28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[baby doll]

Was surprised to see what appears to be a direct visual reference to Eisenstein's Ivan the Terrible Pt. I:Fun fact: The director, Kevin MacDonald, is Emeric Pressburger's grandson (proving, if Touching the Void and The Last King of Scotland are any indication, that talent is definitely not genetic), and he's made documentaries about Howard Hawks and Errol Morris.

[B-side]

Fun fact: The director, Kevin MacDonald, is Emeric Pressburger's grandson (proving, if Touching the Void and The Last King of Scotland are any indication, that talent is definitely not genetic), and he's made documentaries about Howard Hawks and Errol Morris.

Oh, wow. Didn't know he was Pressburger's grandson. Perhaps my seeing a visual reference to Eisenstein in The Eagle isn't entirely a product of my mind.

[Qrazy]

Awesome; prioritised.

Cool story. REPORTED.

[Qrazy]

Fun fact: The director, Kevin MacDonald, is Emeric Pressburger's grandson (proving, if Touching the Void and The Last King of Scotland are any indication, that talent is definitely not genetic), and he's made documentaries about Howard Hawks and Errol Morris.

Cool except Touching the Void is actually fairly solid so your underhanded and baseless insult means nothing.

[Winston*]

Touching the Void is great.

[baby doll]

Oh, wow. Didn't know he was Pressburger's grandson. Perhaps my seeing a visual reference to Eisenstein in The Eagle isn't entirely a product of my mind.Check out his top ten from the last Sight & Sound poll:

Atanarjuat (Kunuk)
Double Indemnity (Wilder)
The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (Powell and Pressburger)
The Magnificent Ambersons (Welles)
The Palm Beach Story (Sturges)
Partie de compagne (Renoir)
Rear Window (Hitchcock)
Singin' in the Rain (Donen and Kelly)
The Thin Blue Line (Morris)
The Unseen (Janek)

[baby doll]

Cool except Touching the Void is actually fairly solid so your underhanded and baseless insult means nothing.Yeah, it's solid in a man-against-the-elements TV docudrama sort of way, but it's nothing very memorable or interesting.

[B-side]

Check out his top ten from the last Sight & Sound poll:

Atanarjuat (Kunuk)
Double Indemnity (Wilder)
The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (Powell and Pressburger)
The Magnificent Ambersons (Welles)
The Palm Beach Story (Sturges)
Partie de compagne (Renoir)
Rear Window (Hitchcock)
Singin' in the Rain (Donen and Kelly)
The Thin Blue Line (Morris)
The Unseen (Janek)

Not bad.

[Dukefrukem]

The Bad Lieutenant... Wow. Cage's most entertaining movie. I don't think I was supposed to laugh during some of the scenes, but because it was Cage it was hard not to. Very dark and twisted. It lacks the camp that is present in 99% of his other movies so seeing him in a serious role was a change of pace.

[Raiders]

Local Hero is good, but check out Comfort and Joy and Housekeeping for the best of Forsyth.

[Melville]

Yeah, it's solid in a man-against-the-elements TV docudrama sort of way, but it's nothing very memorable or interesting.
Boney M piping through the Andes is unforgettable:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZdxBu8zZ2g#t=4m05s

[Qrazy]

Yeah, it's solid in a man-against-the-elements TV docudrama sort of way, but it's nothing very memorable or interesting.

You must be watching some great TV docudramas.

[MadMan]

The Bad Lieutenant... Wow. Cage's most entertaining movie. I don't think I was supposed to laugh during some of the scenes, but because it was Cage it was hard not to. Very dark and twisted. It lacks the camp that is present in 99% of his other movies so seeing him in a serious role was a change of pace.No, a lot of the movie was supposed to be darkly humorous. The lizard cam moment might be a bit overrated, but I still liked how random it was anyways. The Academy was too scared to nominate Cage for this movie. After all, he plays a cocaine addicted, corrupt cop. But hey Denzel was a murderous thieving corrupt cop in Training Day, and he won for that, so go figure.

I still think the last act of Bad Lieutenant is very interesting. The "It was a Dream" theory jives with everything, but then that ruins the last scene, which is not only really funny but also quite meaningful. I'd rather go with Herzog mocking happy concidences, noting that in the end despite seemingly solving his problems Cage's cop has either learned nothing, or is unable to move past his own issues.

Charley Varrick seems to gather ratings higher than my own. Almost wants to make me watch it a third time. Good crime flick, though.

[Ezee E]

Best scene in the movie is with Cage smoking crack with Xzibit.

[Dukefrukem]

No, a lot of the movie was supposed to be darkly humorous. The lizard cam moment might be a bit overrated, but I still liked how random it was anyways. The Academy was too scared to nominate Cage for this movie. After all, he plays a cocaine addicted, corrupt cop. But hey Denzel was a murderous thieving corrupt cop in Training Day, and he won for that, so go figure.

I still think the last act of Bad Lieutenant is very interesting. The "It was a Dream" theory jives with everything, but then that ruins the last scene, which is not only really funny but also quite meaningful. I'd rather go with Herzog mocking happy concidences, noting that in the end despite seemingly solving his problems Cage's cop has either learned nothing, or is unable to move past his own issues.

Charley Varrick seems to gather ratings higher than my own. Almost wants to make me watch it a third time. Good crime flick, though.

I don't think it was a dream and didn't get the hint after the viewing. Thinking about it now, it makes more sense because it was just one good thing after another falling ino his lap. I like the irony ending more; That no matter how bad he fucks up, things always seem to work out for him.

I do believe he hasn't learned anything AND is unable to move past his own issues. That was the one consistent ending that is undeniable



The lizard scene was so great. "What the fuck is that? Iguanas!" *hiss* LOL

kknXBbnppzA

[Stay Puft]

Somehow I had never seen Jackie Chan's Who Am I? until last night. I did not realize I was missing out on one of the best fight scenes in his career. The whole thing is a blast, actually, and has some awesome stunts, especially during the climax. I also loved the car chase bit when they're all spinning in the car on its side. Lots of fun setpieces in this one.

The only thing stopping this from being one of Chan's best overall is how aggressively stupid it is at times. The basic story is laughable Hollywood style globetrotting nonsense, one character randomly drops out of the film before the third act, some of the comedy is lame, and it has an obnoxious tourist-y style aesthetic in the African and Netherlands sequences.

The verdict is still out on whether or not those awful explosions are a good thing or a bad thing. I mean obviously yeah they look awful and that's bad I guess, but then again the film goes so ridiculously overboard with them I couldn't help picturing Jackie Chan and Benny Chan in an editing room or something looking at a giant button that says "push for stupid explosions" and hitting it over and over and laughing like maniacs. I cannot say I was not entertained.

[Spun Lepton]

The verdict is still out on whether or not those awful explosions are a good thing or a bad thing. I mean obviously yeah they look awful and that's bad I guess, but then again the film goes so ridiculously overboard with them I couldn't help picturing Jackie Chan and Benny Chan in an editing room or something looking at a giant button that says "push for stupid explosions" and hitting it over and over and laughing like maniacs. I cannot say I was not entertained.

This is the case with a lot of Chan's earlier movies. Even if the story is bad, the action is usually good enough to carry it.

Did you see this on Netflix Instant, per chance? This is one of his I have not seen.

[Stay Puft]

No, I haven't been able to access Netflix for the last 24 hours. I had a VCD copy of it.

[MadMan]

I saw that movie when I was in middle school, and I really forgot about it all together. What I recall was it being dumb, but entertaining. My favorite Chan is still First Strike, where he fights people while on stilts. Hell yeah.

[B-side]

http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz70/SalvadorDali_2010/Miscellaneous/reconstructionbanner.png

I have a standing assumption that anything I watch from Eastern Europe is ripe with political commentary that I'm far too ignorant to comprehend, and this is certainly the case here as well. Reconstruction starts off slow and somewhat frustratingly vague, but its looseness eventually settles in and begins to function well. It's a self-reflexive film about the making of an educational video on the dangers of alcohol featuring two young men being asked to recreate a fight they had while they were drunk. What starts out as a farce; making light of the poor production values in the educational film and all the random hurdles that consistently hold up and harm production of the film, takes a rather dark and sobering turn near the end. It's clear from the beginning that the two young men are friends, but the recreation of the fight only seems to create more problems between them. A local professor cries foul at what's being done and seems far more upset about it than any of the participants. An elderly woman can't seem to keep her geese in check, and a beautiful younger woman spies on the action from a distance and giggles at the folly on hand. A rewatch is likely in order here, perhaps with some historical knowledge in tow, but it's a pretty good film as is. Random fact: This was named the best Romanian film of all time by the Romanian Movie Critics Association.

[StanleyK]

Check your pulse, Stan. If you think this movie lacks soul, you just very well might be dead.

I feel it lacks soul because I don't see the director's investment in it. I'm sort of an auteurist, and a mark of an auteur for me is showing extreme passion in their projects, passion for cinema, life, everything; for example, when I watch a Tarkovsky film, I can feel the passion burning through the screen. Of course it's not something I can quantify or prove, but I once read a quote by Michael Curtiz saying that during production of Casablanca, they didn't feel like they were doing one of the greatest movies of all time, it was simply the studio picture #38 of the year. I can't find this quote so I may be imagining things, but I'm almost positive I saw it, but even if it doesn't exist that attitude definitely comes through in the film for me. It's a great movie, I just don't feel very passionate about it.

[StanleyK]

I was quite disappointed in The Treasure of the Sierra Madre. Its one-note condemnation of human greed is shallow and tiresomely overstated. It was pretty obvious from the start where they were going with it, and sure enough, it has an ironic ending where it turns out the gold wasn't that important after all. I think it would have been pretty funny if at the end, when Curtin and the old dude sit down to laugh, their laughter eventually breaks down into crying, and it just ended there. As it is, the film takes itself much too seriously, the worst offender being the scene where they read the dead guy's wife's letter- a cliché in itself, carried out without any self-awareness and in the most blatantly manipulative way possible. The filmmaking is mostly pretty good but completely functional, and being at the service of such a shallow story that can be boiled down to a simple message, the highlight ends up being the performances- namely Huston and Bogart, who as in In a Lonely Place initially hides his dark streak, and slowly, expertly reveals it through the course of the story.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Nice post, Stanley. Couldn't agree more.

[Pop Trash]

You had me with Casablanca, lost me with Sierra Madre.

[Dukefrukem]

I've got a question about the ending of the Matrix Reloaded:

At the end, when the sentinels about to kill Neo, Trin and Morph as they are exiting the ship... Neo stops and says: "I can feel them" and proceeds to (at least what it looks like) to show off new powers to stop the sentinels. He passes out into the coma and the Hammer ship arrives seconds later. Since seeing this movie in 2003, I've always believed it was the Hammer using their EMP device to kill the sentinels. Did Neo really use his powers there?

The only reason I ask is i was reading the wiki plot after the talking about Revolutions in the The Grandmasters thread, and the wiki article states that Neo was using new powers. Is this the canon censuses?

[Henry Gale]

I've got a question about the ending of the Matrix Reloaded:

At the end, when the sentinels about to kill Neo, Trin and Morph as they are exiting the ship... Neo stops and says: "I can feel them" and proceeds to (at least what it looks like) to show off new powers to stop the sentinels. He passes out into the coma and the Hammer ship arrives seconds later. Since seeing this movie in 2003, I've always believed it was the Hammer using their EMP device to kill the sentinels. Did Neo really use his powers there?

The only reason I ask is i was reading the wiki plot after the talking about Revolutions in the The Grandmasters thread, and the wiki article states that Neo was using new powers. Is this the canon censuses?

Well he definitely got those first few, after that, I can't say I remember.

[Qrazy]

IMO Neo stopped them. It's fucking stupid but oh well.

[MadMan]

I think Casablanca, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, and In A Lonely Place are are great, classic films. I'd say the best of the three would be In A Lonely Place, but I'm not entirely sure if The African Queen or In A Lonely Place features Bogart's best performance.

[Spinal]

Sierra Madre is the best Bogart performance I have seen. I have not seen In a Lonely Place. But it's the one performance I've seen where he really stretches himself.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I've got a question about the ending of the Matrix Reloaded:

At the end, when the sentinels about to kill Neo, Trin and Morph as they are exiting the ship... Neo stops and says: "I can feel them" and proceeds to (at least what it looks like) to show off new powers to stop the sentinels. He passes out into the coma and the Hammer ship arrives seconds later. Since seeing this movie in 2003, I've always believed it was the Hammer using their EMP device to kill the sentinels. Did Neo really use his powers there?

The only reason I ask is i was reading the wiki plot after the talking about Revolutions in the The Grandmasters thread, and the wiki article states that Neo was using new powers. Is this the canon censuses?

