28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[Russ]

The Driver (Walter Hill)

:air guitar:

I can't wait for you to see this.
For my money, it's got the best car chases ever filmed.

[Qrazy]

Lots of hyperbole in the last few pages.

Think I'm going to watch The Scent of Green Papaya.

[MadMan]

Lots of hyperbole in the last few pages.

Think I'm going to watch The Scent of Green Papaya.You say that like its a bad thing :P

[baby doll]

I really honestly don't blame Jackie Chan for making Rush Hour 3.I'm kind of curious to see this, simply because Roman Polanski's in it, but not having seen the first two Rush Hours, I'm afraid I'd be lost completely.

Speak of the devil, if anyone knows where I can download What? (1972), I'd be much obliged.

[Wryan]

I drink your milkshake!

My mouth got dry hanging open for such extended periods of time. In a good way. Baptism for scene of the year.

[origami_mustache]

Lots of hyperbole in the last few pages.

Think I'm going to watch The Scent of Green Papaya.

hmm I've had this for a while...I should watch soon.

[megladon8]

3:10 to Yuma was even better the second time.

It's nice to see that "big" movies can still be great - and westerns, at that *cough*AMERICANOUTLAWS*cough*.

[Sven]

For my money, it's got the best car chases ever filmed.

What do you get when you cross Bullitt, The French Connection, Ronin, The Bourne Identities, and The Italian Job?

You get 1/2 of the awesomeness of The Driver.

[Russ]

Oh. Big Bang Love, Juvenile A was quite lovely as well.

Hmm, didn't know quite what to make of this one. Miike goes on to show that he might as well be working in theater with his wonderful lighting, staging, mise en scene, etc. It starts off very very well... figured it was saying something about alienated male youths (well, duh, I know) coming of age/existence in an ageless, unloving environment... and I thought it was doing it well in its cryptic, abstract visual way... but then I felt it failed to go anywhere at the end. When the

investigation begins, it becomes [relatively, disappointingly] straight-forward and its approach to its array of characters suddenly becomes somewhat reductive. We need to learn more about both main characters' psyches, but with the one's death, the film takes on the need to look backward, which halts thematic richness and gives us half-baked exposition (he raped the prison director's wife... why and how did it effect him?). The scenes with the two men and their journey outside to the spaceship and pyramid were hopeful signs of the film reaching some emotional conclusion, but instead the film seems to degrade into a mere collection of cinematic puns on a burgeoning but repressed homosexual relationship that should inform the story until the very end (not to belittle the visual grace and sensitivity Miike does bring to the table, or not that I've seen a Miike film possibly about homosexuality other than Gozu, which I hardly remember thus can't really rate, though I suspect it was a darkly comic, non-sentimental version of this).

Or maybe the film just frustrated me because it's too hard to get the damn thing! :P I certainly felt at a loss at the end.
Perhaps the only time I've wished a Miike film were longer as the ending did feel a bit rushed. To address your issues,

I thought the investigative exposition was a crucial component in establishing the exact nature of the relationship between the two leads. Each boy had deep feelings for the other from the very beginning, as during the strip search, Jun imagines Shiro's naked body covered with the ritualistic tattoos of one of his earlier fantasies; and Shiro would beat the hell out of anybody that dared taunt Jun. Their violent natures were born out of violence (Jun's in his implied rape by one of the bar patrons and Shiro's physical abuse as a child). Agreed that the rape of the warden's wife was a red herring to briefly increase the suspect count (btw, how about Audtion's Ryo Ishibashi giving a totally wacked-out performance as the warden? Great stuff!)

When Shiro is forced to come face to face with his feelings for Jun (in the Heaven or Space? scene), he rejects sexual intimacy with Jun because Jun has answered the hypothetical question by saying he wants to go to Heaven (ie, Shiro loves Jun, but fears that acting on his desires may preclude Jun's ascension). And this sets up the denouement that both solves the mystery of Shiro's death and reinforces Jun's devotion for Shiro. He confessed to the murder because he so badly wanted to be the one who was responsible for sending Shiro to Heaven.

At least that's how I see it. The film is so loaded with symbolism, I'll need a couple more viewings to digest it all. Stylistically and visually, this film is the pinnacle of Miike's career so far. It was like watching one of Seijun Suzuki's color-saturated avant-garde hyper-fractured narratives played out on one of von Trier's chalk-outlined stage settings. Except with prison brutality, brooding young men, and all that craaaaaazy shit that Miike is so well known for. **** for me too.

[MadMan]

So yeah Open Range rocks. Pure and simple, especially that badass gun fight. Robert Duvell was his usual great self, Annette Being was pretty gorgous looking for her age, and I think Kevin Costner gave one of the best performances of his career. I have more thoughts on the film among other things, which I plan on elaborating on later this week. But I think I found a new favorite from 2003. I love how the gunfight began. Kevin Costner just walks right up to that killer and then shoots him in the head. I busted out laughing and thought "Damn that's super cool."

[megladon8]

So yeah Open Range rocks. Pure and simple, especially that badass gun fight. Robert Duvell was his usual great self, Annette Being was pretty gorgous looking for her age, and I think Kevin Costner gave one of the best performances of his career. I have more thoughts on the film among other things, which I plan on elaborating on later this week. But I think I found a new favorite from 2003. I love how the gunfight began. Kevin Costner just walks right up to that killer and then shoots him in the head. I busted out laughing and thought "Damn that's super cool."


I agree completely :)

It's one of my favorite films of the decade - I thought Costner was great as both actor and director.

The gunfight is one of the best ever, as well :)

[Watashi]

Man, I forgot how bad Jurassic Park III is. I can't believe some of you people think this is better than the first.

[Bosco B Thug]

Perhaps the only time I've wished a Miike film were longer as the ending did feel a bit rushed. To address your issues,

I thought the investigative exposition was a crucial component in establishing the exact nature of the relationship between the two leads. Each boy had deep feelings for the other from the very beginning, as during the strip search, Jun imagines Shiro's naked body covered with the ritualistic tattoos of one of his earlier fantasies; and Shiro would beat the hell out of anybody that dared taunt Jun. Their violent natures were born out of violence (Jun's in his implied rape by one of the bar patrons and Shiro's physical abuse as a child). Agreed that the rape of the warden's wife was a red herring to briefly increase the suspect count (btw, how about Audtion's Ryo Ishibashi giving a totally wacked-out performance as the warden? Great stuff!)

When Shiro is forced to come face to face with his feelings for Jun (in the Heaven or Space? scene), he rejects sexual intimacy with Jun because Jun has answered the hypothetical question by saying he wants to go to Heaven (ie, Shiro loves Jun, but fears that acting on his desires may preclude Jun's ascension). And this sets up the denouement that both solves the mystery of Shiro's death and reinforces Jun's devotion for Shiro. He confessed to the murder because he so badly wanted to be the one who was responsible for sending Shiro to Heaven.

At least that's how I see it. The film is so loaded with symbolism, I'll need a couple more viewings to digest it all. Stylistically and visually, this film is the pinnacle of Miike's career so far. It was like watching one of Seijun Suzuki's color-saturated avant-garde hyper-fractured narratives played out on one of von Trier's chalk-outlined stage settings. Except with prison brutality, brooding young men, and all that craaaaaazy shit that Miike is so well known for. **** for me too. Cool, nice elucidations, this helps. I thought Shiro's emotional crisis wasn't illuminated on nearly enough, but maybe now with a clearer understanding of where the film goes, repeat viewings will help. Maybe I'll make sense of the prologue, too. "Grandfather/boy = introduction of notions of manhood" is all I got. Ishibashi was interesting; the J-horror ghost was unfortunate.

[MacGuffin]

Reflections of Evil is the single most equally haunting, hilarious, dreamlike movie I have ever seen. A watch salesmen wanders the streets of Los Angeles looking for solace? Money? Packard never makes it clear. Instead, he focuses on the relationships between the people we may pass as we too wander the streets of Los Angeles. It's a comment on modern day society, social morale, and our relationships with each other wrapped in audio clips from the 70s, references and parodies to Universal productions, strangely edited and colorful dream sequences, distorted audio, vomit, blood, gang encounters, angry pets, a mysterious woman dressed in a pink gown possibly related to the salesmen who wanders around through the exterior of seemingly deserted Los Angeles office buildings, and a song by the Carpenters. Packard's movie is possibly one of the best I've ever seen, and I don't think I will ever forget this dream... this beautifully comic, energetic, freakish nightmare.

[Ezee E]

The comic book transitions in the new Warriors is strange to me. It fits with the idea of the movie, but it doesn't actually work in the context of what is already presented. I didn't like it at all.

[Barty]

Rachel Weisz is unbelievably hot in The Mummy.

[Yxklyx]

The comic book transitions in the new Warriors is strange to me. It fits with the idea of the movie, but it doesn't actually work in the context of what is already presented. I didn't like it at all.

I found them to be so inconsequential that it made no difference to me. I just take a few sips of beer while they're on.

[Velocipedist]

Reflections of Evil is the single most equally haunting, hilarious, dreamlike movie I have ever seen.

Where did you get this from? I've been dying to see it.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Man, I forgot how bad Jurassic Park III is. I can't believe some of you people think this is better than the first.

To its credit, it gives the audience a lot of cool dinosaurs and a minimum of bullshit for its ninety minutes. It's more successful with its goals (low as they are) than the original film, which begins promisingly before devolving into peek-a-boo games.

[Boner M]

Reflections of Evil is the single most equally haunting, hilarious, dreamlike movie I have ever seen... this beautifully comic, energetic, freakish nightmare.
Pretty much my reaction to Dawn of an Evil Millennium, one of the most astonishing films I've seen recently. You should check out Other Cinema's "Experiments in Terror" if you haven't already.

And yeah, where did you find this?

[[ETM]]

To its credit, it gives the audience a lot of cool dinosaurs and a minimum of bullshit for its ninety minutes. It's more successful with its goals (low as they are) than the original film, which begins promisingly before devolving into peek-a-boo games.

They had no super-kids, miscast W.H.Macy, and certainly no Tea Leoni... the satellite phone gags were hilarious, though.

[Sven]

Man, I forgot how bad Jurassic Park III is. I can't believe some of you people think this is better than the first.

So very wrong. You're either taking it too seriously or are just bad at watching movies. :)

[NickGlass]

Bodysong is an ambitious documentary that fits in the same type of avant-garde category that the Cremaster Cycle was in. It may not be something you can watch over and over again, but it's something you certainly won't forget.

