrumental music?

It’s 40% dick jokes and 60% sap. This is Bobcat’s style and basis, you can’t just deny it like you deny your existence. Sleeping Dogs Lie is meeker, evenly supplying jokes about bestiality with its saccharine sentiment, but even then it's tonally half-assed. I guess it’s a little interesting as a result. Also, a lot of people with bad taste loved it at MIFF last year, so I'll have that as a backup.
It's rudimentary filmmaking and those music montages are bad except for the Akron/Family one that ends the first act, but Williams is excellent and the scenes between him and his son just sting with truth, esp. Williams' stoned bedside chat with him. Dunno how you can take issue with 'sap' when the kid has basically no redeeming qualities whatsoever. I kept nervously waiting for a moment when he's granted a moment of humanity, and was impressed that Goldthwait held back. Anyway I'll just do the lazy thing and quote this perfect paragraph from Sicinski:


But what WGD gets right, with a jarring precision, is the gulf between who our family members are and who we wish they were. Lance Clayton (Robin Williams) knows full well that his son Kyle (a transformed, post-pubescent Daryl Sabara) is a complete asshole. (In one sense, WGD is almost like a Rosencrantz and Guildenstern riff on Rushmore, opting to follow the "inner life" of one of Bill Murray's dickwad sons instead of Max Fischer.) When Kyle dies as a result of a humiliating accident, Lance is devastated, not only for the loss of the son he truly loved but for the loss of hope, the loss of future potential. Naturally this is true of all parents who lose children, but part of what Goldthwait is showing here is that Lance has lost any chance that Kyle would ever be fundamentally worthwhile. He knows his son was worthless, which of course doesn't mitigate his basic fatherly love for the boy. And so, in an act of almost indistinguishable selfishness and generosity, Lance seizes the opportunity to "remake" Kyle as someone he and others could be proud of.

[Qrazy]

I reserve that level of anger for "needless to say" and "couldn't care less."

Um... there's nothing wrong with either of those?

[Spinal]

I was going to post Movieline's Top 10 Twist Endings of the Decade, but then High Tension was on there at #4 and I decided that I couldn't possibly endorse that.

[Idioteque Stalker]

I was going to post Movieline's Top 10 Twist Endings of the Decade, but then High Tension was on there at #4 and I decided that I couldn't possibly endorse that.

My ambivalence toward this list and twist endings in general was belied by my astounding eagerness to see what was on it. And I just got rickroll'd thanks to you.

[Spinal]

And I just got rickroll'd thanks to you.

Yeah, that was the other reason I didn't post it.

[Sven]

So, in other words, get over it.

Thanks for the help.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Um... there's nothing wrong with either of those?

"Needless to say" pisses me right the fuck off, because if it's needless to say, what the hell is the author doing saying it? Why is he or she wasting my time? I thought the point they were making was needless to say.

And I meant to write "could care less." Which is even worse.

[transmogrifier]

"Needless to say" pisses me right the fuck off, because if it's needless to say, what the hell is the author doing saying it? Why is he or she wasting my time? I thought the point they were making was needless to say.

And I meant to write "couldn't care less." Which is even worse.

People who take turns of phrase literally and get angered by them confuse me.

"If you ask me -"
"I didn't ask you! Go to hell!"

"Well, in my opinion -"
"Of course it's your opinion, you're talking, ain't ya!" Go take a flying fuck at a rolling donut!"

"Young actresses are a dime a dozen in Hollywood"
"What the fuck are you talking about!! Even the worst off actress would earn thousands of dollars a year, you mutherfucker!"

[transmogrifier]

Thanks for the help.

Assuming you read the rest of the post, you're welcome.

PS: In this case, "you" means you, Sven. In case you were wondering.

[Rowland]

I kept nervously waiting for a moment when he's granted a moment of humanity, and was impressed that Goldthwait held back:I thought the dinner scene between Williams, Sabara, and the girlfriend showed the slighted glimmer of humanity in Sabara, so that while he was hardly redeemed, he nevertheless displayed some glimmer of potential for being a real person instead of the monster he was otherwise portrayed as. It was minor, but a rather touching grace note all the same. And yeah, what the film mostly had going for it otherwise were the performances by Sabara and especially Williams. The second half was pretty lame though.

[Rowland]

Man, I absolutely LOVE this movie. Absoultely, gloriously over the top.Yep, it's a lot of fun. Ditto the overlooked District 13: Ultimatum, another product of the Luc Besson factory from last year.

[Qrazy]

"Needless to say" pisses me right the fuck off, because if it's needless to say, what the hell is the author doing saying it? Why is he or she wasting my time? I thought the point they were making was needless to say.

And I meant to write "couldn't care less." Which is even worse.

Because the meaning of the phrase is that it's so self-evident you need not say it and yet the individual is saying it regardless. 'It may be needless to say, but I'll say it anyway, hand guns kill people... so stop buying them people!'

You did write couldn't care less the first time and there's still nothing wrong with it.

[Boner M]

The Docks of New York - Was expecting this to be a dreamy, unabashedly sentimental lost-soul romance along the lines of Frank Borzage, and though it is plenty atmospheric, I was taken aback by how understated the central relationship is. There's a scene early on with George Bancroft exhaling cigarette smoke amidst a cloud of fake fog, and it's a perfect encapsulation of Sternberg's blend of the the earthbound and the dreamily abstract; a mixture of ships-passing-in-the-night swooniness and the mundane reality of labor. The attempted suicide scene is a doozy of formal mastery, but two mirroring camera moves also stand out - a backward tracking through a bar, and later through a courtroom - the implications of this visual echo sent me into a melancholy daze.