I think the theory is that Neo has wi-fi powers. All the weirdness in the trilogy can be explained in terms of computers.

[Ezee E]

Can any of you point me to some film noir assassination movies? Trying to think of some.

[B-side]

Can any of you point me to some film noir assassination movies? Trying to think of some.

Depends on what type of assassination you mean. Political?

[Ezee E]

Depends on what type of assassination you mean. Political?
Preferably. But I'll take anything where it's a plot to kill someone.

[B-side]

Preferably. But I'll take anything where it's a plot to kill someone.

Isn't that the plot of most film noirs? Or do you mean where the protagonist is trying to kill someone?

[Ezee E]

Isn't that the plot of most film noirs? Or do you mean where the protagonist is trying to kill someone?
Let's go with political assassinations for now. I can't articulate it properly. I'm tired. :)

[MadMan]

I'd suggest Z, but that's more of a political drama/semi-dramatized style faux documentary.

All I really got is The Manchurian Candidate (1962), but I'm sure you've seen that.

[MadMan]

Sierra Madre is the best Bogart performance I have seen. I have not seen In a Lonely Place. But it's the one performance I've seen where he really stretches himself.Check out In A Lonely Place sometime Spinal. I think it would be right up your alley.

[B-side]

Let's go with political assassinations for now. I can't articulate it properly. I'm tired. :)

Ha, no worries, I just wanted to see if I could help. I'm no noir expert, so I wanted a clearer picture to see if I could dig back and find any examples. Coming up blank on political assassinations right now, unfortunately.

[DavidSeven]

Preferably. But I'll take anything where it's a plot to kill someone.

Double Indemnity.

[B-side]

http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz70/SalvadorDali_2010/Miscellaneous/youngaphbanner.png

Interweaving two ancient Greek plays, Young Aphrodites features two love stories placed side by side. A bunch of herders come upon a village near the sea to rest their animals and wait for the rain, and in the meantime two of them break off and enter into small affairs. One is a man, likely in his 30s or so, attempting to seduce a reticent 20-something woman with a husband away and the other is a pre-pubescent boy -- likely 11 or 12 -- and his sexual initiation and first love with an androgynous teenage girl. Both stories contain outsiders threatening their relationships; a husband in the case of the older two and a slightly older boy, more the girl's age, in the case of the younger two. The women must be chased and "won" and the guys are a bit brutish but determined breadwinners, demonstrated with them both seeking out birds to give to the ladies as gifts. Before the boy decides to find the dead goose she'd been keeping in a hideout, an oddly touching moment occurs between them in which the boy grabs a goose and swings it around by the leg, and after he stops, she speaks her first words in the film: "I could never love you." A fine summation of her natural tenderness. The older woman similarly has a fondness for birds. As each character is constantly peering and chasing, the film adopts a rather animalistic approach to sexuality. A simple return to basics in the wilderness a la Walkabout. Granted, this film is certainly not as good as that one, but it's a good one regardless. I enjoyed the relatively small amount of dialogue. Shame the film is so utterly average on the technical/formal front.

[Dukefrukem]

Well he definitely got those first few, after that, I can't say I remember.


IMO Neo stopped them. It's fucking stupid but oh well.



I think the theory is that Neo has wi-fi powers. All the weirdness in the trilogy can be explained in terms of computers.

He probably did stop them. Otherwise he wouldn't have been able to see

Smith as Bane.

[Yxklyx]

Preferably. But I'll take anything where it's a plot to kill someone.

We did this some pages back - a whole list of films about hired killers.

[Boner M]

Good Dick is one of the most emotionally fraudulent films to ever pass itself off as 'raw' and 'honest', with tacked-on Sundance Lab indie-quirk only making matters worse, and the reduction of serious emotional trauma to a third-act 'ah-hah!' revelation the piss-icing on the shit-cake (and the involvement of Tom Arnold in said revelation being the icing upon that icing). Fortunately it has decent performances, otherwise nothing would ring true. Feel like I need to watch Minnie & Moskowitz again to wash out the bad taste it's left. Blech.

[StanleyK]

A revisit of Pan's Labyrinth was a bit unkind to it. As much as I love the warped fairytale angle, I'm not sure it excuses its one-dimensional characters (granted, the Captain is so over-the-top evil that it has to be intentionally reflecting a simple children's book bad guy, but still...) or dialogue which obviates their emotions and the themes. The filmmaking is pretty good when it's being flashy, less so when it's just pasting together medium shots of folks talking (the side-screen wipes, which I used to find obnoxious, are actually a quite charming invocation of pages turning). It's a great story and clearly a labor of love for del Toro; I don't find it as impressive as I once did, but it's still an engrossing and emotionally engaging film.

[D_Davis]

I've got a question about the ending of the Matrix Reloaded:

Did Neo really use his powers there??

That's what I always thought.

[Our Aurora]

That's what I always thought.

As did I... but Duke's take on it...

The Hammer sending out its EMP

definitely heightens the idea of believing Neo is the one.

Faith in an individual -- or individuals -- who can achieve the unimaginable is what drives a revolution.

[Qrazy]

If Neo didn't do it why would he have entered Limbo? And his threat to the machines would have been meaningless in Revolutions if he wasn't capable of buggering them over. He did it.

Anyway who cares, shitty movie is shit.

[D_Davis]

As did I... but Duke's take on it...

The Hammer sending out its EMP

definitely heightens the idea of believing Neo is the one.

Faith in an individual -- or individuals -- who can achieve the unimaginable is what drives a revolution.

That's true, and a good point of discussion. I've been wanting to rewatch these, and I think I will soon. It's been awhile.

[MadMan]

I still enjoy the Matrix trilogy, even though I don't think any of them are great movies.

[Qrazy]

I still enjoy the Matrix trilogy, even though I don't think any of them are great movies.

The first one is a great genre film. It is not a particularly deep film and there are plenty of valid criticisms. However, say what you will about the silliness of some of the concepts or general attitude of the film but the storyboarding, pacing and general visual flow of that film is impeccable.

[DavidSeven]

Yeah, the first Matrix is cinematic as hell. The film's mythology is serviceable in a one-off, but the expansion of it in the sequels exposes and magnifies the absurdities. Still, there's no way you can take away from what the first film accomplished in terms of basic storytelling and craftsmanship.

[B-side]

http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz70/SalvadorDali_2010/Miscellaneous/happygypsiesbanner.png

I Even Met Happy Gypsies, my second and final Yugoslavian film for this little excursion, might be my favorite of the bunch so far. Bora, our gambler and Jean-Paul Belmondo-looking protagonist, is an opportunistic and abusive ladies man who falls in love with a younger woman who was forced to marry a teenage boy who she quickly abandons because he can't consummate their marriage. I wanna say around halfway through I began getting critical of the film for some perceived failings on the dramatic front until I realized that neither the tone nor the intent of the film necessitated any particularly trenchant drama. It all sort of falls under the banner of the title; the constant strife, gambling, dancing, poverty and financial underhandedness are recurring, but what threw me off was that there always seemed to be someone having fun, sometimes in the midst of the drama or otherwise in the same small country village. The gypsies are constantly disparaged and somehow always retain their sense of humor and resolve. I can't really make heads or tails of the ending, but it's certainly intriguing.

if soitgoes... were still alive, he'd appreciate this:sad:

[Yxklyx]

Tokyo Twilight (1957) is another remarkable film by Ozu but I can't make heads or tails of the ending. The "life goes on" theme comes across as nihilistic - or at the very least the father appears as a robot. There's too much done off-screen in Ozu films especially when it comes to emotion. Are we supposed to include our own interpretation of emotional response in these films when so little is offered in the film. Generally, this is not too much of an issue as most of Ozu's films are somewhat light but here we have a very very dark film.

[Dukefrukem]

That's true, and a good point of discussion. I've been wanting to rewatch these, and I think I will soon. It's been awhile.

Bringing this up the other day forced me to buy the trilogy on Blu-ray. $40 on Amazon.

[transmogrifier]

Jesus Christ The Tourist is bad. It has to be one of the most low energy "caper" films ever made, with an atrocious screenplay (seriously, they have an instance where two characters who, while not guilty of anything, would definitely be questioned by the police at this stage of the proceedings about what has happened, are in a room surrounded by police and armed offendor squad members. In a room where three people have just been shot dead by the police. Then the police get a call that the main culprit has been spotted a couple of blocks away. SO EVERY SINGLE POLICEMAN leaves the room allowing the two characters to escape. That's how bad this movie is - it doesn't even try to think up clever ways for characters to escape. Another example - in one of the key "chase" sequences, a character climbs through a window and clambers across roof tops in plain view of everyone, chased by a couple of gangsters, again in plain view of a crowded fucking street with everyone gawking at them as they run across the rooftops, and he escapes by jumping off a building into a fruit stand below. And that's it.)

No-one watch this movie. It is a waste of your life. The only upside is that it gives you a greater appreciation of what Burton does with Depp, because my God is he boring as a "normal" character.

[Morris Schæffer]

Yeah, The Tourist was absolutely, disgustingly appaling. More Timothy Dalton might have added some, uh, ya know, oomph.

[Pop Trash]

Any thoughts on Night Moves and/or Straight Time? Double feature at the local indie theater and tomorrow is the last day. Might do my best to check 'em out.

[Boner M]

Haven't seen Night Moves yet (shameful, I know) but Straight Time is fantastic. Amazing cast, all at the top of their game.

[Qrazy]

Any thoughts on Night Moves and/or Straight Time? Double feature at the local indie theater and tomorrow is the last day. Might do my best to check 'em out.

Straight Time is a strong 70s crime film. Hoffman is great, the script loses it's way a bit by the third act but it's relatively forgivable in this regard. Not really a film that demands to be seen in a theater though.

[Sven]

I prefer Night Moves. Sooooo good.

[MadMan]

A recent revisiting made my rating for the first Matrix go back up a bit again, but I stand by my previous statements.

Hoop Dreams (1994) is probably the best sports documentary I've ever seen. If not, its damn close.

[transmogrifier]

Night Moves is great. Watch it. Haven't seen the other.

[baby doll]

Tokyo Twilight (1957) is another remarkable film by Ozu but I can't make heads or tails of the ending. The "life goes on" theme comes across as nihilistic - or at the very least the father appears as a robot. There's too much done off-screen in Ozu films especially when it comes to emotion. Are we supposed to include our own interpretation of emotional response in these films when so little is offered in the film. Generally, this is not too much of an issue as most of Ozu's films are somewhat light but here we have a very very dark film.Personally, Ozu's elliptical narration gives me a major hard-on. My favorite example is in Early Summer where the heroine and her neighbor agree that the former will marry the latter's son, who only finds out about this arrangement afterwards. And of course, this being an Ozu film, we never find out how the guy feels about it. Rather than going for easy identification with his characters, Ozu requires that we actively empathize with them.

[Morris Schæffer]

Hoop Dreams (1994) is probably the best sports documentary I've ever seen. If not, its damn close.

My oldest as-of-yet-unseen DVD in my collection. I should remedy that.

[MadMan]

My oldest as-of-yet-unseen DVD in my collection. I should remedy that.You really should. Sure the documentary style is quite basic, and its clear that the documentary crew didn't have the necessary budget to go beyond their limits. But that's doesn't matter, as the true life story and the two boys that the crew follows over four years gives its raw, emotional power. Plus the 2.5 hour running time goes by surprisingly quick.

[Stay Puft]

I suppose this won't get a response but is there anybody here in the Toronto area who would want a free ticket to tomorrow night's screening of Wild Zero at the Lightbox? I won two tickets the other week but my roommate just cancelled on me and now I have no idea what to do with this extra ticket. I'll probably end up just giving it to someone at the theatre tomorrow I imagine.

[Irish]

Can any of you point me to some film noir assassination movies? Trying to think of some.

There's a little one-room noir called Suddenly starring Frank Sinatra and Sterling Hayden, about a trio of thugs trying to kill the president during a whistlestop in a small midwestern town.

It's the kind of movie that played on the late late late show decades ago. I'm pretty sure it's on DVD. It won't be the best oh-my-god-you've-got-to-see-this experience, but it's a good little drama just the same.

[Irish]

I was quite disappointed in The Treasure of the Sierra Madre.

Beginning to suspect that you're having an off week. It's the only way I can explain your failing to connect to some of these movies lately.

Madre isn't really a morality play. It's not that simple. You can take it that way, I guess, but I think if you do you're missing out on some of its subtleties. It operates more on the level of a noir crossed with a western, plays brilliantly with audience expectations, and solidly predates the kind of stuff Anthony Mann did in The Man from Laramie and Alfred Hitchcock did with Psycho.