Bodysong tries to tell the story of human life, with only images and music. Both are captivating as they break it down into six sections, half of them being about birth and the good side of life, the other half looking at death and the dark side of life. Although I'd like to say that there's a stronger look at death.

It's not a mind-blowing movie like Baraka, but worth seeing, especially with the score by Greenwood.

My favorite part is when the muscle-man juggles a baby on the ledge of a skyscraper.

[Melville]

Joseph Losey's The Servant was terrific. The inverse transformations of the two leads, the servant transforming into the master and vice versa, were both theatrically grotesque and an incredibly interesting view of shifting power relationships between individuals (I can't help thinking of Hegel's master and slave dialectic) and, more generally, of class structures in Britain. Bogarde's performance as the butler was phenomenal, and the script was a marvel of precise narrative shifts and perfect dialogue. But the off-kilter compositions were what I most appreciated: they created a tense atmosphere, wonderfully accented the characters' relationships, and constantly maintained a lingering possibility of a complete rupture of traditional aesthetics.

[Velocipedist]

Superb! I was just researching Losey today.

[Ezee E]

My favorite part is when the muscle-man juggles a baby on the ledge of a skyscraper.
That is a great image.

There's so many in the movie I don't think I could pick a favorite.

[MacGuffin]

I rented Reflections of Evil on Netflix, but I'm considering buying it from his website for ten dollars. Note that the version I saw seemed to be cut 30 minutes or so, but it still felt full length. I think the version you can be on his website is uncut, and in its entirety, but I know there were some copyright problems for him in releasing it.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Meet the Spartans is the #1 film in America. What the hell is wrong with people??

:frustrated:

[Li Lili]

I watched one of the latest Johnnie To's film : Mad Detective with Lau Ching Wan... :P :P :P
It's GOOD!!!!

[Spinal]

Meet the Spartans is the #1 film in America. What the hell is wrong with people??

:frustrated:

This British co-worker of my wife's was saying that one of the first things she noticed about America was that the sense of humor seemed to revolve heavily around pop culture references. It may have something to do with that, that people want to be rewarded for their ability to identify trivia. Obviously these films aren't really about satire because they are taking on targets that don't really need to be satirized. I think it's just a dumb game - spot as many references as you can and feel good about your pop culture awareness.

[Qrazy]

So very wrong. You're either taking it too seriously or are just bad at watching movies. :)

"Allen?"

Movie negated.

[Mysterious Dude]

I don't really see what's wrong with finding Meet the Spartans funny.

[MadMan]

To its credit, it gives the audience a lot of cool dinosaurs and a minimum of bullshit for its ninety minutes. It's more successful with its goals (low as they are) than the original film, which begins promisingly before devolving into peek-a-boo games.Peak-a-boo-games? What the hell? That's one of the strangest criticisms I've ever read for the first film. I love the first film because it expertly captures our wonder and love for dinosaurs. And at the same time is not only a great roller coster ride, but also manages to keep some of the ideas from the actual book intact as well. The first film>>>>the third>>>>>>>the second


Man, I forgot how bad Jurassic Park III is. I can't believe some of you people think this is better than the first.What people are those? I think its better than the overlarge, unnecessarily lengthy second film that wore out its welcome pretty quick and is really silly in some parts. PS: I got an answer to my question :|

[Rowland]

Brady Corbet, the actor playing the sidekick villain in the Funny Games remake, on what he believes is the purpose of this shot-for-shot American version: "The first (version) asked the question 'Why are you watching this?' And the new film asks 'Why are you watching this again?'"

:|

[Winston*]

Why are you watching this IN 3D?

[MacGuffin]

If you haven't seen a movie so far from the year 2008, allow me to agree with Michael Sicinski's sentiments and recommend that you make your first the internet release of Prosperity for 2008. There's really no reason you should regret it, considering it's a beautifully constructed and thoughtful 57 second short movie. I watched it three times in a row.

[Grouchy]

This British co-worker of my wife's was saying that one of the first things she noticed about America was that the sense of humor seemed to revolve heavily around pop culture references. It may have something to do with that, that people want to be rewarded for their ability to identify trivia. Obviously these films aren't really about satire because they are taking on targets that don't really need to be satirized. I think it's just a dumb game - spot as many references as you can and feel good about your pop culture awareness.
This is very true. It's why I never found Shrek funny and why I think Family Guy has overstayed its welcome already. They sacrifice everything, characters, plot and ideas, for the sake of cheap laughs per minute.

[Rowland]

If you haven't seen a movie so far from the year 2008, allow me to agree with Michael Sicinski's sentiments and recommend that you make your first the internet release of Prosperity for 2008. There's really no reason you should regret it, considering it's a beautifully constructed and thoughtful 57 second short movie. I watched it three times in a row.Yeah, I posted a link to that a few weeks ago. And dude, it's just a firework. How is it thoughtful? It's a blank slate, you can read whatever you want into it.

[MacGuffin]

Yeah, I posted a link to that a few weeks ago. And dude, it's just a firework. How is it thoughtful? It's a blank slate, you can read whatever you want into it.

I can't think of another director who went to the trouble to create a really short movie clearly dedicated to humanity. Joe isn't concerned with creating the next Tropical Malady here, but instead, he creates a simple, and yes, thoughtful little short video with little to nothing on it's mind aside from the viewer, and Joe's hopes that they will, in short, find prosperity in 2008.

[Grouchy]

Ok, lots of movie watching recently.

Miike's Full Metal Yakuza is hilarious. One of his early movies, and probably before he became a household name for weirdness, it's somewhat reminiscent of Zebraman in that it's a superhero revenge movie... with yakuzas. He's already experimenting with red herrings and a meandering plot here. In many ways, Miike's movies are like a Simpsons episode, where you never really know where the story will take you. I feel grateful that the man makes so many movies, because that gives him the freedom to throw sense out of the window instead of forcing everything he makes to be an unforgettable masterpiece. Fully recommended.

Another big thumbs up is the animated Highlander: the Search for Vengeance. After the original film, it's clearly the best of the saga (ok, that I've seen at least) and the most concerned with continuity and lore. The film becomes a bit cartoonish at a point, when the snippets of reiterative scenes in different times show McLeod getting his ass kicked apparently all of his life, but the writer (same as in the TV show, by the way) has the good sense to mock that device in the dialogue, so it's all good. Excellent animation, somewhat anime-like but with more fluid movements, and the right amount of carnage, decapitations and sex every Highlander movie needs. Long live the clan and always remember, there can be only ONE!

I also saw Valley of the Dolls with completely wrong expectations. I expected a Russ Meyer movie with lots of boobs and the nudity the Pussycat movie didn't have. Instead, I discovered the movie was a Hollywood musical/melodrama based on some best-seller from the '60s, and the Russ Meyer move is the unofficial sequel/spoof. Still, once I realized no nipples were gonna be on display, I simply watched the movie. It's very cheesy and the dialogue is among the worst I've ever heard. There was also a big discrepancy between the acting talent - Patty Duke, for example, is clearly a good actress, although her overdone catharsis scene at the end is a fucking laugh parade, but the protagonist chick, Barbara Parkins, is the dramatic equivalent of a wooden chair. I still found something to like in the film, but for all the wrong reasons, like how naive the supposedly harsh and realistic depiction of Hollywood was and it's always cool to see Sharon Tate in any movie. She was fucking drop dead gorgeous. I wish it had been shorter, though. I seriously considered fast-forwarding the last third or so.

[Rowland]

Another big thumbs up is the animated Highlander: the Search for Vengeance. After the original film, it's clearly the best of the saga (ok, that I've seen at least) and the most concerned with continuity and lore. The film becomes a bit cartoonish at a point, when the snippets of reiterative scenes in different times show McLeod getting his ass kicked apparently all of his life, but the writer (same as in the TV show, by the way) has the good sense to mock that device in the dialogue, so it's all good. Excellent animation, somewhat anime-like but with more fluid movements, and the right amount of carnage, decapitations and sex every Highlander movie needs. Long live the clan and always remember, there can be only ONE!I think this may actually be the best entry in that terrible series, but it's still only slightly above average. Yoshiaki Kawajiri knows how to make an immanently watchable anime, and this is a fine showcase for his talents, but it doesn't approach his best work. More Highlander action like the opening sequence was needed.

[Grouchy]

I think this may actually be the best entry in that terrible series
Whoa, hold your horses. The sequel is one of the worst movies ever (shot in my city, by the way), and the third one is average, but the original Highlander is a classic. Nothing bad can be said about it or I'll have to remove your head from your shoulders.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Peak-a-boo-games? What the hell? That's one of the strangest criticisms I've ever read for the first film. I love the first film because it expertly captures our wonder and love for dinosaurs. And at the same time is not only a great roller coster ride, but also manages to keep some of the ideas from the actual book intact as well. The first film>>>>the third>>>>>>>the second

It just bugs me, because the film starts out with a lot of mystery and grandeur, and even a bit of intelligent discussion from the characters. But then it switches gears and becomes a monster movie. The kids in the kitchen is suspenseful, sure, but it's a step down, in my eyes, from what the movie could be.

However, I grew up as an enormous fan of dinosaurs, and I think the film never really engages all that it would mean for dinosaurs to come back to us.

[Duncan]

Yeah, I posted a link to that a few weeks ago. And dude, it's just a firework. How is it thoughtful? It's a blank slate, you can read whatever you want into it.

Just watched it, and it's clearly not a blank slate. You don't think he has specific intentions with the work? The image is a bit abstract, sure, but the abstraction also promotes universality.

[Qrazy]

Whoa, hold your horses. The sequel is one of the worst movies ever (shot in my city, by the way), and the third one is average, but the original Highlander is a classic. Nothing bad can be said about it or I'll have to remove your head from your shoulders.

Nah, it's awful.

[Grouchy]

Nah, it's awful.
Your face is awful.

[Rowland]

You don't think he has specific intentions with the work? Sure. The title gives that away. But it's still an abstraction. I guess it's cool that people get something out of it.

[MacGuffin]

Sure. The title gives that away. But it's still an abstraction. I guess it's cool that people get something out of it.

Like I said, it's not so much that I get something out of it, so much that I appreciate that an acclaimed director went out of his way wishing me prosperity in 2008, and what better way to display this hopefulness than the firework, an icon of, as Duncan puts it wonderfully, 'universality'. It's very much so an appreciated gesture, and as I said before, it's thoughtful (I think you may have mistaken that for thought provoking, which it clearly is not).

[Qrazy]

Your face is awful.

I blame the snow shovel.