Under the Sun of Satan - Pialat mostly abandons his usual crude, impressionistic realism for elegant classicism married jarringly to an almost Brechtian approach, in this story of a country priest's crisis of faith. Dreyer and Bresson come to mind, naturally, and the anti-illusion, alienation effects and focus on blunt materiality reminiscent of the former (rarely has weather being rendered so tactilely) are perfectly in sync with the film's aura of godlessness. Took me a while to get into the groove of the whole thing - the theological dialogues seeming clunky until it clicked that Pialat wasn't going for naturalism, but it's an undeniably intriguing film that deserves a repeat viewing.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Because the meaning of the phrase is that it's so self-evident you need not say it and yet the individual is saying it regardless.

This isn't a counter-argument; it's just a re-phrasing of what I said. Explain to me the value of "needless to say" as a phrase, other than as an apologetic for what the author admits is unnecessary.


You did write couldn't care less the first time and there's still nothing wrong with it.

Wait a second.

This site auto-corrects to "couldn't care less."

I thought I was going crazy for a second there.

Anyway, the phrase I was referring to subtracts the "n't" from "couldn't."

[Sven]

PS: In this case, "you" means you, Sven. In case you were wondering.

It's an irritation. I'm not an idiot.

[Qrazy]

This isn't a counter-argument; it's just a re-phrasing of what I said. Explain to me the value of "needless to say" as a phrase, other than as an apologetic for what the author admits is unnecessary.

I just don't see it as much different from... beyond any doubt, obviously, without question... plus with needless to say you can use it ironically which is harder to do with obviously. For instance... 'I got a girl's number last night. But when I dialed it I got a voicemail for an animal shelter. Needless to say, I am the world's greatest pick up artist of all time.'


Wait a second.

This site auto-corrects to "couldn't care less."

I thought I was going crazy for a second there.

Anyway, the phrase I was referring to subtracts the "n't" from "couldn't."

Ahaha okay yes, in that case I agree.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I just don't see it as much different from... beyond any doubt, obviously, without question

All of those put emphasis on certainty, not necessity.


... plus with needless to say you can use it ironically which is harder to do with obviously. For instance... 'I got a girl's number last night. But when I dialed it I got a voicemail for an animal shelter. Needless to say, I am the world's greatest pick up artist of all time.'

I think "clearly" works better in that situation than "needless to say."

Anyway, semantic digression. Back to what matters:

I like movies.

[B-side]

It's hard to assess Two Rode Together in the context of Ford's filmography as it doesn't feel all that much like a Ford film. Formally, it feels purely paint by numbers. No Ford landscapes or iconography, mostly just intimate racially-tinged drama. It's easily the harshest and most cynical Ford I've seen, which lends itself to some great humor early on. Unfortunately, though I'd say the content is characteristic of the changing sensibilities of the western and Ford's aging, it lacks the overarching emotional sweep I love about his work. Maybe it feels too calculated. There are great moments in it, however, that do encompass that emotional sweep. Too few and far between, though. Stewart is very entertaining.

[Raiders]

B-side, you gotten to The Sun Shines Bright yet? Of all the Fords I have yet to see, it is the most intriguing to me and I have seen a lot of love for it in certain critical circles.

[B-side]

B-side, you gotten to The Sun Shines Bright yet? Of all the Fords I have yet to see, it is the most intriguing to me and I have seen a lot of love for it in certain critical circles.

I haven't, but I've heard identical praise. Neither the description nor screenshots grabbed me right away, and the rip is from a VHS, so I've waited, but I'll likely cave here soon.

[StanleyK]

Dreaming is a perfect subject for Kon's usual merging of reality with the subconscious' perception of it, and fittingly Paprika is his best work (only by a hair though, he was awesome). It's a great film about the mind's power to conjure up fantastic scenarios, molding them from our life and then in turn changing how we see the world, while also being a wonderful ode to the movies, and its story of a grief-stricken man coming to terms with his past thanks to a girl helping him through his dreams is, for my money, much more involving than the similar Inception. Just like that movie, though, this one's plagued by blunt expository dialogue, which I'm starting to notice is a problem I have with virtually all the Japanese animation I see. I don't know how or why having characters loudly announce their state of mind and point out plainly visible and obvious things became a trope with anime, but it's there and it hurts even my favorites. Other than that, I can't think of too much I didn't like about Paprika; the music, particularly, is very vibrant and fun, and the refrigerator parade is awesome.

[Mara]

Finally decided to see Babe: Pig in the City after hearing both good and ill over the years. I really ended up enjoying it, but I have to admit all the animal endangerment really freaked me out.