Remember this is 1948, a studio movie, and the height of Bogart's career. He's supposed to be the hero, the guy the audience is going to be drawn to and identify with. The way the movie plays with your expectations and eventually turns on you is astounding, because when Bogie (Bogie!) goes around the bend you're forced to go with him, like it or not.

[EyesWideOpen]

Ridley Scott said today during his comic-con appearance for Prometheus which is filmed in 3D that he'll never film another non-3D film again.

[Ezee E]

Seven joins Ebert's Great Movies. (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110718/REVIEWS08/110719985)

[transmogrifier]

Ridley Scott said today during his comic-con appearance for Prometheus which is filmed in 3D that he'll never film another non-3D film again.

A Good Year 2: The 3D Experience

[Irish]

Ridley Scott said today during his comic-con appearance for Prometheus which is filmed in 3D that he'll never film another non-3D film again.

He's 73 years old. How many more does he think he has in him?

[Qrazy]

He's 73 years old. How many more does he think he has in him?

Clint Eastwood has made 8 films since he turned 73.

[Irish]

Clint Eastwood has made 8 films since he turned 73.

That's an absurd reduction, even for you.

[DavidSeven]

Ridley Scott said today during his comic-con appearance for Prometheus which is filmed in 3D that he'll never film another non-3D film again.

So, his 2D movies that I wouldn't have bothered with just become his 3D movies that I won't bother with. I can live with this.

[Qrazy]

That's an absurd reduction, even for you.

Not really. Cool story though.

[Derek]

Cool story though.

Nah, I didn't care about the characters.

[Winston*]

How is it an absurd reduction?

[Qrazy]

Nah, I didn't care about the characters.

Nice prof pic.

[Pop Trash]

One of my friends mentioned on FB that her new favorite film is The Adjustment Bureau. She has pretty good taste, so I might have to check 'er out.

[DavidSeven]

her new favorite film is The Adjustment Bureau. She has pretty good taste

I foresee a reassessment of conclusions in your future.

[Watashi]

Hello, I'm back.

What did I miss?

[transmogrifier]

Yes, kind of. We observe thrillers not because we want to see characters get hurt; usually we want them to survive the terrible ordeal. We can see this as a reaffirmation of our survival instincts, or we can see it as simply the journey of the hero overcoming obstacles, and violence is a pretty standard component of a quest's hurdles. Violence in fiction is typically a narrative drama issue, one that Haneke himself employs in this movie and others, and I really don't see that as being a propagation of a culture of violence in the media. I see it as a sign of heightened reality, where the violence is much more staged and far less grotesquely ugly than violence in real life, which are not drawn out, clever or planned.

Funny Games fails because, instead of just trusting its own story to reveal the difference or similarity between screen violence and real violence (the lingering shot of the bloody television is actually the most effective "point" for me), it constantly draws attention to the fact that it's a film, a sham, a made-up thing that's for all intents and purposes a cross between mere entertainment and punditry. Haneke makes the distinction more apparent, and therefore the connection groggier. Why should I feel bad about the peril of this family when the film reminds me time and again that it's all make-believe, whereas good straight thrillers do more to relate us to the characters and therefore make the violence a true turn-off?

I disagree with this. Film can use character identification and narrative intrigue to hook you in and then use violence as cheap punctuation for those two aspects, thereby normalizing it as a routine ingredient of our entertainment. I believe that this is worth commenting on, and the only real way to do it inside the cinematic universe is to break the fourth wall and remind the audience that you are watching staged actions designed to illicit a response from you. Funny Games too is trying to get a response, just a different one than the standard thriller. If the artificiality wasn't apparent, then the finished movie would be indistinguishable from those movies it is providing a counter-point to.

This is part of the reason why the remake works better for me, because I recognize the actors and it feeds into the artificiality better.


My reaction to the original Funny Games was mixed at best, whereas I found the remake masterful, fine-tuned in a number of ways that's cumulative effect made for both a more compelling viewing experience and a more thematically sound thesis. It's definitely undervalued, and unfairly dismissed as an exact duplicate of the original.

Agreed. I think the remake works better as a satire, but they may simply be because understanding the dialogue as spoken conveys mood and nuance much better than subtitles. Whether Haneke meant it or not, the remake seems funnier and allows you to appreciate the sledgehammer message all the better.


My issue with Funny Games is that it shoots itself in the foot by creating sympathetic characters, shooting its thriller elements with great care and craft, and then presuming that the audience is watching for violence rather than suspense. To the point that it destroys what good there was in the film in pursuit of some tawdry commentary on titillation.

But doesn't it still provide the suspense in the end? In fact, knowing that the director is blatantly fucking with you actually adds an extra layer of meta-suspense on top. In the end, Haneke basically marginalizes the violence while keeping the suffering, and simply acknowledges that it is all in service of an audience who has certain expectations for this type of movie. That's not shooting yourself in the foot - that's actually having something to say and actually getting people to listen. Now you may disagree with the message and the pervasiveness of media violence, but you have to admit, the film accomplishes what it sets out to do.

Also, I prefer not to listen to a single word Haneke has to say about his films.

[B-side]

http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz70/SalvadorDali_2010/Miscellaneous/thechasersbanner.png

I could post a basic overview of the form of this film and screenshots and you'd know I loved it, but I'll try and give you a bit more. The Chasers is French New Wave, more specifically Godard, before French New Wave meant anything. It's a self-aware mocking and embracing of cinematic convention complete with fourth wall breaking, a narrator interrogating the cast and characters' inner monologues taking cues from others all while the "story" is taking place in front of us. The Norwegian mountains are beautifully filmed and provide ideal isolation for the constantly rising tension amidst the love triangle at the heart of the film. Bjørn is married to Guri and Knut is still in love with her. The two men make a primal game of her pursuit with the threat of violence involving their guns hanging over every tense moment. The sympathy lies with Guri as she's torn between the two men, weary of hurting either's pride and ruining all of their friendships. Løchen's form is playful and ambitious, which is likely why he only managed to make one more film after this one, 13 years later. Løchen took a similar approach to that film that Coppola is now taking with Twixt (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/23/twixt-francis-ford-coppola-tour_n_907865.html).

[B-side]

Inception fans might be interested in this psychological and philosophical take (http://www.sensesofcinema.com/2010/feature-articles/desiring-machines-in-american-cinema-what-inception-tells-us-about-our-experience-of-reality-and-film/) on it from Senses of Cinema. The author basically danced around it, but I came away from the article viewing Inception as a work on the theory of cosmic consciousness, which actually does the film some favors if only in regards to situated the proceedings under an interesting philosophical and scientific theory.

[Spinal]

Zelig (Allen, 1983) ****

This is good.

[Dead & Messed Up]

But doesn't it still provide the suspense in the end? In fact, knowing that the director is blatantly fucking with you actually adds an extra layer of meta-suspense on top.

I disagree with this. The director fucking with me reminds me of the artificiality of the narrative, which breaks my engagement with the story. I'm trying to think of comparable fourth-wall breaks in media, but I'm brain-farting right now. My general impression is that such things are usually cheeky and not impactful on the main narrative. Winks and nods. It further hurts that the director doesn't hold to any logic in his intrusions. Unless your term "meta-suspense" means something other than "additional suspense," which is what I assume it to mean.


In the end, Haneke basically marginalizes the violence while keeping the suffering, and simply acknowledges that it is all in service of an audience who has certain expectations for this type of movie. That's not shooting yourself in the foot - that's actually having something to say and actually getting people to listen. Now you may disagree with the message and the pervasiveness of media violence, but you have to admit, the film accomplishes what it sets out to do.

Actually, the reverse is true. I support the idea that violence in the cinema isn't examined enough by filmmakers or viewers, and that it's often excessive, but the film's delivery of that message is graceless, blunt, and confrontational to a degree I don't care for. Again, I feel like Haneke was already rebuking the excesses of cinema violence by crafting a story where I didn't want anybody to be hurt. Him busting in like a tweedy college professor with an ax to grind was hardly necessary.

[transmogrifier]

I disagree with this. The director fucking with me reminds me of the artificiality of the narrative, which breaks my engagement with the story.

Which is entirely the point, isn't it?


I support the idea that violence in the cinema isn't examined enough by filmmakers or viewers, and that it's often excessive, but the film's delivery of that message is graceless, blunt, and confrontational to a degree I don't care for.

It's definitely unsubtle, blunt and confrontational - traits it shares with mainstream cinematic violence, I would argue.

[MadMan]

Seven joins Ebert's Great Movies. (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110718/REVIEWS08/110719985)Deservedly so. I finally watched my copy of it on Friday, and I was really blown away. However, I think I slightly prefer Fight Club overall. Still need to rewatch The Game and view Panic Room and Zodiac. Man was that one bleak, powerful, nasty movie.

Also at this point Brad Pitt is easily one of my favorite actors. Get this man an Oscar, stat. Oh and in regards to Seven's famous finale even though Internet had spoiled it for me already, knowing what "Was in the box" didn't make the aftermath any the less devasting or shocking. What did surprise me more was how in the end Somerset doesn't retire, but stays on anyways. Very film noir-ish ending in my book.

Oh and after viewing Blow Out (1981), I've decided I need to see more of De Palma's non-commerical offerings. The only ones I had viewed prior were his most successful box office wise movies such as The Untouchables, Scarface, and Mission Impossible. Great movie anyways, and I was fascinated by how in many ways it was a 70s style movie made in the 80s. Another example of this is The Evil Dead, although that movie would have been released (maybe) in 1979 had the filmmakers had a bigger budget.

At this time I'm still trying to finish All That Heaven Allows. I know its good, but the main plot is at times silly melodrama, even though the underlying class contrastings and the amazing use of color and the wonderfully expressive shots are remarkable.

[Yxklyx]

You should definitely see De Palma's Phantom of the Paradise if you're into "horror".

[Dead & Messed Up]

Which is entirely the point, isn't it?

I thought you were just saying the director intrusions "added a layer of meta-suspense." Doesn't that imply that the original layer of suspense remains? Now you're saying that breaking that narrative suspense is the point? Imma confused.


It's definitely unsubtle, blunt and confrontational - traits it shares with mainstream cinematic violence, I would argue.

Okay. Not sure what you're getting at here. Is this intended to counter some claim I'm making? Or is it just food for thought? I will say this for Haneke. Even though I think the movie is stupid and aggravating, it gets a lot of people talking. Is the movie the movie? Or is the real movie starting after the movie? What is a movie, anyway? Who are we? Where are we headed? Is that the remote from Click?

[transmogrifier]

I thought you were just saying the director intrusions "added a layer of meta-suspense." Doesn't that imply that the original layer of suspense remains? Now you're saying that breaking that narrative suspense is the point? Imma confused.


I guess I was saying that I still think the surface narrative remains suspenseful througout due to the way it is shot and acted, and then knowing that the director is consciously addressing the audience adds a second layer of suspense to that narrative because you suspect that anything could happen due to didactic nature of the exercise.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I guess I was saying that I still think the surface narrative remains suspenseful througout due to the way it is shot and acted, and then knowing that the director is consciously addressing the audience adds a second layer of suspense to that narrative because you suspect that anything could happen due to didactic nature of the exercise.

Gotcha. I mean, I disagree, but I gotcha. I felt that breaking the internal logic of the narrative with fourth-wall changes damaged my connection to what was happening. I get Haneke's purpose, and I respect his ideas, but I really didn't dig on how he assembled them. But that's getting reiterative, and it's getting late, and so I may bow out, with respect.

[B-side]

http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz70/SalvadorDali_2010/Miscellaneous/threedaysbanner.png

Here we have another French New Wave-inspired film, this one with the youthful and cinematic exuberance trademarked by the movement and morality play similar to that of Eric Rohmer. A young teacher agrees to sit for an ex-girlfriend hoping to reconnect with her and his frustration with love lost and new responsibilities gained drives the film forward. His unhappiness with his current relationship with Yael is exaggerated further with this re-connection and symbolized by her thorny plants invading his living space and in one instance used as a visual prison for Eli. His hot and cold relationship with the child -- sometimes heartwarming, others oddly chilling -- seem to stem from anxiety over caring for it as well as a less explicit one that it may actually be his. The judgmental eyes of Jerusalem cast over his every move when he's in town, perhaps because he appears to be a single father. A visit to his Yael's parents' house to allow the child to swing takes on a sinister tone as Eli pushes the kid higher and higher in the swing while the camera cuts quickly between the point of view of the swing, shots of the nervous parents and Eli's delight while pushing him. IMDb lists a running time of 90 minutes, but the copy I saw was 80. Likely due to the aforementioned less than explicit notion that the child was his. Really good film.