[Melville]

The penultimate scene in Les Diaboliques was incredibly tense, but the twists at the end were pretty damn silly. Good stuff overall, though.

[Watashi]

Sweet. I didn't know Charles Durning got the life-time achievment award at the SAG's today.

That guy is awesome.

[Wryan]

The penultimate scene in Les Diaboliques was incredibly tense, but the twists at the end were pretty damn silly. Good stuff overall, though.

One of my favorite films. The go-to film when I want people to know what kind of films I enjoy. Love, love this movie. It's a bit long and excruciatingly precise, but damn it's all worth it for those 7-8 minutes.

[origami_mustache]

http://www.tiff07.ca/images/films2007/705302114261386.jpg

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly was a truly beautiful film to look at with it's painterly touch; the cinematography seems to reflect the impressionist art movement. Much of the camerawork is a blurred first person perspective of the one eyed protagonist who suffers from "locked-in" syndrome following a sudden stroke. The flashy editing effects compliment the stylistic camera work, although I was confused by the occasional and seemingly nonsensical jump-cuts. The film is based on a moving true story, and it succeeds for the most part, however I was disappointed when the film abruptly cut away from several emotional sequences. Perhaps this was the point, but I didn't want to be taken out of those moments.

[MadMan]

It just bugs me, because the film starts out with a lot of mystery and grandeur, and even a bit of intelligent discussion from the characters. But then it switches gears and becomes a monster movie. The kids in the kitchen is suspenseful, sure, but it's a step down, in my eyes, from what the movie could be.

However, I grew up as an enormous fan of dinosaurs, and I think the film never really engages all that it would mean for dinosaurs to come back to us.To me as much as I love Jurassic Park that's partly the reason why I love the book more than the film. I also think that the book is more intelligent and features some really great stuff that should have been included (the raptor cave would have been cool onscreen). I think that in a way it does engage what dinos mean to us dino lovers, even if it gets lost in some of the roller coster ride, suspensive elements. Perhaps I should give the film another viewing, even though I've seen it 22 times already.

[Rowland]

Perhaps I should give the film another viewing, even though I've seen it 22 times already.22 times is probably enough. Spend that time watching Raiders of the Lost Ark or somethin', fer chrissakes!

[megladon8]

I vividly remember reading the scene where the t-rex attacks the raft in "Jurassic Park".

I was about 9 years old, and I felt like it was the best thing I'd ever read :)

[origami_mustache]

To me as much as I love Jurassic Park that's partly the reason why I love the book more than the film. I also think that the book is more intelligent and features some really great stuff that should have been included (the raptor cave would have been cool onscreen).

The film really should have included the mini elephant.

[MadMan]

The film really should have included the mini elephant.Hah I forgot about the mini elephant.


22 times is probably enough. Spend that time watching Raiders of the Lost Ark or somethin', fer chrissakes!I've seen Raiders even more I think. Heh. There are other films I've seen way too many times as well.

[Rowland]

I've seen Raiders even more I think. Heh. There are other films I've seen way too many times as well.Oh shit, I confused you with someone else then. Who is it around here that hasn't seen Raiders?

[origami_mustache]

Hah I forgot about the mini elephant.



For some reason I remember that more than anything else haha.

[MadMan]

Oh shit, I confused you with someone else then. Who is it around here that hasn't seen Raiders?Its all good in the hood. I believe its Ivan that hasn't seen it yet.


For some reason I remember that more than anything else haha.I for one loved the parts where Muldoon and the lawyer are going around hunting the T-Rex. That would have been badass to include in the first flick, but instead they changed it quite a bit and threw it in the second film instead.

[lovejuice]

critics are too kind with how she move especially since stomp the yard is only 27 on tometometer. both movies are cliche ridden to the extreme. although HSM has a decency to clock in around one and a half hours while StY is almost two hours long. HSM also has a better pacing and features more dance numbers. i enjoy both to some degree. HSM is a bit more easily recommendable.

[Stay Puft]

I love Susumu Terajima! I can't even explain it. So I'm watching Gonin 2 earlier tonight, just kind of half paying attention (like the first, it's middling), and then there's this scene with one of the main characters tied to a chair, being guarded by some guy cutting up some meat in a kitchen. And then I notice it's fucking Susumu Terajima and I'm practically jumping out of my seat with joy. Barely a minute later he's shot and killed, but what more do you want after that? It's like in Gohatto, when he suddenly shows up as a spy in one scene and is dead in the next. That's it right there, that's the fucking movie.

He doesn't even have a credit for Gonin 2. He just appears, turns in his one minute cameo, and leaves the rest of the movie for dead. I'm convinced now that you can build feature length films around one minute Susumu Terajima performances.

[transmogrifier]

Hairspray

Sweet and enjoyable, but God damn stop the music I wanna get off! Seems to want to cram as many show-stoppers in as possible, creating a density that ought to collapsing into a black hole any second now. Really, really needed to prune some of the songs out (a lot of them are remarkably repetitive, even if they are toe-tapping as standalones) and boost the sugary-silliness of the script, which promises to be a string of off-color jokes in the opening (the flasher, the drunk at the bar etc) but never really follows through with it. Cast is superb, though, especially Pfieffer, who was born to play a bitch (see also: Batman Returns)

Eastern Promises

Cronenberg stops trying to outsmart the audience like in the deeply silly A History of Violence, and instead just decides to make a movie, as opposed to hap-hazardly critiquing them. Develops a head of steam by just letting the plot steamroll over the ordinary lives of a family, and seeming what pieces are left. Turns out, not much it's all shit (until the film turns to a retread of the Running Scared ending, which disperses a lot of tension). Mortensen is very, very good.

EDIT: Spoiler is the name of a film from 2006 with almost exactly the same story point at the end. It's not a very well-received film, though, so knowing ain't going to be such a big deal. I think around here, only iosos likes the spoiler movie.

[Rowland]

I think around here, only iosos likes the spoiler movie.Raiders and I do too. That may be it.

[MacGuffin]

Raiders and I do too. That may be it.

I thought it was pretty interesting.

[Ezee E]

NickGlass's boy, Channing Tatum, is going to be Duke in G.I. Joe. I wonder how excited he is.

I checked out Red Road. I really saw potential in Andrea Arnold's Oscar-winning short, and really saw some potential in the synopsis of this movie, but outside of some neat shots whenever the woman was at work, there was nothing much going on for me. Really disappointing. I knew Spinal loved it, but did anyone else see this?

[Boner M]

Raiders and I do too. That may be it.
Ahem.

[Boner M]

NickGlass's boy, Channing Tatum, is going to be Duke in G.I. Joe. I wonder how excited he is.

I checked out Red Road. I really saw potential in Andrea Arnold's Oscar-winning short, and really saw some potential in the synopsis of this movie, but outside of some neat shots whenever the woman was at work, there was nothing much going on for me. Really disappointing. I knew Spinal loved it, but did anyone else see this?
Yeah, and I liked it... even though it didn't add up to much other than a neatly mounted feminist riff on The Son. Superb lead performance; currently my winner on m awards ballot.

[Qrazy]

Anyone seen this?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0879843/

[Bosco B Thug]

I checked out Red Road. I really saw potential in Andrea Arnold's Oscar-winning short, and really saw some potential in the synopsis of this movie, but outside of some neat shots whenever the woman was at work, there was nothing much going on for me. Really disappointing. I knew Spinal loved it, but did anyone else see this? I liked it. I loved the first 3/4 of it - the film was probing really well the inequalities she creates for herself with the people she observes, then with her obsession with the one guy, I thought the film was headed toward a real subversive story about degrees of decency or whatnot... but the ultimate direction the story heads struck me as really ho-hum, even if its admirable in its adult treatment of sad, banal realities... and, well, degrees of decency. So I gave it an extra .5 and it ended up at 7.5/10.

So first viewing of Magnolia... um, what's it all about? Shattered expectations of an array of arrested developments, maybe... people trying to rise above their vapidity? The emotionally self-serving and the whirlpool they set off with their miserable complacency? Broken people finding one another again? I left the most trite one for last because the film seems like a bunch of ideas thrown together with the barest sense of an emotional throughline. It does pull it off barely, though, which is something to admire. Really, the film's much ado about nothing, but I think it realizes that and it's most effective when it wallows in the nothingness its characters represent, which is luckily most of the time. PTA's visual eccentricity works to make the film withdraw into its own cocoon, which works with the film's story and doesn't work to emphasize itself as essentially a one-man-show, like TWBB... since there's dozens of characters here, with more interaction and interplay and personality than in his recent film. Julianne Moore, John C. Reilly, William H. Macy, and Phillip Baker Hall provide the most striking characters. Reilly's really good, and Moore's scene in the pharmacy stands out as one of the best.

I'd have to watch [i]There Will Be Blood again to see which one is really the stronger film, but when I do, and I find this better... that means I'll have to give TWBB a 7 or lower, which makes me even feel wrong! We shall see.

[Duncan]

The SonHappened to watch this tonight. Pretty fantastic. I thought its aesthetic approach was particularly interesting having watched The Diving Bell and the Butterfly recently. In that film we're directly in the protagonist's perspective for much of the film. It's a heavy handed way to enforce empathy. In The Son we're often just staring at the back of Olivier's head or looking directly at him, and I had the profound sensation of desperately wanting to see what he was seeing. And not just to see, but to understand. I thought it was perfectly illustrative of how precious that gap between people is, and how the longing to break that gap down is one of the things that makes life worth living, even if it inevitably proves futile. I love experiencing that emotion. I loved the film.

[Qrazy]

Moonstruck was OK, pretty by the books.

WR Mysteries of the Organism was quite good. The film manages to explore many of the nuances of sexuality without ever feeling exhibitionistic. The film certainly poses a lot of questions throughout it's run time, although I'm going to have to reflect a bit more deeply upon it's conclusions to those questions.

[Boner M]

Man, I love the final shot of Sisters. So hilarious.

[megladon8]

I would really like to work on a long review for 3:10 to Yuma - I've been thinking about it ever since watching it the other night with my dad.

I really like how it's a send-up of the classic western formula, especially in the "hero" (Bale) and "villain" (Crowe) characters.

And Ben Foster definitely stole a lot of it - he looked eerily comfortable with all the gunplay, and that was perfect.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I watched 12:08 East to Bucharest last night. Very impressive. It had some great lighthearted moments, and considering the running time (it's only 80 minutes when you take away the closing credits) I was surprised how emotionally invested I was by the end. That final caller, and the way the men part ways, and those final shots of the town; fantastic. The first 30 minutes or so were a bit rough. I think there were better ways to introduce the characters, but in the end it proved effective, so it's a minor complaint.