[Raiders]

The Trial of Joan of Arc - Wow. I know I'm already a big Bresson believer, but I did not expect this. The rhythms of this film are entirely disorienting while staying equally flat and monotone (as Bresson is wont to do). There is never an establishing shot, just a series of scenes which themselves are nothing but a series of rapid-fire questions. Where Dreyer used the inherent strengths of silent cinema to portray the experience of Joan's trial--the intimate close-ups to her face and the cutting between her agony and the almost-grotesque church leaders--Bresson instead uses the dialogue and the quick cadence and the unrelenting questioning, the endless doubting and schemes to bring about the tireless oppression Joan faced. Interestingly this is a film as powerful for its dialogue than any visual rhythms. Similarly to Dreyer, Bresson doesn't make any attempt to make Joan a personable or intimate character; we don't ever know anything outside what is presented to us at the trial; our reaction to her is purely based on the circumstance and the conviction of her (what we see, not what she feels). Nobody will ever match Falconetti's performance, one so powerful in its honest-yet-heightened emotion and agony, but Florence Delay manages to create a great "model" for Bresson's vision. She never seems awkward and despite the expected lack of emoting, she convincingly expresses the same weariness we also feel while experience the barrage of assaults and questioning while standing firmly enough to provide Joan's conviction and assured demeanor. Less successful I think are the quick cuts to the English leaders attempting to secure her fate and corrupting the bishop, but I think Bresson successfully doesn't flesh it out to its own storyline and keeps us reserved to a perspective similar to Joan's: aware of the desires, corruption and scheming but never fully seeing the larger picture. Still, Bresson finds a final image that is as overwhelming as any: the burned stake standing alone, a shot that brings to mind a certain Biblical individual's final sacrifice and who also happens to be the final word Joan utters (it also leaves me wondering if the cut to a dog moments earlier doesn't give way to Bresson's masterpiece four years later).

Never Let Me Go - I haven't read Ishiguro's novel, but I wonder if it too is as coy with the overall details of this alternate history as the film. Romanek and Garland give little specifics and instead focus their energy squarely on the clones (though this word is never uttered and no science is ever referenced), namely Carey Mulligan's Cathy. I like the idea of approaching the scenario of human clones bred strictly for the purpose of donating organs without the necessity of Michael Bay blowing shit up and focusing solely on the impact on those clones without the necessity of corporations and science factoring in. Pity though that for the most part, we learn little about these characters as individuals which seems antithetical to the film's stance on the human-vs-clone argument. Andrew Garfield's Tommy rages, Cathy is sensitive and Keira Knightley's Ruth is... well, not. That's about it. The shifts in time show less a new chapter rather than the same old shit just years later. There is an implied poignancy to the time shifts that relates to the expected lifeline Sally Hawkins' sensitive teacher laid out (this last stage is "old age" for them--complete with forms and signatures when death occurs), but the film is one muted-tone too many. Luckily, Mulligan's performance is quietly fierce, suggesting an understanding of her purpose that the weak Ruth and innocently ignorant Tommy don't fully grasp or want to face. Her reaction to the news about the reality of the "deferrals" (which honestly was as obvious as could be) is powerful and gives the implication she knew the truth all along. Sadly, in spite of her efforts, the film still leaves only a marginal impact and the final moments hit with only a small nudge.

[Idioteque Stalker]

Just watched Contempt for the first time in years and I'm kind of torn up. I suppose my sixteen-year-old self loved it on a formal level, but at that time in my life I seriously doubt I could've understood romantic conflict so complex, messy, intangible, etc. (It reminds me of last year's Everyone Else in this way.) Godard handled Bardot wonderfully, somehow not objectifying her as much as making another character out of her incredible beauty--one that not only inspires arousal but also jealousy and resentment.

If someone can convince me that 1) the camera pointed at us in the prologue suggests more than "oooh, meta and it's about me!" and 2) that the car accident shouldn't have been scrapped with the first draft of the script... then I think it could be my new favorite Godard.

[Boner M]

Fine, I'll watch Trial and Contempt again.

[Winston*]

Thought World's Greatest Dad that I watched last night was better than The Ghost Writer that I watched last week. Less boring.

I think those might be the only two movies I've watched in the last two months. Similar subject matter in a way.

[Dukefrukem]

First Contact is on. And it's awesome.

Also, Trying to wrap up Spielberg's filmography.
Changing my Munich grade. It might be one of his best films. Will sleep on it.

[Ezee E]

Changing my Munich grade. It might be one of his best films. Will sleep on it.

Good. Cause it isn't. :)

Why the change of opinion?

[Lucky]

Never Let Me Go - I haven't read Ishiguro's novel, but I wonder if it too is as coy with the overall details of this alternate history as the film. Romanek and Garland give little specifics and instead focus their energy squarely on the clones (though this word is never uttered and no science is ever referenced), namely Carey Mulligan's Cathy. I like the idea of approaching the scenario of human clones bred strictly for the purpose of donating organs without the necessity of Michael Bay blowing shit up and focusing solely on the impact on those clones without the necessity of corporations and science factoring in. Pity though that for the most part, we learn little about these characters as individuals which seems antithetical to the film's stance on the human-vs-clone argument. Andrew Garfield's Tommy rages, Cathy is sensitive and Keira Knightley's Ruth is... well, not. That's about it. The shifts in time show less a new chapter rather than the same old shit just years later. There is an implied poignancy to the time shifts that relates to the expected lifeline Sally Hawkins' sensitive teacher laid out (this last stage is "old age" for them--complete with forms and signatures when death occurs), but the film is one muted-tone too many. Luckily, Mulligan's performance is quietly fierce, suggesting an understanding of her purpose that the weak Ruth and innocently ignorant Tommy don't fully grasp or want to face. Her reaction to the news about the reality of the "deferrals" (which honestly was as obvious as could be) is powerful and gives the implication she knew the truth all along. Sadly, in spite of her efforts, the film still leaves only a marginal impact and the final moments hit with only a small nudge.

Believe it or not, the novel is even more stagnant than the film. I mostly agree with you on your points, but I found it a bit more affecting than you did. The film left me with impressions and images that haunted me for a few days and lingered a plesant air -- perhaps the same will happen with you.