[Mysterious Dude]

I've never seen an Israeli film that I really liked. It seems like most Israeli movies from before 2000 that are available on Netflix are farcical comedies like The Big Dig or Hill "Halfon" Doesn't Answer. I can't seem to find much in the way of arthouse cinema. For a country that is so often in the middle of world news, their movies seem very slight. And movies that do try to tackle the real conflicts of the region like Promises and The Band's Visit take a "can't we all just get along?" attitude, as if that's the only thing preventing peace.

[B-side]

I've never seen an Israeli film that I really liked. It seems like most Israeli movies from before 2000 that are available on Netflix are farcical comedies like The Big Dig or Hill "Halfon" Doesn't Answer. I can't seem to find much in the way of arthouse cinema. For a country that is so often in the middle of world news, their movies seem very slight. And movies that do try to tackle the real conflicts of the region like Promises and The Band's Visit take a "can't we all just get along?" attitude, as if that's the only thing preventing peace.

Yeah, I'm not particularly interested in the modern political films from there, so I've avoided those. This is my first or second Israeli film. KG has far more older Israeli cinema than I expected, and I'm excited to see more. The gimmick of the thread I'm re-posting these reviews from is that a buddy and I are choosing 10 countries we wanna see more films from and watching 2 films from each. It's essentially just an excuse to review and highlight obscure cinema while expanding our own palette. But yeah, if you download and are on KG, they've got quite the treasure trove on there.

[StanleyK]

Finally, I've watched Grindhouse! The wait was long because I wanted to see it the proper way: both parts together, 90-minute version of each, and the fake trailers. While I definitely feel like this is the way to experience the film, the trailers are kind of a let-down; not very funny, and even as short films they feel too long.

Planet Terror is nothing groundbreaking and not particularly accomplished filmmaking, but it's probably Rodriguez's best film. I don't share the mindset that zombies are intrinsically entertaining; what makes this one loads of fun is that it feels very earnest, full of love for the films it's mimicking rather than smug irony. Like Shaun of the Dead, it succeeds through its own memorable characters and cool dialogue, and it's thanks to all the build-up that its centerpiece moment (the machine-gun leg rampage) is so satisfying.

Death Proof is a straight-up masterpiece. Tarantino really continues to grow as a filmmaker; his craft is impeccable, every shot and cut is essential, fluid and impactful. The narrative strikes me as one of the most ambitious in American cinema of the decade, and he populates it with so many wonderful details that hint at a carefully-constructed universe that I don't think I can even begin to grasp at with a first viewing. It's a challenging, morally ambiguous work, a great companion piece to Inglourious Basterds (which I'm very excited to watch again), and similarly astute about pop culture and its place in it.



Planet Terror - ***
Death Proof - ****
Fake trailers - **½
The whole thing - ***½

[Yxklyx]

Planet Terror is the cinematic masterpiece here.

[Irish]

Death Proof is a straight-up masterpiece.

BRB -- I just puked onto my keyboard and need to clean that up.


It's a challenging, morally ambiguous work, a great companion piece to Inglourious Basterds (which I'm very excited to watch again), and similarly astute about pop culture and its place in it.

Could you elaborate on the "challenging, morally ambiguous" bit? I've only seen the movie once (theatrical release) and there wasn't anything particularly challenging about it, much less ambiguous.

[TGM]

Death Proof is a straight-up masterpiece. Tarantino really continues to grow as a filmmaker; his craft is impeccable, every shot and cut is essential, fluid and impactful. The narrative strikes me as one of the most ambitious in American cinema of the decade, and he populates it with so many wonderful details that hint at a carefully-constructed universe that I don't think I can even begin to grasp at with a first viewing. It's a challenging, morally ambiguous work, a great companion piece to Inglourious Basterds (which I'm very excited to watch again), and similarly astute about pop culture and its place in it.


Huh, as a full package, I really enjoyed Grindhouse overall, though individually I didn't find either to be all that great.

Death Proof especially I didn't think was even much of a movie at all. It's a load of building up characters for an hour, only to kill them all off, then introducing an entirely new cast of character, who then take part in a random chase sequence with the bad guy before winning the day.

And, well, that's it. There's really no plot to speak of, as far as I can recall (haven't seen it since it was in theaters), it's just a lot of random talk, followed by barely related action sequences. Which, sure, as part of the full Grindhouse package, was fun enough, but on its own, I found it pretty terrible, IMO.

It is interesting to see you praise it so highly, though. I haven't heard many good things spoken of it individually, so I'd be interested to hear why you found it to be a masterpiece. :)

[Bosco B Thug]

Death Proof is a straight-up masterpiece. Tarantino really continues to grow as a filmmaker; his craft is impeccable, every shot and cut is essential, fluid and impactful. The narrative strikes me as one of the most ambitious in American cinema of the decade, and he populates it with so many wonderful details that hint at a carefully-constructed universe that I don't think I can even begin to grasp at with a first viewing. It's a challenging, morally ambiguous work, a great companion piece to Inglourious Basterds (which I'm very excited to watch again), and similarly astute about pop culture and its place in it.

StanleyK, hope I didn't give you a black eye, from how fast that rep came.

[Pop Trash]

Could you elaborate on the "challenging, morally ambiguous" bit? I've only seen the movie once (theatrical release) and there wasn't anything particularly challenging about it, much less ambiguous.

Yeah, you (StanleyK) were being rather vague in your praise. Could you name some specifics? I liked Death Proof, but any depth there is tenuous at best.

[Lazlo]

AN OPEN LETTER TO AMC ENTERTAINMENT

To whom it may concern,

Let me tell you about my experience at AMC Northlake 14 in Charlotte, NC on July 25, 2011. It was far from pleasant.

There was a couple with small child that would not stay quiet. They were asked once to be quiet by someone else. When I asked again shortly after, the man cursed at and threatened me, challenging me to a fight.

I left the theater and went to the lobby at approximately 11:30pm and could find no employees to help me.

The man exited the theater and approached me, got in my face, and told me he had every right to bring his son, no matter how disruptive, and that I was the one who should leave. He reiterated that we could “take things outside” if I still had a problem. I walked away and he returned to the theater.

I continued to search for an employee, to no avail.

At 11:54pm I called the theater phone number. No one picked up. I left a message.

Upon discovering the door to the upstairs of the building was open, I went upstairs in search of help. After knocking on a few doors I found the manager. I explained my problem and he refunded my money (though not before repeatedly telling me that he could only give me a pass because all the money had been closed for the night; eventually he gave me cash) and offered to kick the offending patrons out of the theater. By this time the movie had ended and the couple had left.

I continued to talk to the manager about the absurdity of the situation. He was respectful and apologetic but insisted that the theater was technically closed and he had other duties to attend to other than ensuring the safety and satisfaction of his customers.

The fact that it took me a half hour to find anyone that could help me is deeply troubling.

My moviegoing experience was greatly damaged. No one was around to help deal with the disturbance.

What if the man had assaulted me? Who would have known or been able to help me? The lobby was deserted. I could have been injured and unable to notify anyone.

What if someone gets hurt accidentally in one of your theaters? Where is the First Aid kit? Where is anyone who knows its location? This is a huge safety and security issue. The options should not be either (a) call 911 or (b) go to the hospital. There should be assistance available at all times there are customers present on the premises. Someone should be around to at least pick up the phone when called.

No one should have to fear for either their safety or the disturbance of their theater experience upon entering your building.

I was able to open every door marked “Private” and walk through the entire upstairs of the facility. Film prints, concessions, and lobby displays are vulnerable to theft. The building’s entire electrical system is accessible to anyone.

The theater should not be considered “closed” when it is still occupied by customers. I understand the need to close out the business day, but your business is in fact not closed if it is still serving customers.

I returned to the theater today and spoke with the general manager. I laid out all my concerns and she listened attentively. She had read the report and watched the security tapes first thing this morning and was very familiar with the situation. She agreed with every one of my points and told me that the supervisor that should have been walking the floor had been disciplined and a written account of the incident had been placed in his permanent employment file. She volunteered that from what she could tell from the security footage, the supervisor lingered too long in one theater, ignoring his duty to sweep the facility. A mandatory staff meeting would be held to discuss the incident and ensure that others like it do not happen in the future. The general manager also promised that she would bring up the incident at a training conference she is attending later this week. She agreed that it was wrong that children so young were allowed into the theater so late and she said she would suggest a policy to restrict such activity. Overall she was friendly, receptive, understanding and in full agreement with my complaints and concerns. It was clear she took the situation very seriously. I appreciate her concern and candor. Hopefully her understanding and appreciation of the situation will lead to improvements in the operation of the theater.

Please know that while the general manager’s response was welcome, I will no longer attend this location.

Sincerely,

Griffin Van Malssen

[Qrazy]

Alternatively you could have just kicked the shit out of the guy. That would teach his son to shut his big yap next time around!

[Lazlo]

Alternatively you could have just kicked the shit out of the guy. That would teach his son to shut his big yap next time around!

Dude had five inches and eighty pounds of muscle on me. He would have destroyed me and no one would have known.

[Spun Lepton]

Lazlo, just a quick suggestion to remove your email address from this site. When I was running a similar site, there was no end to spambots.

[Lazlo]

Lazlo, just a quick suggestion to remove your email address from this site. When I was running a similar site, there was no end to spammers.

10-4, thanks.

[Irish]

Lazlo, throw a heads up to the Consumerist website too. They usually eat stuff like this up.

[Qrazy]

Dude had five inches and eighty pounds of muscle on me. He would have destroyed me and no one would have known.

Yeah I was just kidding but... knife him in the spleen?

[Lazlo]

Lazlo, throw a heads up to the Consumerist website too. They usually eat stuff like this up.

Rock and roll.

[Lazlo]

Yeah I was just kidding but... knife him in the spleen?

Yeah, I know you were kidding. It was just a super shitty situation all around. Probably including the kid's diaper.

[Derek]

Yeah, I know you were kidding. It was just a super shitty situation all around. Probably including the kid's diaper.

You have an awesome name. I don't know about the douche bag at your theater, but I'd never threaten anyone named Griffin Van Malssen.

[Lazlo]

You have an awesome name. I don't know about the douche bag at your theater, but I'd never threaten anyone named Griffin Van Malssen.

Thanks. Maybe I should start wearing a nametag.

[MadMan]

Lalzo that's really shitty that anything like that happened. The last theater I worked at wasn't the greatest, but late at night we didn't lock the doors and shut down anything until the last showing ended. And there was someone at least behind concessions, plus at least one manager wandering around making sure everything was a-okay. And I recall having to deal with one asshole customer before-him and his friends wouldn't be quiet when I asked them too, but they shut up after I got a manger and she showed up.

But I can't blame you at all for not wanting to back to that theater. I wouldn't, either.


You should definitely see De Palma's Phantom of the Paradise if you're into "horror".I will, at some point. I think I'll try and view Hi! Mom before I see Sisters and Carrie.

[transmogrifier]

I will, at some point. I think I'll try and view Hi! Mom before I see Sisters and Carrie.

Sisters and Carrie are both a million times better than the tone-deaf, inexplicably loved Phantom of Paradise. Boy I hated that movie.

[Spinal]

Death Proof is a straight-up masterpiece. Tarantino really continues to grow as a filmmaker; his craft is impeccable, every shot and cut is essential, fluid and impactful. The narrative strikes me as one of the most ambitious in American cinema of the decade, and he populates it with so many wonderful details that hint at a carefully-constructed universe that I don't think I can even begin to grasp at with a first viewing. It's a challenging, morally ambiguous work, a great companion piece to Inglourious Basterds (which I'm very excited to watch again), and similarly astute about pop culture and its place in it.



I disagree with just about everything you said here. Death Proof is easily Tarantino's most tedious film, full of bluster and bloat. The dialogue draws far too much attention to the writer rather than servicing the film. Unlike other Tarantino films where the dialogue amuses or heightens tension, here it just drones on and on and on. The narrative is really just atrocity followed by revenge interrupted by endless chit-chat. Not sure what's ambitious about that. Morally ambiguous? What, because the chicks beat the shit out of a murderer instead of reporting him to the proper authorities? It's not a complex film. There's a baddie baddie and some vulnerable hot chicks and some tough hot chicks. It's an exploitation film for people who like feet and women who won't shut up. I watched it twice thinking I had missed something and ending up discovering there was even less there than I thought. Not a good film.

[Spun Lepton]

I disagree with just about everything you said here. Death Proof is easily Tarantino's most tedious film, full of bluster and bloat.

/snipped, but agreed.

Although, I thought the last 20 minutes were excellent. Too bad you have to sit through so much tedium to get there.

[Russ]

Sisters and Carrie are both a million times better than the tone-deaf, inexplicably loved Phantom of Paradise. Boy I hated that movie.
I would need to see it again to defend it, but yeah, you're really in a minority on this one.