[Sycophant]

I love Susumu Terajima! I can't even explain it. So I'm watching Gonin 2 earlier tonight, just kind of half paying attention (like the first, it's middling), and then there's this scene with one of the main characters tied to a chair, being guarded by some guy cutting up some meat in a kitchen. And then I notice it's fucking Susumu Terajima and I'm practically jumping out of my seat with joy. Barely a minute later he's shot and killed, but what more do you want after that? It's like in Gohatto, when he suddenly shows up as a spy in one scene and is dead in the next. That's it right there, that's the fucking movie.

He doesn't even have a credit for Gonin 2. He just appears, turns in his one minute cameo, and leaves the rest of the movie for dead. I'm convinced now that you can build feature length films around one minute Susumu Terajima performances.I haven't seen an appearance so brief, but there truly is no such thing as too much Susumu Terajima. When he shows up in a film I'm not expecting him in, my heart also does a little leap.

[Melville]

Superb! I was just researching Losey today.
I don't know if I've ever heard of any of his other films. He seems to be a director worth looking into, though.


If you haven't seen a movie so far from the year 2008, allow me to agree with Michael Sicinski's sentiments and recommend that you make your first the internet release of Prosperity for 2008. There's really no reason you should regret it, considering it's a beautifully constructed and thoughtful 57 second short movie. I watched it three times in a row.
Wow, that really is beautiful. The combination of the one precise central image and the subdued music is wonderful. Minimalism at its best. I think the firework works as a metaphor for the individual human spirit climbing toward its fruition, while the simplicity of the image, the lack of distinguishing features, indicates the universality of that spirit. Obviously other things could be read into it, but that's what I felt when watching it.


One of my favorite films. The go-to film when I want people to know what kind of films I enjoy. Love, love this movie. It's a bit long and excruciatingly precise, but damn it's all worth it for those 7-8 minutes.
That scene is especially impressive because it works so well even after seeing dozens or hundreds of similarly-executed scenes that it inspired.

[Rowland]

I watched 12:08 East to Bucharest last night. Very impressive. It had some great lighthearted moments, and considering the running time (it's only 80 minutes when you take away the closing credits) I was surprised how emotionally invested I was by the end. That final caller, and the way the men part ways, and those final shots of the town; fantastic. The first 30 minutes or so were a bit rough. I think there were better ways to introduce the characters, but in the end it proved effective, so it's a minor complaint.I felt the same way about the first 30 minutes, but they play better upon a repeat viewing, knowing what's to come. And yeah, it's a very good film.

[Velocipedist]

I don't know if I've ever heard of any of his other films.

That's precisely why I was researching him.

[Ivan Drago]

Its all good in the hood. I believe its Ivan that hasn't seen it yet.

Uh.....


'Tis true. But one of my floormates has it, and I intend to borrow it from him soon, maybe even this weekend.

But I'm a bit worried I won't enjoy it because I've seen a majority of the spoofs, so I know what's coming.

[EvilShoe]

Uh.....


'Tis true. But one of my floormates has it, and I intend to borrow it from him soon, maybe even this weekend.

But I'm a bit worried I won't enjoy it because I've seen a majority of the spoofs, so I know what's coming.
So much enthusiasm!

[Ivan Drago]

So much enthusiasm!

Hey, I'm a pessimist. What can I say?

[MadMan]

Uh.....


'Tis true. But one of my floormates has it, and I intend to borrow it from him soon, maybe even this weekend.

But I'm a bit worried I won't enjoy it because I've seen a majority of the spoofs, so I know what's coming.Don't worry. You'll only get drawn and quartered by most of Match-Cut if you don't like it :P

[Raiders]

Joseph Losey's The Servant was terrific. The inverse transformations of the two leads, the servant transforming into the master and vice versa, were both theatrically grotesque and an incredibly interesting view of shifting power relationships between individuals (I can't help thinking of Hegel's master and slave dialectic) and, more generally, of class structures in Britain. Bogarde's performance as the butler was phenomenal, and the script was a marvel of precise narrative shifts and perfect dialogue. But the off-kilter compositions were what I most appreciated: they created a tense atmosphere, wonderfully accented the characters' relationships, and constantly maintained a lingering possibility of a complete rupture of traditional aesthetics.

Huzzah!

[Melville]

Huzzah!
Any further Losey recommendations?

[Raiders]

Any further Losey recommendations?

His revamping of Lang's M is masterful (to the point I might be inclined to call it better than the original), and I also really liked Accident, his second Pinter collaboration. Time Without Pity is a decent, rather typical noir, and the less said about Modesty Blaise, the better.

To date, that's all I have seen. I am most interested in his early film, The Boy With Green Hair. Though I think the only person I know who has seen it around here, Antoine, hated it. There's also The Go-Between, his other Pinter collaboration.

[Derek]

To date, that's all I have seen. I am most interested in his early film, The Boy With Green Hair. Though I think the only person I know who has seen it around here, Antoine, hated it.

I thought it was thoroughly mediocre. Dean Stockwell is good, but the film is clunky and heavy-handed. My favorite Losey's are Secret Ceremony and Mr. Klein, the latter of which is on DVD.

[Mysterious Dude]

I am most interested in his early film, The Boy With Green Hair. Though I think the only person I know who has seen it around here, Antoine, hated it.
If it makes you feel any better, Harvey Fierstein loves it.

[Grouchy]

To date, that's all I have seen. I am most interested in his early film, The Boy With Green Hair. Though I think the only person I know who has seen it around here, Antoine, hated it.
That movie's premise has been fucked over by modernity. I mean, I've seen a lot boys with green hair recently.

[Duncan]

Watched Svankmajer's Alice last night. Sort of a surreal, pseudo-sexual nightmare from the mind of a not-so-innocent little girl. It was very good. Remarkably creative. I had always sort of imagined Wonderland as being more open though. Setting it inside a house makes the tone a lot more claustrophobic. And creepy. Definitely a dirtier version of the young female psyche than is usually portrayed.

[megladon8]

If it makes you feel any better, Harvey Fierstein loves it.


I love the new avatar, Antoine!

Such a great, creepy moment...

[Rowland]

Watched Svankmajer's Alice last night. Sort of a surreal, pseudo-sexual nightmare from the mind of a not-so-innocent little girl. It was very good. Remarkably creative. I had always sort of imagined Wonderland as being more open though. Setting it inside a house makes the tone a lot more claustrophobic. And creepy. Definitely a dirtier version of the young female psyche than is usually portrayed.Yeah, I found this remarkably disturbed. The Mad Hatter scene really got to me, as it was intended to.

[Winston*]

I would have like Alice more if they cut out all that "said the white rabbit" "said the white rabbit" "said the white rabbit" stuff. Too annoying.

[megladon8]

Watched Svankmajer's Alice last night. Sort of a surreal, pseudo-sexual nightmare from the mind of a not-so-innocent little girl. It was very good. Remarkably creative. I had always sort of imagined Wonderland as being more open though. Setting it inside a house makes the tone a lot more claustrophobic. And creepy. Definitely a dirtier version of the young female psyche than is usually portrayed.


Hmmm...this sounds really interesting.

I shall have to check it out.

[Rowland]

I would have like Alice more if they cut out all that "said the white rabbit" "said the white rabbit" "said the white rabbit" stuff. Too annoying.I thought this added to the unsettling vibe. You're supposed to be on edge, which this effect quite successfully provokes. I can empathize with you being too annoyed by it though.

[Watashi]

Did anyone see Viggo Mortensen at the SAG awards last night? He was oozing out awesome.

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/7738/viggo20sag20320jan08bd1.jpg

[megladon8]

Viggo is one of those cases where, when you look at his face studiously, he's not an overly attractive guy - he sort of has mis-matched parts, as if his face was assembled from pieces of various others.

Yet he's incredibly handsome regardless. And he's very charming.

He's awesome - and yes, he looks great there.

[Duncan]

I would have like Alice more if they cut out all that "said the white rabbit" "said the white rabbit" "said the white rabbit" stuff. Too annoying.

I think they should have cut some of it out. Like Rowland said, it can really unsettle you. But the frequent use dilutes that effect.

[Qrazy]

I would have like Alice more if they cut out all that "said the white rabbit" "said the white rabbit" "said the white rabbit" stuff. Too annoying.

I liked the film quite a bit but I agree. Voice over in general tends to distance one from the action of the film.

[Wryan]

Did anyone see Viggo Mortensen at the SAG awards last night? He was oozing out awesome.

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/7738/viggo20sag20320jan08bd1.jpg

He looks like a Jesus that ripped himself off the cross, time-traveled to the modern era, bought a good suit and bullied his way onto live television to give everyone the finger before ascending to heaven.

[Wryan]

BTW, check out the youtube thread for Viggo singing Dylan's "Masters of War" a capella at some kind of art event. Pretty chilly.

[transmogrifier]

Mortensen is definitely one of the best actors around. Thank God Jackson brought him in at the last minute for Lord of the Rings, because it really put him on the leading man map. (And he is friggin awesome in those movies)

[Winston*]

Mortensen is definitely one of the best actors around. Thank God Jackson brought him in at the last minute for Lord of the Rings, because it really put him on the leading man map. (And he is friggin awesome in those movies)

Imagine how much Stuart Towsend would have sucked in that role. A lot, I imagine.

[transmogrifier]

Imagine how much Stuart Towsend would have sucked in that role. A lot, I imagine.

Yeah, which is why I can't quite believe Jackson ever considered him in the first place. And again with Gosling and The Lovely Bones. Sometimes I wonder if he thinks these things through.

[Mysterious Dude]

I love the new avatar, Antoine!

Such a great, creepy moment...
I decided it was time to go back to the classics. No more new crap.

[Rowland]

So, A Might Heart wound up being a flat, pointless vehicle for a star performance. Disappointing, to say the least.

[MacGuffin]

So, A Might Heart wound up being a flat, pointless vehicle for a star performance. Disappointing, to say the least.

It looked pretty dull and pretentious.

[Henry Gale]

Yeah, which is why I can't quite believe Jackson ever considered him in the first place. And again with Gosling and The Lovely Bones. Sometimes I wonder if he thinks these things through.

And what exactly would be wrong with Gosling?

[transmogrifier]

And what exactly would be wrong with Gosling?

Much, much too young for the role.

[Henry Gale]

Much, much too young for the role.

Oh okay that. I thought you were saying he wasn't a good actor.