[dmk]

It works brilliantly because of the context of his relationship with his son/writing career. The only reason that movie isn't completely awesome is Williams' revelation and what not near the end, in which your misplaced criticism is warranted.
It's rudimentary filmmaking and those music montages are bad except for the Akron/Family one that ends the first act, but Williams is excellent and the scenes between him and his son just sting with truth, esp. Williams' stoned bedside chat with him. Dunno how you can take issue with 'sap' when the kid has basically no redeeming qualities whatsoever. I kept nervously waiting for a moment when he's granted a moment of humanity, and was impressed that Goldthwait held back. Anyway I'll just do the lazy thing and quote this perfect paragraph from Sicinski:

I don’t feel adept to counter anything said (I watched it, like, a long time ago), but I stand by my general reaction, although glancing at my diary, I noted at the time something along the lines of ‘some moments work really well in retarded left-field ways' (they don't come to mind though), although I do also use "maudlin", "inept" and "its want for 'meaningful' drama seldom working" without context.

Heh, Sicinski. I'll quote Nick Schager's better paragraph:

Goldthwait's aesthetic remains crude, here heavily reliant on music montages set to on-the-nose lyrics. More frustrating still, however, is that despite his conceit's potential for investigating loneliness, self-deception, and the malleable and easily exploitable nature of memory, Goldthwait's zigzagging script keeps things surface-trivial while failing to meld its discordant tendencies. Sentimentality neuters its faux-ribald humor, which in turn trivializes its somberness.

But,
Thought World's Greatest Dad that I watched last night was better than The Ghost Writer that I watched last week. Less boring. this totally corresponds to what I’ve been saying, and gives me consent to feel superior to everyone not with me. And I mean that with my whole heart.


EDIT- That last part came out horrible, I'm sorry. What I meant was that, going by general word of those I know, most of those "I heart World's Greatest Dad" folk at MIFF were either underwhelmed or offended by Ghost Writer, which was a masterpiece. How the hell do I get out of this fucking post?

[Winston*]

Well, I think you're the phillistine dmk for having the opposite opinion as me. (Phillistine is the worst insult anyone can ever be given*).


*and if you don't agree, you're a phillistine.

[transmogrifier]

The Ghost Writer, a masterpiece? By that reckoning, the bowl of oatmeal I had this morning was a masterpiece of cuisine.

[Dead & Messed Up]

By that reckoning, the bowl of oatmeal I had this morning was a masterpiece of cuisine.

Sure, but the sequel's going to be crap.

[Derek]

The Ghost Writer, a masterpiece? By that reckoning, the bowl of oatmeal I had this morning was a masterpiece of cuisine.

Either this means you were underwhelmed by Ghost Writer or you love oatmeal. I'm fine with both!

[Derek]

Sure, but the sequel's going to be crap.

The reboot with grits stepping in for oatmeal is when it really gets embarrassing, though Duke will still be excited to try it.

[Irish]

Sure, but the sequel's going to be crap.

I see what you did there. -.-

[elixir]

The Tree of Life (Malick, 2011) ****

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

[elixir]

I'm thinking of going through and watching all the short films on the Brief Encounters list on icheckmovies.com. Should I post thoughts on each one in a thread...I mean, would people be interested in that? Or no? If no, ignore this. If yes...say so. It's fine either way of course.

[soitgoes...]

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

The red hurts the eyes.

[Watashi]

Seeing Lawrence of Arabia on the big screen tomorrow. First viewing. Can't fucking wait.

[transmogrifier]

Either this means you were underwhelmed by Ghost Writer or you love oatmeal. I'm fine with both!

Oatmeal is just fine. But it is not exactly what I would put foward as the pinnacle of the human culinary experience.

[soitgoes...]

Seeing Lawrence of Arabia on the big screen tomorrow. First viewing. Can't fucking wait.

I've seen it twice in a theater, and it's a pretty amazing experience. I hope you get a good print. The last time I saw it, the print was pretty worn. Still I loved it.

[Dukefrukem]

Good. Cause it isn't. :)

Why the change of opinion?

When I saw it years ago, I remember being very bored. I think it had a lot to do with me not knowing much about the events. There's so many things I like about it on the second viewing. How scared they were after the first kill, how it goes silent before they set a bomb off, the explosion in the hotel, the scene where they kill the whore... exceptional.

When I saw one of the best, there are still four movies that beat it.

[MadMan]

Australian rating certificates on DVD/Blus are the most annoying thing ever.

http://cdn2.fishpond.co.nz/9322225085121-crop-325x325.jpg

FFUUUUUUUUUUThat cover is terrible. I'm glad its on Blu Ray, though.

As much as I like Contempt, the ending is one of the movie's weakest parts. Good movie otherwise, and it was actually the first Godard I watched.

[baby doll]

Just watched Contempt for the first time in years and I'm kind of torn up. I suppose my sixteen-year-old self loved it on a formal level, but at that time in my life I seriously doubt I could've understood romantic conflict so complex, messy, intangible, etc. (It reminds me of last year's Everyone Else in this way.) Godard handled Bardot wonderfully, somehow not objectifying her as much as making another character out of her incredible beauty--one that not only inspires arousal but also jealousy and resentment.

If someone can convince me that 1) the camera pointed at us in the prologue suggests more than "oooh, meta and it's about me!" and 2) that the car accident shouldn't have been scrapped with the first draft of the script... then I think it could be my new favorite Godard.1. There's a narrative justification in that it's a movie about filmmaking set partly on the back lot at CinecittÃ* (even if this shot exists outside the digesis). And the film ends with a similar shot of a tracking shot being executed, so there's an abstract formal justification as well.