Hi Mom! is awesome. I especially like the completely out-of-left-field "Be Black, Baby" theater piece that was plopped down in the middle of this film. See it.

[Irish]

Ok, Spinal's Death Proof post is pretty much the post to end all posts. I'm embarrassed my own is so skimpy and, well, content-less.

Particularly like the line "The dialogue draws far too much attention to the writer rather than servicing the film."

That clearly states my beef with the movie -- it feels written, like the entire thing is a constant setup to the next scene, and completely inauthentic.

[Ezee E]

I like it up until the tough chicks. There is character building, even if it's deserving to a whole different story. The second round never really builds on it to me like it should have. The cafe talk intends to be something like the discussion of pipes in Basterds but the subpar acting drolls it out.

[EyesWideOpen]

Finally, I've watched Grindhouse! The wait was long because I wanted to see it the proper way: both parts together, 90-minute version of each, and the fake trailers. While I definitely feel like this is the way to experience the film, the trailers are kind of a let-down; not very funny, and even as short films they feel too long.

Planet Terror is nothing groundbreaking and not particularly accomplished filmmaking, but it's probably Rodriguez's best film. I don't share the mindset that zombies are intrinsically entertaining; what makes this one loads of fun is that it feels very earnest, full of love for the films it's mimicking rather than smug irony. Like Shaun of the Dead, it succeeds through its own memorable characters and cool dialogue, and it's thanks to all the build-up that its centerpiece moment (the machine-gun leg rampage) is so satisfying.

Death Proof is a straight-up masterpiece. Tarantino really continues to grow as a filmmaker; his craft is impeccable, every shot and cut is essential, fluid and impactful. The narrative strikes me as one of the most ambitious in American cinema of the decade, and he populates it with so many wonderful details that hint at a carefully-constructed universe that I don't think I can even begin to grasp at with a first viewing. It's a challenging, morally ambiguous work, a great companion piece to Inglourious Basterds (which I'm very excited to watch again), and similarly astute about pop culture and its place in it.



Planet Terror - ***
Death Proof - ****
Fake trailers - **½
The whole thing - ***½

Since you seemed to like Death Proof so much. You should definitely watch the full version. It was filmed as a 2 hour movie and then cut to fit in the Grindhouse package. I've seen Grindhouse once and the 2 hour cut of Death Proof 4 times now and it's the better version.

[Ezee E]

Since you seemed to like Death Proof so much. You should definitely watch the full version. It was filmed as a 2 hour movie and then cut to fit in the Grindhouse package. I've seen Grindhouse once and the 2 hour cut of Death Proof 4 times now and it's the better version.
Disagree fully. The two hour version is just more fluff crammed in.

[EyesWideOpen]

Disagree fully. The two hour version is just more fluff crammed in.

It's my favorite QT movie. And I love QT movies.

[Ezee E]

It's my favorite QT movie. And I love QT movies.
I love QT movies too. And I think this is his one hiccup amongst the rest of his reel.

It has some fantastic moments, sure. But it takes far too long to get to them, and Spinal's post says it best. No need to repeat.

[EyesWideOpen]

Different strokes. I don't consider anything in Death Proof to be "fluff".

[StanleyK]

I disagree with just about everything you said here. Death Proof is easily Tarantino's most tedious film, full of bluster and bloat. The dialogue draws far too much attention to the writer rather than servicing the film. Unlike other Tarantino films where the dialogue amuses or heightens tension, here it just drones on and on and on. The narrative is really just atrocity followed by revenge interrupted by endless chit-chat. Not sure what's ambitious about that. Morally ambiguous? What, because the chicks beat the shit out of a murderer instead of reporting him to the proper authorities? It's not a complex film. There's a baddie baddie and some vulnerable hot chicks and some tough hot chicks. It's an exploitation film for people who like feet and women who won't shut up. I watched it twice thinking I had missed something and ending up discovering there was even less there than I thought. Not a good film.

On the contrary, I find that Tarantino's earlier films were more prone to dialogue that indulges him and adds little to it. The Like a Virgin analysis and tough-guy dialogue in Reservoir Dogs, the barely-contextualized references to TV shows in Pulp Fiction, are mostly amusing but give little insight into the characters. In Death Proof, when Stuntman Mike lists all the shows he's worked on and nobody knows them, it shows him as the sad forgotten product of a bygone era, adding some possible motivation as to why he stalks these young women to get his jollies on, or why he's so concerned with Jungle Julia's fame. When Zoe and Kim discuss Vanishing Point (which I have not seen, so there may be a stronger connection that I'm not aware of), it establishes their love of muscle cars and stunts, thus the fact that they're on equal grounds with Mike and the reason why they ultimately beat him. In any case, my visceral reaction to the dialogue was the opposite of yours. Instead of tedious or bloated, I found it to be funny and exciting.

The moral ambiguity comes from the fact that Stuntman Mike isn't just a baddie baddie and his victims aren't just vulnerable/tough chicks. Mike's dialogue at the bar is largely endearing, and his childlike vulnerability after he's shot makes him more pitiable than despicable. The moment when he smiles at the camera is particularly startling because the film has been so successful at making this serial killer likeable, and yet he knows that we know what's coming next (and then the movie subverts our expectations by, instead of picking them off one by one through the rest of the running time, he instead manages to kill all of them at once, and we're dropped with little recovery time onto his next batch of victims; this, along with the strong emphasis on long, Leone-like scenes of build-up through dialogue, is mostly what I referred to when I meant that Death Proof is ambitious). I do think that the fact that the girls have no qualms about hunting down and killing Mike is surprising, even considering its exploitation roots, but even if you don't, consider the coda: Tarantino takes a moment after the film is finished to show Abernathy, so far a relatively sweet-natured character (and she left her friend to be possibly raped just to have some fun with the other two!), caving Mike's skull in with her boot. It's pretty horrifying and I think it's meant to be intended as so.

[StanleyK]

Since you seemed to like Death Proof so much. You should definitely watch the full version. It was filmed as a 2 hour movie and then cut to fit in the Grindhouse package. I've seen Grindhouse once and the 2 hour cut of Death Proof 4 times now and it's the better version.

I'm definitely curious to watch the 2-hour version, but I'm also a little worried, considering that at 90 minutes, it felt pretty much perfect, without a single moment wasted. I'm not sure if actually seeing the lap dance is essential.

[Spinal]

It's not a very good lap dance.

[Pop Trash]

It's not a very good lap dance.

Nope. I did like the scene (in the extended cut) at the gas station where they pan across the magazine rack and the only mags you see are Film Comment and Fangoria. Pretty funny QT.

[MadMan]

I still slightly prefer Death Proof to Kill Bill Vol. 1. Both are his two lowest rated movies imo, but they are still pretty good. I'm glad I saw Grindhouse in theaters-the fake trailers were the best thing about the whole experience.

[Ivan Drago]

I still slightly prefer Death Proof to Kill Bill Vol. 1. Both are his two lowest rated movies imo, but they are still pretty good. I'm glad I saw Grindhouse in theaters-the fake trailers were the best thing about the whole experience.

This. Hope to get the blu ray soon.

[DavidSeven]

Death Proof is a straight-up masterpiece. Tarantino really continues to grow as a filmmaker; his craft is impeccable, every shot and cut is essential, fluid and impactful. The narrative strikes me as one of the most ambitious in American cinema of the decade, and he populates it with so many wonderful details that hint at a carefully-constructed universe that I don't think I can even begin to grasp at with a first viewing. It's a challenging, morally ambiguous work, a great companion piece to Inglourious Basterds (which I'm very excited to watch again), and similarly astute about pop culture and its place in it.


Absolutely correct. Every single word of it. Spot. On. You're the man now, StanleyK.

[B-side]

http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz70/SalvadorDali_2010/Miscellaneous/currentbanner.png

I've seen a few films cover nearly the same exact territory as this film; a group of friends experience an unexpected death in the group and are unsure of how to deal with it. Films like Mean Creek and River's Edge come to mind immediately. Neither of those are nearly as good as this. While River's Edge has an appealing trashiness to it that sets it apart from Mean Creek's more emotional approach, Current encompasses both the intellectual and emotional ramifications of this type of scenario with far more intelligence and keen observation. What begins as light entertainment with a gliding camera complimenting it; a group of friends having fun in and near a river that's size sees them decorating the shore, barely discernible as people, in far shots, slowly begins to be imbued with bits and pieces of tension in the group. Two of the guys capriciously and perhaps carelessly smother themselves in mud and mockingly imitate tribesmen, running contrary to their open minds and intellectual curiosity touched upon a mere minutes earlier. Such is youth. When tragedy finally strikes, all of them oscillate between finger-pointing, guilt and an intellectual easing of grief. The math lover frames his death in cosmic and cold fashion, much to the dismay of the artist who is seen discussing his grief with a man carving a statue in terms they're familiar with. A statue of a mother with a child in her lap watches on. Above all, the group assesses their capacity for grief given their supposedly poor memories and prior selfishness. Though the title surely refers to the waters that were the catalyst for the young man's early demise, they also refer to the generation of people featured. But there is reconciliation in grief as the young man's grandmother as well as his friends come together to identify the body. The grandmother grieves in silence until she musters the will to belt out a morbid ballad through her sobs in the solitude of her now empty home. The younger generation is initiated into college and adulthood with the new banning of swimming in the river they once identified with the best times of their lives. It should be noted, finally, that the camera work and staging are immaculate.

[StanleyK]

The Lost Weekend was not interesting at all. Alcoholism is bad, you say? Got it. Billy Wilder was one hell of a director though. The movie is worth watching thanks single-handedly to his filmmaking prowess. Not sure why I've seen so few of his films; I gotsta get on that.

[dreamdead]

Yeah, The Lost Weekend is definitely more important for symbolically breaking down the dictum that drunks can only endearing and funny. It's very much a social film like Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?, but suffers the same obvious bumps and simplicity when viewed now. And that coda is beyond ridiculousness.

The nearly 4 hours of Woodstock were surprisingly engaging and informative on a historical level, but almost wish that the film had been less panoramic and had instead followed a few of the crowdmembers around so that we could have a more thorough and individualized take on the event. Great musical performances, though...

[Pop Trash]

The Lost Weekend totally works for me if you view it as a dark comedy. "JUST GIVE ME ONE MORE DRINK!"

[MadMan]

http://dcairns.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/all-heaven-allows.jpg

Look, I know that Sirk was saying something more with All That Heaven Allows, and I imagine the studio interfered with the script. The use of expressionist colors, the stunning singular shots that capture just what the characters are feeling, all that really works and is great. But I hate the melodrama, and the class issues feel too shallow to me. Oh and I really think the movie should have closed with Cary looking into the TV, wondering why she gave up true love for nothing. But of course the movie had to have its "Happy Ending." Maybe I'm too damn cynical and grumpy, but that was lame.
Despite the last act being lackluster, the rest of the movie's rather obvious amount of quality and the great performances from the two leads are enough to make me give it a higher score than I probably should. That said, I do want to see more from Douglas Sirk, who clearly had talent and then split to Switzerland for the rest of his life after 1959. Wonder why he did that.

[baby doll]

That said, I do want to see more from Douglas Sirk, who clearly had talent and then split to Switzerland for the rest of his life after 1959. Wonder why he did that.Illness.

[MadMan]

Illness.Oh. That's a damn shame.

[Spinal]

Good Dick (Palka, 2008) *½
The Beaver (Foster, 2011) **
Love in the Afternoon (Rohmer, 1972) ***½

:|

[Boner M]

:|
I'm a whirlwind of a lover.

[B-side]

Nice long take from the latest film in my sig:

WKzRMkMbEVk

[Lasse]

Watching Bowfinger. I love that film. It's just my kind of comedy.

Also, it reminds me that I need to watch Mel Brooks' The Producers.

[Kurosawa Fan]

:|

You forgot the most important component: The Whip and the Body.

[StanleyK]

Contempt is Godard's most awe-inspiring filmmaking yet. I really prefer this long-take approach to the rapid-fire editing of Breathless; it makes the one instance of a jump-cut, the one quickly edited sequence (already a transcendent moment) so much more striking. It does lag in some spots (I was never bored, but at times I was less than entertained), but it's definitely a very involving movie, alternatively funny and heart-rending. My main complaint: Theme de Camille is a beautiful song, yes. But is it really necessary to set 80% of the running time to it? It's the same problem I had with Deborah's Theme in Once Upon a Time in America; if it was used more sparingly, it would've been incredibly effective, but hearing it so often makes it annoying instead.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Watched Hud today for the first time. What a fantastic script. Beautiful photography, as well. Certainly a new favorite. That was really impressive.