[Ezee E]

I wonder if that's Viggo getting a beard for The Road, or just plain beard. Both are awesome.

[transmogrifier]

Oh okay that. I thought you were saying he wasn't a good actor.


No, Gosling's okay. But every man and his dog could see he's hardly the type of actor to pull off mid to late 30s with a teenage daughter....

[D_Davis]

I just watched Eye in the Sky, the newest Milky Way joint. Produced by Johnny To, directed by Nai-Hoi Yau (a Milky Way writer), and starring Big Tony Leung, Simon Yam (yay!), Lam Suet, and the new cutey, Kate Tsui.

It's a pretty good little techno-thriller, I guess you would call it. Very low key, but pretty intense. I liked it.

[Sycophant]

300 is retarded. Very, very retarded.

[Duncan]

I got through half of Alexander Nevsky tonight, but Netflix's instant watch feature crapped out on me. I find that happens pretty frequently. Anyway, what I saw of the film was disappointingly American looking, but with a lower budget. I won't judge it until I see the rest though.

[Derek]

300 is retarded. Very, very retarded.

My thoughts exactly, word for word.


I got through half of Alexander Nevsky tonight, but Netflix's instant watch feature crapped out on me. I find that happens pretty frequently. Anyway, what I saw of the film was disappointingly American looking, but with a lower budget. I won't judge it until I see the rest though.

Hmmm, I remember some typically Eisensteinian compositions, but I too found it underwhelming and the only one of his films that I don't really care for. From his sound films, Ivan the Terrible: Part I is the way to go.

[origami_mustache]

I got through half of Alexander Nevsky tonight, but Netflix's instant watch feature crapped out on me. I find that happens pretty frequently. Anyway, what I saw of the film was disappointingly American looking, but with a lower budget. I won't judge it until I see the rest though.

Hmm, it's been a while since I've seen it, but it resonates as distinctly Soviet to me, technically and culturally. Although Eisenstein was prohibited from using the overt montage style methods do to accusations of formalism, you can still see hints of it from the use of angles and diagonals. There are also several repeated shots of the same actions with different framings as well as some discontinuous edits. The ice battle sequence is a great example of rhythmic editing. The compositions don't strike me as American, although maybe in terms of narrative conventions this could be more accurate, however if you break it down the film is a straightforward anti-German propaganda piece as well as a warning to Germany prior to the non-aggression pact Hitler signed. When compared to a lot of epics being made today I suppose the battle scenes resemble American filmmaking, but Alexander Nevsky has been a major influence for these types of films.

[Stay Puft]

I just saw a commercial for The Eye (the new Jessica Alba movie - I didn't even know they were remaking this) and is it just me, or is there a shot in there lifted straight out of Kurosawa's Bright Future? I could have sworn I saw a shot with Alba staring into a fish tank with a jellyfish, ala Jo Odagiri, same positions, color hue and everything.

[Derek]

Paisan had some absolutely devastating moments and while the vignettes come together a bit awkwardly, the lack of smoothness in the editing is easy to overlook considering the powerful images Rossellini provides us with. The first few vignettes are infinitely fascinated with the architecture of the area and how the vast piles of rubble redefined the collective space. This coupled with multiple sequences where language barriers play a critical role makes it perhaps Rossellini's most comprehensive response to the post-war conditions. I still prefer Germany Year Zero, but even that film doesn't have the immediacy or frank, matter-of-fact realism that this one does. Rossellini even allows for brief glimpses of humor - my favorite between a black soldier and young Italian boy after they bond. They lie on a rubble pile together and the soldier begins to sing a soul song after the boy plays his harmonica, but as the soldier leans back to rest, the boy warns him, "Don't fall asleep or I'll steal your boots!" And of course, he did. I won't spoil where Rossellini takes it, but it's perfect evidence of his ability to take scenes or situations from one tone into something completely unexpected, yet all-to-real. Needless to say, great film and hopefully TCM will play it more often so people can catch it.

[origami_mustache]

Paisan had some absolutely devastating moments and while the vignettes come together a bit awkwardly, the lack of smoothness in the editing is easy to overlook considering the powerful images Rossellini provides us with. The first few vignettes are infinitely fascinated with the architecture of the area and how the vast piles of rubble redefined the collective space. This coupled with multiple sequences where language barriers play a critical role makes it perhaps Rossellini's most comprehensive response to the post-war conditions. I still prefer Germany Year Zero, but even that film doesn't have the immediacy or frank, matter-of-fact realism that this one does. Rossellini even allows for brief glimpses of humor - my favorite between a black soldier and young Italian boy after they bond. They lie on a rubble pile together and the soldier begins to sing a soul song after the boy plays his harmonica, but as the soldier leans back to rest, the boy warns him, "Don't fall asleep or I'll steal your boots!" And of course, he did. I won't spoil where Rossellini takes it, but it's perfect evidence of his ability to take scenes or situations from one tone into something completely unexpected, yet all-to-real. Needless to say, great film and hopefully TCM will play it more often so people can catch it.

That's great TCM showed it, what a fantastic network. I much prefer this to Germany Year Zero, despite the less polished look among other flaws. The stories themselves are poignant enough, but the rubble and architecture serves as a document for preserving a period of history and really makes the realism stand out over the bad American acting and poor cinematography.

[Derek]

That's great TCM showed it, what a fantastic network. I much prefer this to Germany Year Zero, despite the less polished look among other flaws. The stories themselves are poignant enough, but the rubble and architecture serves as a document for preserving a period of history and really makes the realism stand out over the bad American acting and poor cinematography.

I agree. The sense of immediacy and urgency in this film is felt to a much higher degree than either Germany Year Zero or Open City (and most neo-realist films of the time for that matter), which makes it easy to overlook flaws that weren't as glaring in those two films. If all the vignettes were on par with the first three, I'd be with you saying this is the best of those three films, but the last couple vignettes just weren't as great as the earlier ones.

[Duncan]

Yeah, I guess I should have clarified that by American looking I meant the editing, not the compositions. The compositions are fairly unique it seems.

[origami_mustache]

I agree. The sense of immediacy and urgency in this film is felt to a much higher degree than either Germany Year Zero or Open City (and most neo-realist films of the time for that matter), which makes it easy to overlook flaws that weren't as glaring in those two films. If all the vignettes were on par with the first three, I'd be with you saying this is the best of those three films, but the last couple vignettes just weren't as great as the earlier ones.

Yeah, it's difficult for any vignette style film to be consistent and I still think Rome, Open City is the best of the trilogy, but this format must have been fairly unique for the time, which I also admire.

[Boner M]

Shoot 'em Up was pretty fun. I loved the absurd continuity of Clive Owen's carrot obsession, which turns out to really just be an excuse for the early stabbing/"eat your vegetables" moment. I wish the whole film had as much wit as that minor detail, but the action scenes are always fun and Owen is perfect for the deadpan quips.

[Yxklyx]

...

So first viewing of Magnolia... um, what's it all about? ...

Exodus 8:2 reads: "And if thou refuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy borders with frogs".

[Yxklyx]

Watched Svankmajer's Alice last night. Sort of a surreal, pseudo-sexual nightmare from the mind of a not-so-innocent little girl. It was very good. Remarkably creative. I had always sort of imagined Wonderland as being more open though. Setting it inside a house makes the tone a lot more claustrophobic. And creepy. Definitely a dirtier version of the young female psyche than is usually portrayed.

It got a bit too repetitive for me but was still good. Svankmajer does a lot with repetition in his movies but they're usually much shorter than Alice so don't outstay their welcome.

[Boner M]

The Driver kicked all kinds of ass. So hypnotically austere on account of both it's cold, open spatiality and archetypal approach to characterisation... the test drive scene in the parking lot is brilliant not just in it's choreography and editing, but also as a way of showing the stripping down of character that O'Neal has imposed upon himself. Surprisingly fascinating stuff - I was expecting this to be one of those sorta-'existential' films whose label as such derives from the residue of Melville's influence, but it's clear Hill has more on his mind that just homage. Definitely a film to study in order to understand how action sequences can have resonance beyond their kinetic thrills, while also delivering just that.

And those car chases are pretty good, huh?

[lovejuice]

i watched 30 minutes of shut up and sing but didn't feel that much enthusiastic. should i care to finish the doc?

[Kurosawa Fan]

i watched 30 minutes of shut up and sing but didn't feel that much enthusiastic. should i care to finish the doc?

Nope. It's that blah from start to finish. Not bad, but not good either. Just kind of... there.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Oh, and last night I made a terrible mistake. I had some stuff to do around the house, so I didn't have time to sit down and invest myself in anything. I turned on the TV and noticed that High Fidelity was on. I finished it while doing other things, and after it was over Catch and Release started. I was still doing some things, namely laundry, so I didn't change the channel. Before I knew it I had watched the entire film. What a complete waste of time. I almost couldn't believe how poorly written the characters were. I felt embarrassed at the end when I saw the credit "written and directed by". It's one thing for rewrites and such to hurt a director's film, but that was entirely her creation. I couldn't glean a single trait from any character, though thankfully each character either had their personality and/or emotion explained by themselves or someone close to them. Without that I would have been lost. For instance, if Silent Bob hadn't said out loud that he missed his dead best friend, his suicide attempt would have been completely baffling. And if someone hadn't said that Jennifer Garner was "perfect" and that was why her dead fiance was cheating on her, I never would have guessed. Thankfully the performances matched the poor writing, avoiding any mixed emotions on my part. I was secure in loathing the film from every angle.

[lovejuice]

Nope. It's that blah from start to finish. Not bad, but not good either. Just kind of... there.

thank! now i can move on to.....rocky balboa.

weirdly enough, i miss masterwork.

[dreamdead]

Aaron Katz's Quiet City is tempting me to blind-buy with its premise. Is this supposed to be the best from this batch of directors? Anyone seen it?

[Raiders]

Joe Swanberg's Quiet City is tempting me to blind-buy with its premise. Is this supposed to be the best from this batch of directors? Anyone seen it?

That's by Aaron Katz, not Swanberg (he just stars in it). I believe it has the highest imdb rating, don't know about the general consensus. To date, I have only seen Bujalski's two films, which were decent but not good enough to get me interested in the subgenre.

[Eleven]

The Driver kicked all kinds of ass.