2. That shot is awkward and perfunctory, but storytelling was never Godard's strong suit. In any case, considering what Godard does right, I can't see any reason to get all uptight about a couple of small flaws here and there.

[StanleyK]

I don't know why it took me such a long time to see my first John Ford film, but only today did I do so with Stagecoach. I wasn't terribly impressed; there's some strong craftsmanship, to be sure, but not enough to elevate the thin story and weak characterizations. The one action scene there is also gets pretty repetitive after a while: long shots, then a medium shot isolating an Apache, shot of John Wayne shooting at him, Apache is done for. The ending stand-off was much more well-executed, though. In the end what bothered me the most is the film's attitude towards women and natives, which I guess was to be expected but still not less of a problem.

[B-side]

I don't know why it took me such a long time to see my first John Ford film, but only today did I do so with Stagecoach. I wasn't terribly impressed; there's some strong craftsmanship, to be sure, but not enough to elevate the thin story and weak characterizations. The one action scene there is also gets pretty repetitive after a while: long shots, then a medium shot isolating an Apache, shot of John Wayne shooting at him, Apache is done for. The ending stand-off was much more well-executed, though. In the end what bothered me the most is the film's attitude towards women and natives, which I guess was to be expected but still not less of a problem.

Watch The Searchers. 7 Women is his best from a feminist standpoint, but certainly not his best film. I wouldn't go looking for modern feminism in a western. Ford loves his women, but they're not always a big focus of the narrative.

[Watashi]

Lawrence of Arabia in 70mm was amazing! This is the only way I could ever see it. I've been saving my first viewing for a theatrical viewing and it didn't disappoint.

The crowd was a little too into it. The place was packed and they treated it like a midnight showing of Harry Potter. They clapped and hollered at every character entrance and even said famous quotes out loud with the characters. It was kind of annoying. So many faux hipsters were there.

[Dead & Messed Up]

...said famous quotes out loud with the characters...

I hate this. I can't stand it. There was a lot of it at the Trek-a-thon I was at, and I wouldn't be able to handle it in Lawrence of Arabia. Ugh. What is it that compels people to say what the film's saying as it saying it?

[Winston*]

What's a faux hipster?

[Scar]

The crowd was a little too into it. The place was packed and they treated it like a midnight showing of Harry Potter. They clapped and hollered at every character entrance and even said famous quotes out loud with the characters. It was kind of annoying. So many faux hipsters were there.

Army of Darkness, sure. Star Trek, fine. Star Wars, fine. Snakes on a Plane, sure. Lawrence of A-freakin-rabia?! Fuck. That.

[EyesWideOpen]

I had the same problem when I saw A Clockwork Orange. The crowd was laughing hysterically at pretty much every moment in the movie. It's my favorite film and while it does have funny moments I find it quite disturbing to see people laughing out loud throughout the film.

[Mysterious Dude]

So, Bigger Than Life...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v281/Isaac3159/bigger-than-life-1.jpg

Intentional, or not?

[Watashi]

I had the same problem when I saw A Clockwork Orange. The crowd was laughing hysterically at pretty much every moment in the movie. It's my favorite film and while it does have funny moments I find it quite disturbing to see people laughing out loud throughout the film.
People were laughing hysterically during my showing yesterday. Sure, there are some funny moments in the film, but I was mostly grinning, not laughing like a hyena uncontrollably. I hate people like that.

[Raiders]

What the hell is there to laugh hysterically at in Lawrence of Arabia?

[Spinal]

You would think that anyone that familiar with Lawrence of Arabia would understand the opportunity to see it in 70mm is something that doesn't come along every day and be a little more respectful of those around them who actually want to watch the movie.

[Qrazy]

What's a faux hipster?

A description a hipster would use to describe other hipsters apparently.

[Ezee E]

What the hell is there to laugh hysterically at in Lawrence of Arabia?

That's what I was going to say.

I guess no movie gets away from the midnight screening treatment.

Like in 2001, monkeys!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Derek]

A description a hipster would use to describe other hipsters apparently.

That's a meta-hipster, silly.

As for lousy crowds, I guess I'm lucky that I've never had a bad experience at any of the screenings of classic films I've been to.

[MadMan]

You would think that anyone that familiar with Lawrence of Arabia would understand the opportunity to see it in 70mm is something that doesn't come along every day and be a little more respectful of those around them who actually want to watch the movie.Exactly. I would be really pissed at those people, and I'd probably get kicked out for yelling at them to shut the fuck up and watch the damn movie. You get a chance to view one of the greatest films of all time and you can't just view it in silence? *Shakes head*


I had the same problem when I saw A Clockwork Orange. The crowd was laughing hysterically at pretty much every moment in the movie. It's my favorite film and while it does have funny moments I find it quite disturbing to see people laughing out loud throughout the film.WTF is wrong with those people. That movie is disturbing throughout, and I didn't think any of it was really particularly funny. Eventually I'll do a write up for the film, but I think its interesting that I found the second act more beyond messed up than the first half. Even though there was rape and murder committed before Alex being "cured."

[Spun Lepton]

I saw midnight screenings for The Exorcist and The Shining and both audiences were the same; obnoxious, loud, laughing at everything. I stopped going to midnight screenings because of it.

[Watashi]

Topsy-Turvy was an enjoyable film despite being 160 minutes long, but the production design and performances were all top-notch.

[Scar]

What the hell is there to laugh hysterically at in Lawrence of Arabia?

Weed.