[Derek]

Watched Hud today for the first time. What a fantastic script. Beautiful photography, as well. Certainly a new favorite. That was really impressive.

Yeah, this one's a great film all-around. Newman's fantastic as well. This is a film I could see MC getting behind if more people saw it.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Yeah, this one's a great film all-around. Newman's fantastic as well. This is a film I could see MC getting behind if more people saw it.

Yeah, Newman is brilliant, but I find him brilliant in everything (he's my favorite actor, if I'm pushed to name one), so that goes without saying. I thought all the supporting players were also very good, a couple of whom I'd never seen before.

[Pop Trash]

I think I'm over Todd Solondz. Or his films have gotten worse. Or both.

[Irish]

Watched Hud today for the first time. What a fantastic script. Beautiful photography, as well. Certainly a new favorite. That was really impressive.

The script is shit. Read the book. It's a good one, and wholly different from the movie in important ways.

The cinematography is by James Wong Howe, who also did stuff like Sweet Smell of Success, but here he's better, maybe the best.

It's great photography but I don't know if it's good for the picture. It tends to distract, highlighting all the other weakness, like that story. I dunno if a good drama can survive Howe's photography. It's a movie. You shouldn't be constantly struck dumb by the compositions.

Still, though, holy shit what great pictures.

[Qrazy]

Yeah, this one's a great film all-around. Newman's fantastic as well. This is a film I could see MC getting behind if more people saw it.

I would think that many people in Match-cut have seen this and are behind it, as am I.

More people should get behind Martin Ritt in general though, Hombre and Paris Blues are both quality pics.

[Sven]

It's a movie. You shouldn't be constantly struck dumb by the compositions.

If I ask you to clarify this, am I going to regret it?

[Qrazy]

The script is shit. Read the book. It's a good one, and wholly different from the movie in important ways.

The cinematography is by James Wong Howe, who also did stuff like Sweet Smell of Success, but here he's better, maybe the best.

It's great photography but I don't know if it's good for the picture. It tends to distract, highlighting all the other weakness, like that story. I dunno if a good drama can survive Howe's photography. It's a movie. You shouldn't be constantly struck dumb by the compositions.

Still, though, holy shit what great pictures.

I would expect a better opinion, even from you. Seriously, by far your worst post. Be ashamed. In fact cower in a corner in terror at your own inadequacies.

[Qrazy]

If I ask you to clarify this, am I going to regret it?

Yes, yes you are.

[transmogrifier]

Some brief thoughts:

The Assassination of Jesse James etc etc

Movie succeeds as an overpowering depiction of dread and melancholia - the characters are all trapped in their roles (some self-made, like the horndog who just can't keep away from step-mothers, others made via public perception, like the two title characters) and plodding their ways to inevitable conclusions. The self-loathing of Jesse James is almost tangible. Gorgeously shot. 79

Martha Marcy May Marlene

Wisely chooses to focus solely on the title character, rather than getting bogged down in the reactions to the "family" she left behind and the family she has rejoined. This enables sequences of her trying to fit into the normality of her sisters life bleed into her memories of what she escaped, creating an impressive picture of someone who is going to struggle to put her past behind her. 70

Seance on a Wet Afternoon

Another beautifully directed film that takes a mentally unstable protagonist and instead of just letting her drive the plot with random actions to generate "suspense" focuses on the desperately toadying reaction of her husband, who does his best to go along with her plan not realising it is just strengthening her delusions. Great acting by the husband and wife team. 73

The Day He Arrives

Not a Hong Sang-Soo fan, but I still have this compulsive need to watch all his movies (partly out of nostalgia as they depict a lot of the Korea I loved while living there - eating out, drinking a lot, hanging with friends) because he is such a determined formalist and committed to his auteurist foibles that you can't help but believe that he is (accidentally?) going to make something brilliant one day, if he can just find the right premise/chemistry/whatever. This is one of his better efforts (for me) because it is funnier than most of his other stuff, but it's not breaking any new ground. 62

Chaw

A pretty crappy Korean Jaws knockoff featuring a giant wild pig, but I was still jazzed to be reacquainted with the Korean kitchen sink "fuck it, let's put this in there!" attitude to genre knock offs. For example, a teenage girl falls off her bike and is stalked by the pig. She gets back up to the road.....when she is hit by a van. The two drivers get out......and it turns out they have been drinking. So they pick up the girl.....and throw her down the bank and drive away. The girl is then eaten by the pig. And we never see the two drivers/murderers again. Also, there is a crazy woman in the village who pops up now and then but has absolutely nothing to do with the plot (and for some reason, despite the fact she wanders everywhere by herself, she is never a target for the pig) until the very last tag scene of the movie (after everything has been resolved AND we've had the cast list) when we see her in an isolated cabin in the country where she has the Quint of the movie (a big game hunter who was left to die in the forest about 30 minutes from the end of the film) tied up naked except for a diaper, and she threatens him with a huge knife until he calls her Mommy. Which he does in terror. For laughs. And then the film ends. God, I miss Korean movies that only play domestically. 48

[B-side]

I dunno if a good drama can survive Howe's photography. It's a movie. You shouldn't be constantly struck dumb by the compositions.

I'm kinda struck dumb right now. You know I love you, Irish, but wow.

[Irish]

If I ask you to clarify this, am I going to regret it?

I think for a movie to really succeed, all the elements have to be working in concert.

With Hud, they're not. You've got good actors, amazing cinematography and really just a bad adaptation of Larry McMurtry's novel. The whole movie is out of balance, because Howe's photography is working at a level that the rest of the production just is not.

[Irish]

I would expect a better opinion, even from you. Seriously, by far your worst post. Be ashamed. In fact cower in a corner in terror at your own inadequacies.

You'd be more interesting if you actually posted counter arguments. Your fetishistic approach to your own intellect is amusing, but it's like you've got the brains with no brawn behind them; it's like you want the credit and attention for being smart, but without actually doing any of the work.

[Derek]

I would think that many people in Match-cut have seen this and are behind it, as am I.

I'd wager less than 10 people on MatchCut have seen this. More should, point stands, Qrazy fails.

[transmogrifier]

I'd wager less than 10 people on MatchCut have seen this. More should, point stands, Qrazy fails.

I haven't seen it. So you're off to a good start, D.

[Qrazy]

You'd be more interesting if you actually posted counter arguments. Your fetishistic approach to your own intellect is amusing, but it's like you've got the brains with no brawn behind them; it's like you want the credit and attention for being smart, but without actually doing any of the work.

Yeah except I've done the work in the past and so anyone who knows me recognizes this and I can just coast on that shit. You on the other hand just post inane shit so you can coast on that I guess but it won't get you far.

I mean in all fairness I probably have a better memory than most so while I remember repeatedly pwning you in the past you may not. I would link you to some former discussions in order to substantiate your brains/brawn issue but really I can't be assed.

[Qrazy]

I'd wager less than 10 people on MatchCut have seen this. More should, point stands, Qrazy fails.

Do more than 10 people post on match-cut?

[B-side]

http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz70/SalvadorDali_2010/Miscellaneous/telegraphistbanner.png

I think most of us can agree that generally period pieces tend to have about them a pretense of self-importance. The customs and ideas are made elegant and even ideal. The Telegraphist succeeds first and foremost at stripping away that whimsy and nostalgic romanticization. Sure, the costumes are nice and the period affectations are pleasing, but the people and the repressive ideals aren't. The Telegraphist is a highly sexualized tale of a womanizing opportunist worming and wiggling his way to the top all for the sake of a single woman, it turns out. Odd because he seems to be in love with nearly every woman around him, and he seduces them as such with poetic verses and romantic flattery. It would seem he sees himself as the only really reasonable person in the area; not superstitious or stuffy in his adherence to certain codes of conduct. Maybe he's saving everyone from themselves. At its most serious, this film is barely serious. Even the technical bravado feels satirical. The camera is always peering through windows and from behind objects like a schoolboy peeking in at an older woman changing her clothes. Overall, it's a rather entertaining film.

[Kurosawa Fan]

The script is shit. Read the book. It's a good one, and wholly different from the movie in important ways.

I don't require a script to follow suit with the book from which it is adapted. That doesn't equal quality to me. I can judge the script on its own merits, completely separate from the source. It helps that I haven't read the novel, but just because it doesn't fall in line with the source material doesn't automatically make it "shit."

[Ivan Drago]

I'm 20 minutes into watching Super Fly and despite Curtis Mayfield's awesome score, the film itself clearly hasn't aged well.

[Irish]

I don't require a script to follow suit with the book from which it is adapted. That doesn't equal quality to me. I can judge the script on its own merits, completely separate from the source. It helps that I haven't read the novel, but just because it doesn't fall in line with the source material doesn't automatically make it "shit."

I'm not saying that any script needs to duplicate a book in order to be good. Far from it. The strength of an adaptation isn't about how faithfully it follows the source, but how it interprets that source and tries to capture the essence of the story, or, at least, cast a new angle on that story.

Hud's script is bad because its pacing is terrible and it's too episodic. It's a movie that feels arbitrarily plotless when it really shouldn't be, and it tries to hang a story around events that have nothing to do with one another outside a gimpy Cat on a Hot Tin Roof father-son relationship dynamic.

A better example of the kind of thing Hud tries to do and fails at is The Last Picture Show, which captures the spirit of McMurtry's novel without strictly duplicating its contents. There, I think, too, you have a situation where all the elements mesh well, with no single performance, photo, or score overshadowing the rest.

Edit: When I said "wholly different from the book in important ways," in my previous post, I was referring to the character of Alma being black in the book. That adds an entirely new level to the story that the movie excises for really no good reason, outside of the racial politics of the time.

[Kurosawa Fan]

You're using adjectives that make me think that either you're too tied to the source material to judge properly, or it's been far too long since you've seen it, and a rewatch is in order. I found absolutely nothing about Hud episodic, and found the pacing consistent and appropriate for the environment and the subject. I don't know how you could feel that the film feels "plotless." You and I definitely don't see eye-to-eye on this one at all.

[Irish]

You're using adjectives that make me think that either you're too tied to the source material to judge properly, or it's been far too long since you've seen it, and a rewatch is in order. I found absolutely nothing about Hud episodic, and found the pacing consistent and appropriate for the environment and the subject. I don't know how you could feel that the film feels "plotless." You and I definitely don't see eye-to-eye on this one at all.

I watched Hud sometime in the last few years, I think. There are shots in that movie that I can still recall with picture-perfect clarity where some of the other details are a bit fuzzy. It's been over a decade since I've read the book.

It's on iTunes and I'm tempted to rewatch.

[Robby P]

Loves me some Hud. Martin Ritt and Paul Newman make a damn fine team.

[StanleyK]

I don't think I could have had a worse introduction to Powell & Pressburger than I Know Where I'm Going!. There was absolutely zero chemistry between the two leads (I still have no idea when they actually fell in love, nor why he would have wanted anything to do with her), didn't care much for either lead performance, found the story pretty dull, as it seemed more content with giving a history of northern Scotland than with actually developing character, and found the reveal of the curse at the end laughable.

Late to the party, but I just saw this one and largely agree (and it's my first Powell/Pressburger joint, too). I did enjoy it more than Kurosawa Fan as I didn't think it was dull- the film's lively visual wit and colorful side-characters kept me entertained. But yeah, as a romance it's really weak, and its rich people/simple folks dichotomy is pretty simplistic (I did appreciate the scene where Catriona says they'd all do something stupid for money; the film needed more of that, and less stereotypical rich douchebags. Not denying that the rich douchebags scene was really funny). I actually thought it was pretty good up until the last five minutes, but the ending went and ruined it.

[Mysterious Dude]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/it/d/dc/Mastroianni_e_Fellini_set_8_e_ mezzo_1963.jpg

I watched 8½ for the first time in many years, and I have to concede that I was wrong and the critics were right -- this film is pretty much a masterpiece. I hate to admit it, but I just didn't understand it. I found it confusing. I think I must not have had a very good attention span back then, because today I found it quite easy to distinguish the real-world/present-day scenes from the memories and fantasies.

It might be unfair to assume that 8½ is autobiographical, although that is very easy to assume. I don't think very many people in the real world can identify with Guido's position in the film. He is different than the way I normally think of a "genius." Hitchcock and Kubrick are perceived to have been perfectionists who knew exactly what they were doing all the time. Guido seems to have no idea what he's doing. He has found himself in a position of leadership over a large number of people, who surround him and relentlessly beg him for direction, and he is utterly unable to give it to them. (I love how they're often filmed looking straight at the camera and a little too close for comfort; you can almost feel Guido being suffocated by them). To give a counter-example, the way Mark Zuckerberg is depicted in The Social Network, he always seems so calculated and so sure of himself that you can understand how he made his way to the top. With Guido, I wonder how he ever managed to convince anyone to give him money to make a film.