I too started gearing up for the Walter Hill consensus, with Southern Comfort. Also majorly ass-kicking. The sense of place through naturalistic sound design and serene cinematography is both inviting and entrapping, increasingly the latter as the film goes on. The cast of reliably average character actors play their narrow emotional ranges well, and the Vietnam parallels are upfront without overpowering the literal story. Several action sequences that in lesser hands could have proved slightly monotonous instead frighten and energize every time a reservist gets attacked. The peak of the film is the climatic, eerily sustained finale where the frightening wilderness at the heart of the community pays the survivors a visit. Interesting if unexpected ending, too.

[megladon8]

Watched Unforgiven, and I still think it's a masterpiece - one of the best American films in the last 20 years.

[Grouchy]

Now I've seen the "real" Meyer Beyond the Valley of the Dolls and had me a bunch of laughs. I expected even more nudity, but the point of the movie was the camp and the unbelievable over-the-top performances. The movie's ending doesn't have ANY respect for continuity, coherence or plot, but what do you expect? I specially enjoyed the editing, specially that surreal montage when they decide to go LA. By the way, The Kelly Affair was a much hipper-sounding name for a band than The Carrie Nation. This has to be the only worthy thing Ebert wrote in his entire life.

[Sven]

The Driver kicked all kinds of ass. So hypnotically austere on account of both it's cold, open spatiality and archetypal approach to characterisation... the test drive scene in the parking lot is brilliant not just in it's choreography and editing, but also as a way of showing the stripping down of character that O'Neal has imposed upon himself. Surprisingly fascinating stuff - I was expecting this to be one of those sorta-'existential' films whose label as such derives from the residue of Melville's influence, but it's clear Hill has more on his mind that just homage. Definitely a film to study in order to understand how action sequences can have resonance beyond their kinetic thrills, while also delivering just that.

And those car chases are pretty good, huh?


I too started gearing up for the Walter Hill consensus, with Southern Comfort. Also majorly ass-kicking. The sense of place through naturalistic sound design and serene cinematography is both inviting and entrapping, increasingly the latter as the film goes on. The cast of reliably average character actors play their narrow emotional ranges well, and the Vietnam parallels are upfront without overpowering the literal story. Several action sequences that in lesser hands could have proved slightly monotonous instead frighten and energize every time a reservist gets attacked. The peak of the film is the climatic, eerily sustained finale where the frightening wilderness at the heart of the community pays the survivors a visit. Interesting if unexpected ending, too.

You guys are both on my list. My good list.

Awesome thoughts all around. I've said many times that The Driver has not only one of the best car chases ever filmed, but, like, FIVE of the best car chases ever filmed (and bone-daddy, you've done amazing things with your succinct description of the car garage scene). What a great movie!

[MadMan]

So I finally watched The Host last night. Man was it a really fantastic film, one that intelligently touched upon family, the American troop presence in South Korea, and how sometimes the cure is worse than the disease. I was surprised that the family drama was handled somewhat daftly and with a nice soft touch instead of being cloy, heavy handed or annoying. The humor seemed a bit out of place at times though, but there wasn't enough to really have a negative impact. Oh and the monster was just really freakin' cool-I loved the design of it, how it moved, and how it was really freaky, weird looking, and unique. I have to say the first monster attack on the river side was awesome and surreal, and that the film had so many great moments they are hard to pick out. Although the dropping of Agent Yellow on the demonstrators as they ran from the monster was one that really stands out in my mind. I loved how it was both haunting and abstract, as if it was really happening and yet not happening at the same time, and yet it also holds a good deal of shock value in that a dangerous nerve agent is being dropped on innocent people. I have to say that the film sported some excellent cinemtography and the musical score is brilliant.
For me this is one of the best films I've seen from 2007 so far, and I have to say that I will be holding Cloverfield and The Mist, the two other latest monster flicks, to the same high standards.

I also viewed Equilibrium today as well. While I thought the action scenes were really badass (Gun Kata=one of the coolest things ever) I felt that the film's creators could have gotten more out of what is a solid premise. The action junkie in me enjoyed the hell out of it, but the critic within wondered if the film could have been so much more. I only note this because if the film simply wanted to be an action flick it wouldn't have included all of the stuff about being how being human is both good and bad, etc. and all.

Ratings for both can be found by visiting the link in my sig. I've actually seen more than 900 some films but many of them I haven't viewed in ages and thus can't properly rate.

[Qrazy]

Exodus 8:2 reads: "And if thou refuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy borders with frogs".

On the flip-side of the faith vs. randomness, and PTA's original inspiration for the conclusion...

http://www.islandnet.com/~see/weather/whys/fishnfrogs.htm

[Boner M]

That's by Aaron Katz, not Swanberg (he just stars in it). I believe it has the highest imdb rating, don't know about the general consensus. To date, I have only seen Bujalski's two films, which were decent but not good enough to get me interested in the subgenre.
Sicinski said it's the first *censored* film he can get behind, and it's been praised by non-fans of the subgenre too. Reverse Shot had some good things to say as well. I was considering a purchase, since it's available on Filmbrain's Benten films label with Katz's Dance party USA, which Amy Taubin called one of the best coming-of-age films she's seen.

[Melville]

So first viewing of Magnolia... um, what's it all about? Shattered expectations of an array of arrested developments, maybe... people trying to rise above their vapidity? The emotionally self-serving and the whirlpool they set off with their miserable complacency? Broken people finding one another again?
I'd say it's more about the spiritual interconnections between all things, about catharsis, despair, and the absurd, and about its own damn fine bombastic filmmaking.


In The Son we're often just staring at the back of Olivier's head or looking directly at him, and I had the profound sensation of desperately wanting to see what he was seeing. And not just to see, but to understand. I thought it was perfectly illustrative of how precious that gap between people is, and how the longing to break that gap down is one of the things that makes life worth living, even if it inevitably proves futile. I love experiencing that emotion. I loved the film.
Indeed. I loved how inquisitive the camera was in that movie, how it was always at a distance from its characters but always trying to probe deeper into their motives.



His revamping of Lang's M is masterful (to the point I might be inclined to call it better than the original), and I also really liked Accident, his second Pinter collaboration. Time Without Pity is a decent, rather typical noir, and the less said about Modesty Blaise, the better.


I thought it was thoroughly mediocre. Dean Stockwell is good, but the film is clunky and heavy-handed. My favorite Losey's are Secret Ceremony and Mr. Klein, the latter of which is on DVD.
Thanks. I'll keep those in mind.


Watched Svankmajer's Alice last night. Sort of a surreal, pseudo-sexual nightmare from the mind of a not-so-innocent little girl. It was very good. Remarkably creative. I had always sort of imagined Wonderland as being more open though. Setting it inside a house makes the tone a lot more claustrophobic. And creepy. Definitely a dirtier version of the young female psyche than is usually portrayed.
I agree with others that it's repetitious style got a bit tedious, but it sure had its moments.


Hmmm, I remember some typically Eisensteinian compositions, but I too found it underwhelming and the only one of his films that I don't really care for. From his sound films, Ivan the Terrible: Part I is the way to go.
Alexander Nevsky is definitely pretty weak. Eisenstein just isn't that interesting when his style is so diluted. Even Ivan the Terrible: Part I was something of a disappointment for me. Part Two, however, is like an Eisensteinian rampage of close-ups, frantic music, wildly 'theatrical' performances, flurries of color, and mad editing—it's one of the greatest things ever.

[Watashi]

The whole biblical relevance in Magnolia is just one giant MacGuffin. I remember reading an article where PTA thought it was funny that everyone thought the ending was suppose to have an old testament meaning, but he really included it because he thought it was "pretty random and cool". In fact, PTA placed the number 82 around as a joke to make people think it was actually referencing the Exodus 8:2 passage.

Even though I finished the film two hours ago, I can still barely remember a thing about The Good German. It has a neat concept, but it's too empty and emotionally flat. Clooney is no Bogart, Blanchett is no Bergman, and Tobey... well I don't know what the hell Tobey was suppose to be. He was one of the most miscast decision in a Hollywood film in quite awhile.

[Sven]

I remember reading an article where PTA thought it was funny that everyone thought the ending was suppose to have an old testament meaning, but he really included it because he thought it was "pretty random and cool".

He was probably playing coy. I'd like to see an exact quote, because "pretty random and cool" sounds pretty damn stupid. It's way too calculated to be random.

[Mysterious Dude]

I found the frogs to be a pretty lazy way to end the movie.

I have read that Anderson used the frogs, in part, to prevent Jimmy Gator from killing himself so that he would, instead, burn to death, because he thought the character deserved a more painful death.

I think that is really idiotic storytelling.

[Sycophant]

It has a neat concept, but it's too empty and emotionally flat. Clooney is no Bogart, Blanchett is no Bergman, and Tobey... well I don't know what the hell Tobey was suppose to be. He was one of the most miscast decision in a Hollywood film in quite awhile.
Yeah, pretty much. Except I rather liked Blanchett's performance. Tobey stuck out like a sore thumb. Evne moreso than the weirdly obviously digital superimposed titles.

[dreamdead]

Sicinski said it's the first *censored* film he can get behind, and it's been praised by non-fans of the subgenre too. Reverse Shot had some good things to say as well. I was considering a purchase, since it's available on Filmbrain's Benten films label with Katz's Dance party USA, which Amy Taubin called one of the best coming-of-age films she's seen.

Yeah, I looked at the Reverse Shot piece and then went ahead and ordered Quiet City. Should be here in a few and hopefully I can squeeze it into this busy weekend.

Knocked out My Man Godfrey. I'm conflicted because whereas something like The Awful Truth is airy and almost serene in its embracement of the madcap, this film is so constrained by its morality that it dulls some of the edge against licentious sprending and the bourgious. Additionally, the whole family that Powell works for is so myopic in how they invest themselves that much of the effort that Powell undergoes lacks any real agency (though that almost means the film succeeds despite itself). Lombard is a delight, though, and has great fun, so I'll bump a slightly disappointed viewing (given its status with Sycophant, with whom I seem to align myself in these types of films) up to a three star rating.

[Rowland]

So, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly is an engrossing sensory experience... and you know, the human spirit and such. *shrug*

[Watashi]

So, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly is an engrossing sensory experience... and you know, the human spirit and such. *shrug*
Still catching up on your 07 releases, Row?

[Rowland]

Still catching up on your 07 releases, Row?Hell yeah, and I still have plenty more to see too. This just opened around my neck of the woods last Friday.

[Mysterious Dude]

I can hardly believe Andy Griffith was such a good actor. Who knew?

[Justin]

So I am in an American Horror Film class and we have a group assignment due towards the end of the year. My group has to pick out any american horror film and show it to the class and talk about it, our topic is "Gender and the Monsterous Female". What are some good film suggestions?