[EyesWideOpen]

I saw midnight screenings for The Exorcist and The Shining and both audiences were the same; obnoxious, loud, laughing at everything. I stopped going to midnight screenings because of it.

Yeah, I saw The Exorcist re-release in theaters and people were laughing constantly. I don't see horror movies in the theater anymore.

[Mr. Pink]

A theater near me does two special screenings a month. One week it'll be a classic movie (Spartacus, Casablanca, etc.) and the next it'll be more of a midnight/cult movie (The Goonies, Indiana Jones, etc.).

During every cult movie screening, the audience is understandably excited and participates by clapping at character's first appearances, laughing more than they normally would at jokes, quoting lines, etc.

I expected the same thing at the Casablanca screening, due to the infinitely quotable lines and memorable characters. But the audience was dead silent. They laughed at the funny jokes, but no more than they would at any other movie. When Bogart first showed up, one guy did a half-clap but nobody joined in so he stopped. It was the same thing for It's a Wonderful Life.

It was strange. I was glad they were giving Casablanca the respect it deserves, but it was a little off-putting to not have anyone quote a single line, or clap when Bogart shows up.

[Irish]

Ouch: 3-D Starts to Fizzle, and Hollywood Frets (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/30/business/media/30panda.html)

Slumping 3D ticket sales
2011 revenue down 9%
Video rental down 36%
DVD sales down 20%

[megladon8]

Remember back when Avatar was about to be released, and I was like "I think 3D is just a fad that will fizzle out in time" and others were like "no way, it's here to stay!"

Remember that?

[Idioteque Stalker]

1. There's a narrative justification in that it's a movie about filmmaking set partly on the back lot at CinecittÃ* (even if this shot exists outside the digesis). And the film ends with a similar shot of a tracking shot being executed, so there's an abstract formal justification as well.

2. That shot is awkward and perfunctory, but storytelling was never Godard's strong suit. In any case, considering what Godard does right, I can't see any reason to get all uptight about a couple of small flaws here and there.

The non-diegetic nature of the shot turns the reflective image into an academic exclamation point rather than a cinematic one, if you catch my drift. I know it's Godard we're dealing with here, so that kind of thing should be expected somewhat, but as you pointed out, the last shot mirrors it and the brief moment when the camera looks directly at us is much more meaningful in its relative subtlety.

I guess I can't accept an event so momentous for the characters as a small flaw. Considering how authentic the story feels until that point, surely Godard's intent was more considered than "Let's fuck with the audience's emotions," so I assumed he was going for some broader commentary on melodramatic Hollywood filmmaking or something (not that this would be much better).

In the end, though, you're right. I now consider it a masterpiece even with these flaws. But they still bother me and could foreseeably keep it from being an absolute favorite.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Remember back when Avatar was about to be released, and I was like "I think 3D is just a fad that will fizzle out in time" and others were like "no way, it's here to stay!"

Remember that?

Link?

[Derek]

Remember back when Avatar was about to be released, and I was like "I think 3D is just a fad that will fizzle out in time" and others were like "no way, it's here to stay!"

Remember that?

I don't actually, but in the future, remember now when I say that Hollywood, television companies and large production/post-production companies have spent waaaay too much money on this over the past 5-10 years to let this passing trend fade. I don't know if it'll be a permanent fixture, but I don't expect to see it go anywhere too soon.

[D_Davis]

Ouch: 3-D Starts to Fizzle, and Hollywood Frets (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/30/business/media/30panda.html)

Slumping 3D ticket sales
2011 revenue down 9%
Video rental down 36%
DVD sales down 20%

Yay!

[Spun Lepton]

Remember back when Avatar was about to be released, and I was like "I think 3D is just a fad that will fizzle out in time" and others were like "no way, it's here to stay!"

Remember that?

Not the same way you do, apparently.

[Spun Lepton]

Ouch: 3-D Starts to Fizzle, and Hollywood Frets (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/30/business/media/30panda.html)

Slumping 3D ticket sales
2011 revenue down 9%
Video rental down 36%
DVD sales down 20%

Did we miss this quote from the article?


Muddying the picture is a contrast between the performance of 3-D movies in North America and overseas. If results are troubling domestically, they are the exact opposite internationally, where the genre is a far newer phenomenon. Indeed, 3-D screenings powered “Stranger Tides” to about $256 million on its first weekend abroad; Disney trumpeted the figure as the biggest international debut of all time.

With results like that at a time when movies make 70 percent of their total box office income outside North America, do tastes at home even matter?

Also ...


At the box office, animated films, which have recently been Hollywood’s most reliable genre, have fallen into a deep trough, as the category’s top three performers combined — “Rio,” from Fox; “Rango,” from Paramount; and “Hop,” from Universal — have had fewer ticket buyers than did “Shrek the Third,” from DreamWorks Animation, after its release in mid-May four years ago.

OMG ANIMATION IS GOING TO DISAPPEAR!

[Dead & Messed Up]

OMG ANIMATION IS GOING TO DISAPPEAR!

Yeah. More likely: non-branded animated films in the first quarter of a year are not going to pack the plexes. They didn't sell as many tickets as Shrek because Shrek is Shrek and they are not Shrek.

[Dukefrukem]

Rio and Hop are probably not the best examples to being using in that article...

[Irish]

Did we miss this quote from the article?

The biggest takeaway for me from that article was the hurt on the domestic business. Domestic business is what drives the creative end.

It's of secondary interest to me that 3D sales might be slumping, or what the sales are overseas. Far more interesting is that overall box office, DVD, and rental is down in the US for this year.