In a way it's kind of refreshing. V. S. Naipaul recently said that he didn't think any female writer could ever be his equal. I had begun to think that to be a successful artist of any kind, you have to be just that arrogant. You have to believe you are better than anyone else. It's nice to hear an artist admit, "I have nothing to say, but I want to say it anyway."

[Irish]

Thoughtful post. Guido is identifiable to the audience because of the chaotic nature of adult life, relationships, and having any responsibility to people outside yourself. He's also reflective of the nature of the creativity, with its frustrations, flashes of inspiration, dead ends, and turnarounds.

[baby doll]

V. S. Naipaul recently said that he didn't think any female writer could ever be his equal. I had begun to think that to be a successful artist of any kind, you have to be just that arrogant. You have to believe you are better than anyone else.I don't know if that's arrogant so much as old school misogynist.

[Mysterious Dude]

Thoughtful post. Guido is identifiable to the audience because of the chaotic nature of adult life, relationships, and having any responsibility to people outside yourself. He's also reflective of the nature of the creativity, with its frustrations, flashes of inspiration, dead ends, and turnarounds.
Good point. I guess I meant that his role as a leader who is unable to lead is probably something that not many people have to deal with (and that's why I think the film is probably autobiographical), but you're right that he is identifiable in other ways. I think I'm more able to relate to such things now that I'm an adult myself (sob!); I was probably in my late teens the last time I saw the movie.

[Qrazy]

Quality comments on the film Isaac. But yeah, the film is not probably autobiographical. It is certainly autobiographical. Read about the making of... Fellini basically was starting work on a film but had no idea where to take it and then decided to make a film about the fact that he didn't know. This is why this will always be the quintessential film about the creation of film, because it's a deeply personal work from an artist at the top of his game.

[Ivan Drago]

I have no excuse as to why I haven't seen Saving Private Ryan for the first time until now. That is one of the best directed films, and one of the best films, in general, that I've ever seen.

[B-side]

http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz70/SalvadorDali_2010/Miscellaneous/idlersfertilebanner.png

In the tradition of Buñuel's The Exterminating Angel, The Idlers of the Fertile Valley is a leisurely paced social satire of wealth-induced inaction. After his brother dies and leaves the family a big country mansion, a man takes his three sons there for a holiday. Sloth soon takes over and they all begin sleeping more and more and eating less. The virtue of the family's wealth gives them license to do pretty much nothing but molest the maid and sleep and resent those who'd dare do more. "What is there to do outside?" is spoken several times in response to the notion of leaving the comfort of their new home. After what I can only assume is several months, or perhaps even a few years, and after the father had begun being catered to in his bed despite there being nothing wrong with him, his penis literally turns into a giant tumor, which gives way to a rather amusing scene in which the maid grabs the prop and deflates it like a bean bag as two of his sons look on in forced concern masking near anhedonia-level indifference. The maid becomes almost like a domesticated animal, sticking around to care for the men despite them calling her a slut and whore and generally treating her poorly. She assists them around the house, cleans up the house, fixes dinner and occasionally has sex with a few of them, but she's in love with the youngest one who is the only one interested in getting a job. The father and other two sons insult and criticize him, claiming he's needlessly worrying and disgracing the family. The end offers some relief from the constant suffocation of the musty interior of the mansion. It's not as inventive or interesting as Buñuel's satires of a similar nature, but it is good.

[Bosco B Thug]

Ophuls’ film is based on a play of the same name, that was about class and the spreading of syphilis through a series of rencontres sexuelles. Sounds like an absolute riot. Ophuls drops the disease, and most of the class issues in his interpretation of the work. AW!

La Ronde is formally exquisite, though I'm sure many feel similarly with me about the film's conceit, which, while finely observed, is just barely interesting. It's kind of like a (500) Days of Summer of the day - too many clever answers, not enough open-ended questions.

[Pop Trash]

I have no excuse as to why I haven't seen Saving Private Ryan for the first time until now. That is one of the best directed films, and one of the best films, in general, that I've ever seen.

As a first time viewer, what really blew you away about it? I'm genuinely curious.

[B-side]

http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz70/SalvadorDali_2010/Miscellaneous/kairatbanner.png

Consider me pleasantly surprised to have loved this as much as I did. Elliptical and with an emphasis on sound akin to that of Bresson, Kairat is a minimalist tale of a young man attempting to become a bus conductor in the city and his relationship with his first love. The film begins with a small act of defiance from a rural boy; he throws a rock at a window in a passing train, and the shattering of that window introduces us to Kairat, the titular student. Trains are frequent throughout the film. They are, after all, one of the first major additions to a developing nation. They represent the urbanization of the land and are the catalyst for the mass emigration to the big cities. Kairat is full of subdued emotion and simple sublimity. It's quietly political and moves between dream and reality absolutely seamlessly in terms of tone, imbuing the film with a certain elusive ambiguity with touches of the bizarre. This is just terrific cinema.

[Spun Lepton]

I've watched the first two parts of the Carlos miniseries off the Sundance channel, currently streaming on Netflix Instant. Each episode is an entire movie, with the third and final one clocking in at almost 2.5 hours.

So far it's fucking excellent. The 2nd one was riveting.

I appreciate the intellectual honesty they display, too. There's a message at the beginning of each episode stating that it's the result of research and that they have fictionalized many of Carlos the Jackal's personal relationships.

[Dukefrukem]

So I guess there are defective Blu-rays of Sunshine. "Sunshine" has been unplayable on Blu-ray because its picture-in-picture viewing mode cannot be disabled. Therefor during certain parts of the movie, the behind the scenes PiP mode will start playing over the main scene. Bummer. Really wanted to watch this over the weekend. I guess FOX replaces these Blu-rays on their customer support line.

[Henry Gale]

So I guess there are defective Blu-rays of Sunshine. "Sunshine" has been unplayable on Blu-ray because its picture-in-picture viewing mode cannot be disabled. Therefor during certain parts of the movie, the behind the scenes PiP mode will start playing over the main scene. Bummer. Really wanted to watch this over the weekend. I guess FOX replaces these Blu-rays on their customer support line.

Well, I think this was a problem back when it came out with Blu-ray players that didn't have internet capabilities to properly update the necessary firmware (since at the time, it was still working out kinks that HD-DVD didn't have to). Not sure why it wouldn't work now, especially if you have a newer, or at least up-to-date player.

[Dukefrukem]

Well, I think this was a problem back when it came out with Blu-ray players that didn't have internet capabilities to properly update the necessary firmware (since at the time, it was still working out kinks that HD-DVD didn't have to). Not sure why it wouldn't work now, especially if you have a newer, or at least up-to-date player.

It's a defect with the disc. You can't update firmware on the disc.

[B-side]

So, I kinda loved Crank: High Voltage. Extended thoughts here (http://cinematicinsecurity.wordpress. com/2011/08/01/crank-high-voltage-neveldinetaylor-2009/).

[Ivan Drago]

Now, I love watching stupid movies as much as the next guy, but when you're a film like Rubber, and take yourself seriously on your absurdity, and even tell your audience your film is absurd, it just takes all the fun out of watching something completely stupid. It's very well shot, and what there is of a score from Mr. Oizo is awesome, though.


So, I kinda loved Crank: High Voltage. Extended thoughts here (http://cinematicinsecurity.wordpress. com/2011/08/01/crank-high-voltage-neveldinetaylor-2009/).

There's a perfect example of doing absurdity in film correctly.

[Sven]

So, I kinda loved Crank: High Voltage. Extended thoughts here (http://cinematicinsecurity.wordpress. com/2011/08/01/crank-high-voltage-neveldinetaylor-2009/).

No American flag?

[B-side]

No American flag?

Heh. Those are re-posted from another thread for a different forum. Tried to spice up the presentation a bit for it.:P

I knew it would please you that I enjoyed it so much. I live to please you.

[StanleyK]

I don't know, I really enjoyed the first Crank, but High Voltage seemed mostly ugly and depressing to me. As crazy as the first one was, it was still executed with some manner of restraint, which is much more engaging than the second film's completely random insanity; it certainly doesn't have any gags as clever as the one when Chelios' girlfriend refuses to bring him to climax, so he walks out of the car and caps some bad guys.

[StanleyK]

Cantet's Time Out was pretty damn good. The man sure knows how to frame and edit a conversation to get the most out of his actors; he slips into some more conventional patterns some times, but they're forgivable because of wonderful moments like Vincent's monologue with his wife slightly out of focus in the background, or when during a trek in the snow he turns around and briefly thinks he's lost her. The ending was a bit underwhelming, though. I'm still kind of ambivalent, but I'm pretty sure ending with the penultimate scene would have been more appropriate and impactful. Still, a really damn good movie overall.

[Sven]

I knew it would please you that I enjoyed it so much.

It does. But your assessment of the first as fluff is no good. Also, the first one introduces the video game angle, not sure how you missed it.

[B-side]

It does. But your assessment of the first as fluff is no good. Also, the first one introduces the video game angle, not sure how you missed it.

You're probably right. I haven't watched it since I saw it in theaters.

[Dukefrukem]

Now, I love watching stupid movies as much as the next guy, but when you're a film like Rubber, and take yourself seriously on your absurdity, and even tell your audience your film is absurd, it just takes all the fun out of watching something completely stupid. It's very well shot, and what there is of a score from Mr. Oizo is awesome, though.



There's a perfect example of doing absurdity in film correctly.

Oh come on. The film was made for no reason. a 4???

[B-side]

it certainly doesn't have any gags as clever as the one when Chelios' girlfriend refuses to bring him to climax, so he walks out of the car and caps some bad guys.

I think it does. The draining implant deflating the masculinity of the shootout. The insert of the Greek statue when Chelios says Doc is speaking Greek because he doesn't understand it. The sex on the horse track, and the blurring during. Chelios rubbing against Chester Bennington. It's funny.

[Spun Lepton]

Quick ratings breakdown for the Carlos miniseries ...

Part 1 -- 7/10
Part 2 -- 8/10
Part 3 -- 6/10

Part 3 felt overlong, and there were one or two exposition-y scenes in the last 45 minutes. Overall total miniseries, though, is worth a look.

[Dead & Messed Up]

So, I kinda loved Crank: High Voltage. Extended thoughts here (http://cinematicinsecurity.wordpress. com/2011/08/01/crank-high-voltage-neveldinetaylor-2009/).

Cool review. You talk about how it's a video game movie, and I'm wondering if you can elaborate on that a bit. Obviously there's the life-meter restoration parallel in both films, which adrenaline in the first and electricity in the second. The eight-bit titles also. Do you see more parallels? I agree that the connection exists, but the films seem more like a deconstruction of modern action in general - one step beyond cheeky half-kidders like Shoot 'em Up and Torque.

[Ivan Drago]

Oh come on. The film was made for no reason. a 4???

Yep. As I said in my earlier post, to literally state "This is absurd for the sake of being absurd" takes the fun out of watching it.

[Rowland]

And it clearly isn't just absurd for the sake of absurd when it makes such a literalized point of itself as such, and ends with as blatant a pointed mission statement of sorts as the final image featuring a certain famous sign; it's very much a self-reflexive film about the audience and the cinema made for them. Too bad then that its sledgehammer philosophizing plays as both overly simplified and muddled in its approach and perspective. The best material is ironically the stuff that is played the straightest.

[Dukefrukem]

Yep. As I said in my earlier post, to literally state "This is absurd for the sake of being absurd" takes the fun out of watching it.

He was playing with the real audience. It's not for a few seconds do you realize there's a fake audience in the movie. It's borderline breaking through the 4th wall and gets viewers to contemplate the movie's theme and how not to rationalize certain elements of the movie.

I thought that was a neat idea.

[Rowland]

I prefer the first Crank, though I've admittedly seen that close to half a dozen times whereas I've only seen High Voltage once, so I may feel differently with repeat viewings of the latter. Both are wonderful, and I dug Gamer as well, though that one struck me as incompetently edited.

[MadMan]

I'm 20 minutes into watching Super Fly and despite Curtis Mayfield's awesome score, the film itself clearly hasn't aged well.Bah, its one of the best blackexplotation movies ever made. Although when it comes to that genre I think that Across a 110th Street is better.

At some point I should probably view both Crank movies.

Oh and Cowboys & Aliens, while solid and fairly entertaining (I also dug the cast they gathered for this. Its surprising that it took this long for Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford to be cast in a western) reminds me that the western is dead. I know its based off a graphic novel and such, but I wish it had been a regular western without aliens and massive cool looking explosions. Which means I share Ebert's opinion on this movie. Oh well.