[dreamdead]

I can hardly believe Andy Griffith was such a good actor. Who knew?

He's also really pretty good in Pirandello's Six Characters in Search of an Author. Horribly disorienting once you realize it's him, but a solid performer nonetheless. I'll have to queue this up...

[Eleven]

So I am in an American Horror Film class and we have a group assignment due towards the end of the year. My group has to pick out any american horror film and show it to the class and talk about it, our topic is "Gender and the Monsterous Female". What are some good film suggestions?

Off the top of my head...Carrie, Cat People, Alien/Aliens, The Brood, Rabid, The Hunger, The Exorcist.

[dreamdead]

So I am in an American Horror Film class and we have a group assignment due towards the end of the year. My group has to pick out any american horror film and show it to the class and talk about it, our topic is "Gender and the Monsterous Female". What are some good film suggestions?

Only thing that's occurring to me is a study of the character transformation/transmutations behind Riply from the Alien series. I'm guessing this has already crossed your mind, though, and since I'm not a huge horror collector I've reached the peak of my knowledge.

Meg or D_Davis?

[Rowland]

I can think of some great choices that aren't American Horror, such as Repulsion, The Innocents, Audition, etc.

How about The Birds?

[Russ]

So I am in an American Horror Film class and we have a group assignment due towards the end of the year. My group has to pick out any american horror film and show it to the class and talk about it, our topic is "Gender and the Monsterous Female". What are some good film suggestions?
Since the obvious choice is Alien/Aliens, I'd say go with the suggestion to screen one of Cronenberg's: The Brood, Rabid are both good choices.

Audition is another good one too.

EDIT: Heck, forgot about the American qualifier. That screws up these Canadian and Japanese choices, I guess.

[Derek]

So, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly is an engrossing sensory experience... and you know, the human spirit and such. *shrug*

Here's (http://www.match-cut.org/showthread.php?t=327) a thread where some us talk about what we liked about it.

And here's (http://academichack.net/reviewsDecember2007.htm) Sicinski's review of it.

*shrug*

[Rowland]

And here's (http://academichack.net/reviewsDecember2007.htm) Sicinski's review of it.
Yeah, I always read his reviews. This one went over my head.

Oh, and your writing in that thread reads like you put a lot of thought into it, so kudos for that. Hell, I would have liked to "penetrate the screen" when Marie-Josée Croze was in a scene. :lol:

[Eleven]

EDIT: Heck, forgot about the American qualifier. That screws up these Canadian and Japanese choices, I guess.

Yeah, but I still think Cronenberg's are some of the best choices, and they can still be considered North American. The big reveal of The Brood is pretty much what I immediately picture when reading "monstrous female."

[Justin]

Yeah, but I still think Cronenberg's are some of the best choices, and they can still be considered North American. The big reveal of The Brood is pretty much what I immediately picture when reading "monstrous female."

The professor and I are both huge Cronenberg fans, so I might be able to do it.

[Derek]

I found the frogs to be a pretty lazy way to end the movie.

I have read that Anderson used the frogs, in part, to prevent Jimmy Gator from killing himself so that he would, instead, burn to death, because he thought the character deserved a more painful death.

I think that is really idiotic storytelling.

I thought it was pretty clear Anderson set up the finale as the entire ensemble of characters waiting for something miraculous (like, say, the absurd accidents and chance evident in the opening) to unite them and magically bring about closure. The frogs were a pretty clear indication of the absurdity of that and of people shaping their expectations and understanding of the world based on what films feed us on a regular basis. It's very self-reflective, funny and intelligent IMO.

[Bosco B Thug]

Exodus 8:2 reads: "And if thou refuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy borders with frogs". I didn't mind the frogs. The film's about contrivance, so it fit. What it didn't need was that prologue.


I'd say it's more about the spiritual interconnections between all things, about catharsis, despair, and the absurd, and about its own damn fine bombastic filmmaking. "About its own damn fine bombastic filmmaking," ehhhh... *whines* :P Actually, I'm down with that because the film's pretty consistent in its vision of the "choreography of lives." But I hated the "Follow different people through the confines of the TV studio" scene, that was one instance when the "bombast" didn't fit.


I have read that Anderson used the frogs, in part, to prevent Jimmy Gator from killing himself so that he would, instead, burn to death, because he thought the character deserved a more painful death. That's a wierd ulterior motive. But I loved how Gator is used to switch so quickly from sympathetic to becoming immolated as the film's exemplar of emotional selfishness.


So I am in an American Horror Film class and we have a group assignment due towards the end of the year. My group has to pick out any american horror film and show it to the class and talk about it, our topic is "Gender and the Monsterous Female". What are some good film suggestions? Hmm, all I can think of that hasn't been mentioned is Psycho.

[Melville]

I thought it was pretty clear Anderson set up the finale as the entire ensemble of characters waiting for something miraculous (like, say, the absurd accidents and chance evident in the opening) to unite them and magically bring about closure. The frogs were a pretty clear indication of the absurdity of that and of people shaping their expectations and understanding of the world based on what films feed us on a regular basis. It's very self-reflective, funny and intelligent IMO.
I don't know. The plague of frogs seemed pretty honestly cathartic to me. It's catharsis via the absurd, but I didn't see any irony in it.

PTA on the frogs:

It truly came from a slightly gimmicky and exciting place. I'd read about rains of frogs in the works of Charles Fort (His "Book of the Damned" is the genesis for the rain of frogs), who was a turn of the century writer who wrote mainly about odd phenomena. So I just started writing it in to the script. It wasn't until after I got through with the writing that I began to discover what it might mean, which is this: you get to a point in your life, and shit is happening, and everything's out of your control, and suddenly, a rain of frogs just makes sense. You're staring at a doctor who is telling you something is wrong, and while we know what it is, we have no way of fixing it. And you just go: "So what you're telling me, basically, is that it's raining frogs from the sky." I'm not someone who's ever had a special fascination with UFO's or supernatural phenomena or anything but I guess I just found myself at a point in my life where I was going through some shitty stuff, and I was ready for some sort of weird religious experience, or as close as I could get to one. So then I began to decipher things about frogs and history things like this notion that as far back as the Romans, people have been able to judge the health of a society by the health of its frogs: the health of a frog, the vibe of a frog, the texture of the frog, its looks, how much wetness is on it, everything. The frogs are a barometer for who we are as a people. We're polluting ourselves, we're killing ourselves, and the frogs are telling us so, because they're all getting sick and deformed. And I didn't even know it was in the bible until Henry Gibson gave me a copy of it, bookmarked to the appropriate frog passage.

[Justin]

Hmm, all I can think of that hasn't been mentioned is Psycho.

Great recommendation and no doubt a good example of the category, but alas we already watched it on the first day.

[Duncan]

Finished Alexander Nevsky. I maintain my disappointment. Only the residue of dialectical montage remains, and comparing the aesthetic approach here to Eisenstein's earlier ingenuity is a bit sad. Also, I guess I've always wished he wasn't so blatantly propagandistic. I love Strike, and I love that his aesthetics work for his politics, so I forgive that film's baby tossing etc. He's trying to accomplish similar political goals here, but he's reduced to filming his heroes from low camera angles with big skies behind them. It's not nearly as interesting.

[origami_mustache]

Finished Alexander Nevsky. I maintain my disappointment. Only the residue of dialectical montage remains, and comparing the aesthetic approach here to Eisenstein's earlier ingenuity is a bit sad. Also, I guess I've always wished he wasn't so blatantly propagandistic. I love Strike, and I love that his aesthetics work for his politics, so I forgive that film's baby tossing etc. He's trying to accomplish similar political goals here, but he's reduced to filming his heroes from low camera angles with big skies behind them. It's not nearly as interesting.


In Eisenstein's defense, he was on a very short leash and basically forced to conform by the government.

[Duncan]

In Eisenstein's defense, he was on a very short leash and basically forced to conform by the government.

Yeah, I know. That's why comparing it to his earlier work seems sad to me. It won't stop me from watching Ivan the Terrible Parts I & II at some point.

[origami_mustache]

Yeah, I know. That's why comparing it to his earlier work seems sad to me. It won't stop me from watching Ivan the Terrible Parts I & II at some point.

It's regrettable Eisenstein's career was limited by government restriction like so many other great Soviet filmmakers, but on the other hand the hybrid of the montage style with more conventional techniques served as inspiration for future generations of filmmakers, especially Eastern European cinema and led to some great results.

[Rowland]

In The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, what was the purpose behind the interlude that began with the jarring U2 song? Was that just to further develop his previous lifestyle and illustrate why religion doesn't play a larger part in the story, or did I miss something?

[Wryan]

I can hardly believe Andy Griffith was such a good actor. Who knew?

A towering performance, and I hate using that phrase. Amazing film.

[origami_mustache]

Just got upgraded to power user on Karagarga. I will get 1 new invite each week. I gave out my first 2 invites, but will start a waiting list.

...also still have 3 invites for Cinema Obscura.

PM me with emails if interested.

[transmogrifier]

2 Days in Paris

Kind of Before Sunset in an alternate universe, seeing what actually happens if the star-crossed lovers actually get together, stay together and fuck on a regular basis. Works best as a sly dig at how Americans seem so upfront politically, with Goldberg's character not shy to run down his leader, but cringe back into themselves as soon as sex rears its head, preferring to keep that strictly-elephant-in-the-roomish. Never knew Delpy had ambitions to be the French, female Woody Allen (directorial attributes only). Ending is punishingly obvious and increasingly broad, unfortunately.

[Qrazy]

I found the frogs to be a pretty lazy way to end the movie.

I have read that Anderson used the frogs, in part, to prevent Jimmy Gator from killing himself so that he would, instead, burn to death, because he thought the character deserved a more painful death.

I think that is really idiotic storytelling.



He was probably playing coy. I'd like to see an exact quote, because "pretty random and cool" sounds pretty damn stupid. It's way too calculated to be random.

Do people just ignore my posts or what? Again:

http://www.islandnet.com/~see/weather/whys/fishnfrogs.htm

I think I read something about PTA saying that about Gator as well but who knows if he meant it seriously or not, or just as an off hand comment... either way if he did mean it this is a perfect example of a director not necessarily being the best judge of their own work. The frog keeps him from taking the easy way out, but it doesn't necessarily cause the house to burn down (this is not apparent in the film itself), perhaps someone then saved him from the fire (if a fire actually destroyed the house and wasn't just contained in the area which it occurred)... bringing more people together, etc, what have you.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Justin,

Some other choices for your "Monstrous Female" subject:

The Evil Dead has, as its focal point, a female who's been sexualized and turned into a voice of evil by ancient demons. Out of the four "voiceboxes" for the other side, three are women.