[Irish]

Rio and Hop are probably not the best examples to being using in that article...

Interesting though that Rio, Hop, and Rango are all original properties, where Shrek was an existing franchise.

[Dukefrukem]

Interesting though that Rio, Hop, and Rango are all original properties, where Shrek was an existing franchise.

It just supports the theory that people want to see sequels more than original movies.

[Spinal]

Ingmar Bergman "switched at birth". (http://www.thelocal.se/34002/20110526/#)

[megladon8]

Is Hop really even an animated movie?

I thought it was an animated character integrated into "real" footage?

[Raiders]

Domestic business is what drives the creative end.

This is the second time I have seen you say this. What makes you so sure?

[baby doll]

It just supports the theory that people want to see sequels more than original movies.Or maybe it's just easier to advertise known quantities.

[Idioteque Stalker]

I hate being "mixed" on films, but Meek's Cutoff left me a little perplexed. This whole popular thing with turning over conventions of the western doesn't engage me. This is not a feminist film just because girls do things, and you're not going to keep my attention solely by making Meek flawed rather than mythologizing him. It has its moments visually, with some nice motifs and juxtapositions, Reichardt's historically wonderful campfire scenes, a strange super-imposition early on that turns the landscape into an Escher painting, and at least one shot straight out of Gerry (pretty much where the similarities end, however). This film though, like Reichardt's others, doesn't get by on strength of composition as much as atmosphere, which here seemed to me intrinsically tied to the film's conflict and moral ambiguity. This is to say I didn't really get on its wavelength until they procured a guide.

A serviceable ensemble overall but great stuff from Williams and Greenwood (their interactions, especially the "chaos and destruction" bit, were the film's narrative highlights). Overall I'll err on the side of positive because I really do admire its best qualities, but there were times (mainly the first third or so) when I found it tough to stay engaged. Reichardt's still cool with me.

Old Joy ****
Meek's Cutoff ***
Wendy & Lucy **

[Raiders]

I decided to watch Reichardt's previous two films since I definitely plan on watching Meek's Cutoff sooner rather than later (it has been at the top of my anticipation list for over a year).

I watched Old Joy on Memorial Day and was pleased with it, but I can't really find a whole lot to say. It's a film that works largely in inexplicable ways. Damn near nothing happens, the characters aren't really dynamic in any way, conflict is almost intentionally kept to a minimum (despite the entire film being bubbling with tension and angst) and.... I quite liked it. I think the fact that it is impossible to really define is its strength; Reichardt expertly captures that feeling of loss and the flow of life going ever forward, unable to be stopped and how we drift away from our past. It's probably a shame that with today's equal rights topics so front-and-center that my mind always had to shift to a "homosexual" angle to the relationship between the two men when Reichardt clearly wanted to go deeper than that.

The late-film moment where ones gives a neck massage to the other is about the emotions that exist outside the physical contact--especially the way Mark gives in and sinks his hand (with his wedding ring on it: his symbol of domesticity that Kurt is subtly looking to find a hole in to seep his way inside) beneath the water, out of sight. It's a fleeting moment that allows one if not both of the men to hark back to their previous lives; but it is only an ephemeral gift as the final scene shows Kurt lonely and awkwardly wandering the city streets, bringing home not only the film's idea that the past is past but the way the film uses the larger metaphor of city/nature dichotomy to hammer it home.

I think I appreciate and admire the film more than I really was taken by it, but it certainly is the indication of a fierce directorial talent.

[Mysterious Dude]

To those who've seen Meek's Cutoff... were there a lot of annoyed groans in your theater when the end credits came up?

[megladon8]

Oh man, this poster for Blood Simple is better than the movie!


http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/7159/bloodsimple.jpg

[Idioteque Stalker]

To those who've seen Meek's Cutoff... were there a lot of annoyed groans in your theater when the end credits came up?

Oh yes.

[Rowland]

I decided to watch Reichardt's previous two films since I definitely plan on watching Meek's Cutoff sooner rather than later (it has been at the top of my anticipation list for over a year).
Hmm, I should check out Old Joy before Meek's Cutoff as well. Wendy and Lucy is really excellent.

[Raiders]

Wait, so Todd Haynes' My Morning Jacket film was a live stream last night??? I assume it will be released on DVD or something also, right? Damn, I've been anxious about this since I read about it but I guess I missed that it was a live stream.

[Yxklyx]

Has anyone watched Haynes' HBO series? What's it like?

[Spun Lepton]

Oh man, this poster for Blood Simple is better than the movie!

Is Spun Lepton gonna hafta cut a #$%&*%?

[Irish]

Why am I watching Resident Evil 5?

[Spinal]

Why am I watching Resident Evil 5?

You mean 4? I think there's only 4 so far. Anyway, Raiders said it was good. I haven't checked up on him though.

[Irish]

You mean 4? I think there's only 4 so far. Anyway, Raiders said it was good. I haven't checked up on him though.

Yeah, it's "Afterlife." I guess that's 4? I lost track of these things a few years back. The one I really wanted to see takes place in a desert and looked sorta Mad Maxish from the promos.

This isn't that one.

[Spinal]

Yeah, it's "Afterlife." I guess that's 4? I lost track of these things a few years back. The one I really wanted to see takes place in a desert and looked sorta Mad Maxish from the promos.


I kind of have a soft spot for these. The one you describe is #3 (Extinction). And sadly, it's not very good, even by series standards.

[Irish]

I kind of have a soft spot for these. The one you describe is #3 (Extinction). And sadly, it's not very good, even by series standards.