[Winston*]

Watched Birth of a Nation. Was kind of disappointed watching the first half, since it was only really racist, but then I got to the second half and it was really really racist.

[Derek]

Watched Birth of a Nation. Was kind of disappointed watching the first half, since it was only really racist, but then I got to the second half and it was really really racist.

It really hits its racist stride once the "crazed negroes" show up.

[Winston*]

The bit where the dude sees kids pretending to be a ghost with a sheet and then is like "I've got it!" made me laugh out loud.

[Bosco B Thug]

The bit where the dude sees kids pretending to be a ghost with a sheet and then is like "I've got it!" made me laugh out loud.
That part's really the cherry on top. Not horrifyingly racist... just horrifying.

[Ezee E]

I like how Lincoln regretfully signs the Emancipation Proclamation, and then has a long sigh afterwards.

[B-side]

Cool review. You talk about how it's a video game movie, and I'm wondering if you can elaborate on that a bit. Obviously there's the life-meter restoration parallel in both films, which adrenaline in the first and electricity in the second. The eight-bit titles also. Do you see more parallels? I agree that the connection exists, but the films seem more like a deconstruction of modern action in general - one step beyond cheeky half-kidders like Shoot 'em Up and Torque.

I kinda saw the adrenaline and electricity aspects as being sort of power-ups or health packs, which I guess is more or less what you're referring to. The final confrontation is set up like a boss fight, I think, and the whole film in general kinda operates on logic that only really exists in videogames. I can definitely see it as a deconstruction of modern action films, paring it down to its bare masculine essentials and subtly undermining it in the process.

[Spun Lepton]

Rubber gets a 0/10 because I could not finish it. Simply put, the whole "No Reason" gag ends up being a crutch for lazy writing. The end film is beyond boring.

The amateurish opening speech set a tone I immediately disliked, "Why didn't we see the kids in the Texas Chainsaw Massacre wash their hands or go to the bathroom? No reason!" No, there was a reason, you hack. It's because IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BORING. Shut up.

I've rewatched Erik the Viking two times over the last 2 decades. Each time I fired it up hoping to see something that I'd missed on the prior viewing, but ... nope. There's some kind of spark missing. Occasionally funny, but overall pretty meh. I wish I could put my finger on exactly where it stumbles, but it's just a general meh. The adventure is meh. The humor is meh. The attempts at being sweet and heartfelt are meh. 5/10

[baby doll]

Rubber gets a 0/10 because I could not finish it. Simply put, the whole "No Reason" gag ends up being a crutch for lazy writing. The end film is beyond boring.

The amateurish opening speech set a tone I immediately disliked, "Why didn't we see the kids in the Texas Chainsaw Massacre wash their hands or go to the bathroom? No reason!" No, there was a reason, you hack. It's because IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BORING. Shut up.What would be good screenwriting in a movie about a sentient, psychopathic tire with telepathic powers? Basically, it's a horror movie remake of Duck Amuck (like Daffy Duck, the cop knows that he's in a movie within a movie) that takes apart narrative cinema, both in terms of narrative logic and editing (it's obvious that the in-film audience couldn't possibly see what they're supposed to be seeing). Ultimately, it has more in common with Bruno Dumont's Twentynine Palms (a "No reason" movie if there ever was one) than Hobo With a Shotgun.

[Spun Lepton]

What would be good screenwriting in a movie about a sentient, psychopathic tire with telepathic powers?

A story about a sentient, psychopathic tire with telepathic powers, rather than a string of non-sequitur "humor." Oh, look he has a turkey in his room!! Why? NO REASON!! HAHAHAHAHAH GET IT GET IT?!?! HAHAHAHAHAHA!! GET IT?!?!?

[baby doll]

A story about a sentient, psychopathic tire with telepathic powers, rather than a string of non-sequitur "humor." Oh, look he has a turkey in his room!! Why? NO REASON!! HAHAHAHAHAH GET IT GET IT?!?! HAHAHAHAHAHA!! GET IT?!?!?I don't know if you stuck around that long, but the turkey winds up playing a fairly prominent role in the narrative.

[Spun Lepton]

I don't know if you stuck around that long, but the turkey winds up playing a fairly prominent role in the narrative.

The audience eats it like a pack of feral dogs? And why are they acting like feral dogs? NO REASON HAW HAW HAW.

[baby doll]

The audience eats it like a pack of wild boars?Is that about the time when you shut it off?

[Spun Lepton]

Is that about the time when you shut it off?

Yup.

[baby doll]

Yup.There's a plot twist that happens about five seconds after you shut it off.

[Spun Lepton]

There's a plot twist that happens about five seconds after you shut it off.

There was a plot to twist?

[baby doll]

There was a plot to twist?Yeah, there was a definitely a reason for the cop and his assistant leaving the audience in the desert for several days and then letting them feast on a turkey.

[Rowland]

The audience eats it like a pack of feral dogs? And why are they acting like feral dogs? NO REASON HAW HAW HAW.Oh, there was a reason. One of the film's more contemptuous moments in fact, equating his audience with a pack of animals (or zombies) thirsty for blood, for which they are consequently punished.

[MadMan]

The strong negative feedback for Rubber is making me want to see it even more, despite the fact that the criticisms appear valid to me.

[Qrazy]

http://whatisthepyramid.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/ouroboros_lezard_tatou.jpg

[kuehnepips]

I've rewatched Erik the Viking ... it's just a general meh. The adventure is meh. The humor is meh. The attempts at being sweet and heartfelt are meh. 5/10

Yes. Erik the Meh so to speak.

I'm on a Jet-Li-trip recently and been rewatching everything he's ever made. Someone should beat me up.

Speaking of: Where is Scar lately?

[Spun Lepton]

The strong negative feedback for Rubber is making me want to see it even more, despite the fact that the criticisms appear valid to me.

Good luck with that.

[Dukefrukem]

What I like about Rubber is it doesn't overstay its welcome. It's a short (85 min) fun flick.

[Spun Lepton]

What I like about Rubber is it doesn't overstay its welcome. It's a short (85 min) fun flick.

Disagree. It overstays its welcome within 5 minutes. I think I was being generous by giving it 35.

[Ezee E]

Yep. I said it'd probably work just fine as a short film.

[Dukefrukem]

I had no idea Mila Kunis spoke fluent Russian (http://gawker.com/5827142/mila-kunis-chews-out-reporter-in-fluent-russian). This does make her more smokin' hot in my eyes.

[Mara]

I had no idea Mila Kunis spoke fluent Russian (http://gawker.com/5827142/mila-kunis-chews-out-reporter-in-fluent-russian). This does make her more smokin' hot in my eyes.

She was born in the Ukraine.

I actually find this story (from an interview) rather charming:


What was the first thing you remember seeing of America?

A black man. It was at the American embassy [in Moscow], and all I had known were Caucasian people with blond hair, brunette hair, and sometimes red hair. You’re never really taught about anything else. I think I was frightened. And the beautiful thing was, the man spoke Russian. He explained to me that there are people in this world who are of different color. Being seven and a half, I asked him, “Does that mean there are purple people in this world?”

[Qrazy]

'There are.' He replied. 'But they are people eaters.'

[StanleyK]

The Maltese Falcon was good; story and Bogart were pretty cool. Based on this and Sierra Madre though (those are the only of his I've seen, so it may be a premature judgment), I don't think Huston was much of a director. His style is really bland, compositions and editing merely functional and second fiddle to the actors and plot.

[Philosophe_rouge]

To be fair, Huston was still quite young when he made those films. I don't think he ever became a whirl-wind formalist but a lot of his later works are so fascinating and his restraint is sometimes appreciated. A divisive and perhaps, overindulgent film, Reflections in a Golden Eye is basically an anti-thesis of practical and bland filmmaking of classic Hollywood. I quite like it, but not everyone does. Looking at his filmography, nearly all of my favourites of his come in the post-1960 period, Reflections, The Misfits, Night of the Iguana, Fat City, Under the Volcano...

[MadMan]

Good luck with that.Why thanks.


Oh wait, you were being sarcastic? No shit....

But at least your post was better than whatever the hell Qrazy was trying to say with his random ass picture.

[Dead & Messed Up]

But at least your post was better than whatever the hell Qrazy was trying to say with his random ass picture.

The snake eating his own tail is an ouroboros, which is a classic symbol for something that's endlessly cyclical.

[MadMan]

The snake eating his own tail is an ouroboros, which is a classic symbol for something that's endlessly cyclical.Yes, but how is that funny?

[Yxklyx]

To be fair, Huston was still quite young when he made those films. I don't think he ever became a whirl-wind formalist but a lot of his later works are so fascinating and his restraint is sometimes appreciated. A divisive and perhaps, overindulgent film, Reflections in a Golden Eye is basically an anti-thesis of practical and bland filmmaking of classic Hollywood. I quite like it, but not everyone does. Looking at his filmography, nearly all of my favourites of his come in the post-1960 period, Reflections, The Misfits, Night of the Iguana, Fat City, Under the Volcano...

His early masterpiece is The Asphalt Jungle. I quite like Fat City and Night of the Iguana and Beat the Devil is a riot. I love his last film The Dead. He has some clunkers though like Wise Blood and Moulin Rouge. I do agree that the two early films mentioned are rather bland but I like them nonetheless because of Bogart.

[Qrazy]

The Maltese Falcon was good; story and Bogart were pretty cool. Based on this and Sierra Madre though (those are the only of his I've seen, so it may be a premature judgment), I don't think Huston was much of a director. His style is really bland, compositions and editing merely functional and second fiddle to the actors and plot.

Yeah. No. His editing is top tier. I agree re: his compositions in relation to those two films though. However, I think his approach their was entirely intentional.

Check out The Misfits, Asphalt Jungle, The Dead, Night of the Iguana and Fat City.

[Qrazy]

Yes, but how is that funny?

It is reflective of the vast majority of your posts such as...

"The strong negative feedback for Rubber is making me want to see it even more, despite the fact that the criticisms appear valid to me."

[Winston*]

Watched Life is Beautiful for the first time in ten years. Odd movie. Only the power of broad comedy will help your son survive a weird fantasy version of the holocaust.

[Boner M]

Odd movie. Only the power of broad comedy will help your son survive a weird fantasy version of the holocaust.
I like this.

[Pop Trash]

The Mexico location shoots in Sierra Madre are so great. Blows so many 40s Hollywood movies away. And the editing is top tier.

[Bosco B Thug]

His early masterpiece is The Asphalt Jungle. I quite like Fat City and Night of the Iguana and Beat the Devil is a riot. I love his last film The Dead. He has some clunkers though like Wise Blood and Moulin Rouge. I do agree that the two early films mentioned are rather bland but I like them nonetheless because of Bogart. Oh good, I thought that one was a clunker, too.

[MadMan]

It is reflective of the vast majority of your posts such as...

"The strong negative feedback for Rubber is making me want to see it even more, despite the fact that the criticisms appear valid to me."Yes, but if you are going to mock my posts, then make me laugh. Otherwise, don't even bother.

[Dukefrukem]

The Girl Who Leapt Through Time was surprisingly emotional. Fantastic animation work.

[Qrazy]

Yes, but if you are going to mock my posts, then make me laugh. Otherwise, don't even bother.

That's not how this works.

[Ezee E]

Brett Ratner is producer of next year's Oscars. LOL. Seriously... (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movies/2011/08/brett-ratner-oscars-2012-produce-show-academy-awards.html).

[Derek]

Brett Ratner is producer of next year's Oscars. LOL. Seriously... (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movies/2011/08/brett-ratner-oscars-2012-produce-show-academy-awards.html).

When you're looking for a dull, bloated epic with a lot of flash and no substance that people will forget 2 days after they see it, Brett Ratner is your man.

[Dead & Messed Up]

When you're looking for a dull, bloated epic with a lot of flash and no substance that people will forget 2 days after they see it, Brett Ratner is your man.

I dug Red Dragon, X-Men 3, and Rush Hour. Not sure what that says about me. Maybe that my taste lapses in the presence of Hannibal Lecter, mutant smash, and Jackie Chan.

[Skitch]

Tucker And Dale Vs Evil = awesome.

[Bosco B Thug]

I'm not sure Muriel's unconventional construction always works, but when it does, it is brilliant. I wasn't loving it at first, but about halfway through it clicks and the fragments become like tasty, tasty morsels of candy. Brilliantly ambitious, flawed or not.

[MadMan]

That's not how this works.Considering that there are several people on the boards who have poked fun at my posts in a really funny and clever manner, its exactly how it works. Just be glad there is no "Meh" rep.

[Spun Lepton]

Tucker And Dale Vs Evil = awesome.

I was irritated by the trailer that appeared to show a five-minute version of the entire movie. However, I really want to see this.