Me too. The ones I've seen have almost been all bad. They all look great (the production design is oddly polished considering the content) and occasionally an interesting idea runs across the screen (and then quickly disappears).

What I can never figure out is how you make zombie movies with few zombies, horror movies without scares or gore, and action movies without set pieces. And then do that 4 times in a row. And still make money.

Still, I keep watching. Might have something to do with a latent Mila Jovovich fetish.

That, and every time I watch one, it occurs to me that this could have actually been a good video game movie series in the hands of somebody, anybody, else.

[megladon8]

Is Spun Lepton gonna hafta cut a #$%&*%?


http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/5337/zmcomeatmebrolarge.jpg

[Boner M]

Speaking of Reichardt (and slightly OT), has anyone read the Jon Raymond stories that her first few were based on?

[Spinal]

Still, I keep watching. Might have something to do with a latent Mila Jovovich fetish.


Yeah, this is basically what it boils down to. I find her compulsively watchable. I watched Ultraviolet for god's sake. Ultraviolet!

[StanleyK]

I said of My Life to Live that it's 'clever without glorifying its own cleverness'. A Woman is a Woman, instead, wants to make damn sure that you know how how clever and unconventional it is. It's certainly a very playful film, to the point of childishness, and just like a child it's as irritating as it's amusing. Some visual gags like Angela and Alfred striking poses in the middle of the street, or the couple perennially making out in the background are quite funny; others, with the characters doing things for no discernible reason and spouting non-sequiturs, not so much. Overall, I'd say the entertaining slightly outweighs the annoying, but only by a hair- just remembering the music and sound effects which come and go at random is making me cringe.

[Yxklyx]

... just remembering the music and sound effects which come and go at random is making me cringe.

Come on, that was the best part!

[Boner M]

Weekend:

The Profound Desires of the Gods (Imamura)
Memory for Max, Claire, Ida and Company (Allan King)
Archangel/Careful/Cowards Bend the Knee (Maddin)
The Shop Around the Corner (Lubitsch)
Maybe a repeat of Snowtown

[Ezee E]

WEEKEND:
The Bad Sleep Well
Kung Fu Panda
Biutiful

Kung Fu Panda 2
X-Men

[MadMan]

Blood Simple is a great movie, and I actually like it more than No Country For Old Men, Burn After Reading, O Brother Where Art Thou?, and even Raising Arizona.

Incidentally I'm reminded that I have Miller's Crossing, and I just haven't watched it for some reason.

[Winston*]

Watching The Blind Side. It isn't very good.

[Winston*]

"I mean, he's a boy, a large black boy, living under the same roof"

"Shame on you"

[Winston*]

I think this movie was directed by the same guy that directed Simple Jack.

[baby doll]

Has anyone watched Haynes' HBO series? What's it like?Mildred Pierce? It's a solid piece of storytelling (I watched the whole thing in one sitting), but stylistically it's surprisingly bland. Think The Best of Youth but a little better.

[Mara]

I had trouble with the Mildred Pierce miniseries. The plot is ridiculous, melodramatic, overwrought nonsense but was treated as though it was great literature, with gravitas and profound, silent glances over swelling music. I found the whole thing to be a waste of talented people.

Raiders really liked it, though.

[Raiders]

I did love it for the most part. It isn't Haynes strongest work, mainly because he retains so much of Cain's stale dialogue, but it is probably the most gorgeously rendered TV production I have ever seen. The production design is through the roof.

[EyesWideOpen]

I think I prefer my Muppets in small doses (ex: The Muppet Show). Neither of the first two movies have held up as well in my memory as I would have hoped. The first gets by on some great songs and some good Muppet moments but the actual plot is pretty lame. The second one didn't have any songs I cared for and struggled to keep my attention.

[baby doll]

I had trouble with the Mildred Pierce miniseries. The plot is ridiculous, melodramatic, overwrought nonsense but was treated as though it was great literature, with gravitas and profound, silent glances over swelling music. I found the whole thing to be a waste of talented people.

Raiders really liked it, though.I don't think it is treated as though it were great literature. At one point, Haynes has Winslet say something to the effect that, Depression or no, all the people asking the government for help could get by if only they had a little "gump"--a line that casts Cain's rags to riches saga in an ironic light by implicitly contrasting it with the reality of the Depression.

[Dukefrukem]

http://blastr.com/assets_c/2011/06/ImageHands060211-thumb-500x595-63617.jpg

[balmakboor]

Btw, I refuse to even open the Tree of Life thread until I've seen the film, which won't happen until July 8. :(

[elixir]

I was on a plane where watching movies was a (free) option. There were categories. I chose "classics," and there were two films listed. I had seen one of them, so I chose to view the other one listed, which was Guess Who's Coming to Dinner. THIS MOVIE IS ATROCIOUS. The movie is basically this: *character says racist remark* *another character lectures racist about how RACISM IS BAD and PREJUDICE IS WROOOOOOOONG," culminating in the awful, final self-congratulatory speech. Yuck.

[Raiders]

Yeah, it is a pathetic film. Kramer in general is bad news.

[Mara]

Btw, I refuse to even open the Tree of Life thread until I've seen the film, which won't happen until July 8. :(

Do you don't know about the ghost twist?

[NickGlass]

Oh yeah, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner is the pits. It goes from insufferable to risible, and then back to unwatchable. When I ponder whether it's just dated, I start to really worry about what life was like in the 60s for any minority.

[Spinal]

On a related note, how do you think Philadelphia's going to look in 30 years? Probably about the same, I reckon.