May is a lovely little horror with a female whose rejections by those around her provoke her into a murderous frenzy.

Misery is a good example if you want a movie based less on sexual impulse/repulsion and more on cleaner character dynamics. Annie Wilkes is fascinating in her combination of maternal glowering and childlike tantrums. One could say she encapsulates the worst aspects of men's view of women: an asexual beast who's half-child, half-grandmother.

Sleepy Hollow, Cat People, and Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? also deserve a second look. And a few critics have suggested that there's a strong female/vaginal subtext to The Thing.

[Qrazy]

I didn't mind the frogs. The film's about contrivance, so it fit. What it didn't need was that prologue.


The prologue is absolutely essential and completely sets the tone for the rest of the film.

The only element of contrivance in the film that I can't get entirely on board with is the Aimee Mann sing-along. If PTA had tied a radio station to the film similarly to Do the Right Thing or Reservoir Dogs, this would have worked better for me... That is to say that if all the characters were listening to the radio and singing or even if some others were just kind of humming along to a tune heard in their head or whatever I could have bought it and it would have seemed more resonant and effective to me. but as it is in the film, it just seems to me like some sort of shared collective soliloquy to the audience... almost approaching fourth wall breakage but not quite... but the characters emotions in that moment are certainly for the audiences benefit and don't seem to naturally follow the characters momentary reality. The operatic frogs incident I have no problem with both as a biblical reference and as actual phenomenon because I felt like the film was building to that kind of shared moment and the moment maintains it's reality as an actual moment... but the operatic everyone's both the lead singer and the chorus element of the song while thematically relevant, faultered slightly in it's execution for me.

On another note I think PTA made the right choice leaving The Worm storyline unresolved. It was storyboarded and I believe partially shot but the openendedness of that plotline has much more significant thematic relevance than

[D_Davis]

Is Peter Watkins' The Gladiators a good introduction to the man's films? I am getting it this week, and I was thinking of taking it over to a friend's house to watch it.

[Ivan Drago]

The rain of frogs in Magnolia might be my favorite scene of all time.

[Velocipedist]

Is Peter Watkins' The Gladiators a good introduction to the man's films? I am getting it this week, and I was thinking of taking it over to a friend's house to watch it.

I haven't seen it but, from what I've heard, it is not.

Don't listen to me though.

[transmogrifier]

The only element of contrivance in the film that I can't get entirely on board with is the Aimee Mann sing-along. If PTA had tied a radio station to the film similarly to Do the Right Thing or Reservoir Dogs, this would have worked better for me... That is to say that if all the characters were listening to the radio and singing or even if some others were just kind of humming along to a tune heard in their head or whatever I could have bought it and it would have seemed more resonant and effective to me. but as it is in the film, it just seems to me like some sort of shared collective soliloquy to the audience... almost approaching fourth wall breakage but not quite... but the characters emotions in that moment are certainly for the audiences benefit and don't seem to naturally follow the characters momentary reality.

Was Magnolia a film that was predicated on realism? No. Nothing in the film leads us to believe that it is trying to provide a fly on the wall, this is really happening view of LA. It's unabashedly operatic and melodramatic and overblown, because sometimes, just sometimes, emotional attachment to a film doesn't come from the "Oh, I recognize that" part of our mind, but rather the "Oh holy fucking shit, these characters are singing the same fucking song at the same fucking time" part of our mind.

I'm not sure what you have against playing to the audience.

[Qrazy]

Was Magnolia a film that was predicated on realism? No. Nothing in the film leads us to believe that it is trying to provide a fly on the wall, this is really happening view of LA. It's unabashedly operatic and melodramatic and overblown, because sometimes, just sometimes, emotional attachment to a film doesn't come from the "Oh, I recognize that" part of our mind, but rather the "Oh holy fucking shit, these characters are singing the same fucking song at the same fucking time" part of our mind.

I'm not sure what you have against playing to the audience.

Fanboy alert.

:rolleyes:

[Spinal]

Is Peter Watkins' The Gladiators a good introduction to the man's films? I am getting it this week, and I was thinking of taking it over to a friend's house to watch it.

No, definitely not. It's pretty much the only one I don't like.

[D_Davis]

No, definitely not. It's pretty much the only one I don't like.

Damn.

[lovejuice]

always: sunset in the 3rd street is a japanese film that won the japanese academy award in 2005. very melodramatic. the beginning and the introductions to characters are quite annoying with the sub-par acting and almost wall-to-wall scores. however, it's getting better later on, and albeit episodic structures, the movie ends up quite a nice exercise for your tear ducts.

[megladon8]

I watched Unforgiven again - that's twice in two days.

Such a wonderful movie.

[Mysterious Dude]

I watched Unforgiven again - that's twice in two days.

Such a wonderful movie.
Now I know why you're always saying "I'd really like to see that movie."

[megladon8]

Now I know why you're always saying "I'd really like to see that movie."


I don't get it.

[Mysterious Dude]

I don't get it.
Because instead of watching movies you haven't seen, you watch the same movies over and over.

[megladon8]

Because instead of watching movies you haven't seen, you watch the same movies over and over.


Why is that a problem?

And I'm always seeing movies I haven't seen. I'm sure you rewatch stuff, too.

[Mysterious Dude]

Why is that a problem?If you watch the same movies over and over, then I don't believe you are making much of an effort to see The Blade or Fantastic Planet or any of the other movies you claim you really want to see. That's not actually my problem, of course.


And I'm always seeing movies I haven't seen. I'm sure you rewatch stuff, too.I never, ever watch the same movie twice in two days.

[megladon8]

If you watch the same movies over and over, then I don't believe you are making much of an effort to see The Blade or Fantastic Planet or any of the other movies you claim you really want to see. That's not actually my problem, of course.

I never, ever watch the same movie twice in two days.


It's ridiculous that you could find fault with this.

I'm not even going to bother arguing with you.

[Yxklyx]

...

I never, ever watch the same movie twice in two days.

I've done that twice from what I recall. Donnie Darko and Hukkle.

[Velocipedist]

I've done that twice from what I recall. Donnie Darko and Hukkle.

Entirely fine with me.

The question is why, though. Was it because they were incredibly good, because you weren't paying attention the first time, or because you wanted to make sure they're as bad as you though they are?

[megladon8]

Entirely fine with me.

The question is why, though. Was it because they were incredibly good, because you weren't paying attention the first time, or because you wanted to make sure they're as bad as you though they are?


I re-watch things because I like having something playing while I fall asleep.

Sometimes if I can't sleep I end up just watching it all the way through.

[Velocipedist]

I re-watch things because I like having something playing while I fall asleep.

You have musics for that.


Sometimes if I can't sleep I end up just watching it all the way through.

That's good, though.

[megladon8]

You have musics for that.

Not really. My stereo has two volumes - mute, and loud.

And I can't wear headphones/earbuds to sleep - I find it quite painful.

[Ezee E]

Despite PTA giving a safe answer about the frogs, there's too much dedication to it for it to simply be something "random and cool" that he adds in there. With the religious subtext in both TWBB and even his first two films, there's something he simply just doesn't want to say.

[Ezee E]

The King of Kong is a decent documentary that fits right in with the MTV True Life episodes. Other then the confrontations between the two high-scorers, I don't really see anything special about the movie.

G.I. Jane is surprisingly good, especially for its look at the rigorous bootcamp training. Once it leaves the boot camp, it loses focus, and tries too hard tto make her look like a great soldier. It should've just ended with her getting past the military. I could've done without the feminist rock songs as she works out too, but meh.

[Kurosawa Fan]

The King of Kong is a decent documentary that fits right in with the MTV True Life episodes. Other then the confrontations between the two high-scorers, I don't really see anything special about the movie.

G.I. Jane is surprisingly good, especially for its look at the rigorous bootcamp training. Once it leaves the boot camp, it loses focus, and tries too hard tto make her look like a great soldier. It should've just ended with her getting past the military. I could've done without the feminist rock songs as she works out too, but meh.

This is easily the most incorrect FDT post of the new year. Congrats.

[MadMan]

This is easily the most incorrect FDT post of the new year. Congrats.Heh. I haven't seen King of Kong yet but I hardly remember GI Jane at all, aside from a couple of scenes. I think it might have been a decent but pretty forgettable film, more well known for pointing a spotlight (a pretty fictional one but still) on women in the material and for Demi Moore shaving her head because the part required it.

[transmogrifier]

Fanboy alert.

:rolleyes:

I assume this is just a filler post which you'll come back and edit once you've actually thought of something useful to say?

[transmogrifier]

The King of Kong is a decent documentary that fits right in with the MTV True Life episodes. Other then the confrontations between the two high-scorers, I don't really see anything special about the movie.
.

Agree completely.

[baby doll]

The King of Kong is a decent documentary that fits right in with the MTV True Life episodes. Other then the confrontations between the two high-scorers, I don't really see anything special about the movie.I haven't seen the film, but I suspect the reason it's done so well at the box office is because it's a documentary in which politics are completely absent.

[Rowland]

I haven't seen the film, but I suspect the reason it's done so well at the box office is because it's a documentary in which politics are completely absent.And the novelty factor of nerds obsessing over the high scores for old games coupled with the Rocky-esque narrative. It's very entertaining, and I suppose you can attach to it some subtext about the American dream or something, but I don't really see what the big deal was about either.

[transmogrifier]

I haven't seen the film, but I suspect the reason it's done so well at the box office is because it's a documentary in which politics are completely absent.

It's basically cut and edited for maximum "Good Guy" vs "Evil Guy" effect, with the filmmakers withholding information at certain points (yet "hinting" at some surprise) in an otherwise chronological film for maximum effect. The "Good Guy" is nice, and we're pleased when he wins, but the film is poorly constructed and rather cynical in its manipulation. Plus, you know, it's about Donkey Kong (;))

[Grouchy]

I also rewatch movies. And sometimes, if I've seen a particularly great one, it's not uncommon for me to rewatch it the next day or or inmediately, sometimes with the excuse of showing it to someone. I think I saw The Big Lebowski three times in a week back when I first discovered it. I saw Eyes wide shut twice in the same day, too. Antoine, you might've heard of this French dude called Truffaut, who did the same thing, and he actually had to walk to a theater to do it.

I'm striving to think of more Horror movies with monstrous females. I think May is an excellent suggestion and has enough meat in it for a long debate. If I can think of another one none has said I'll bring it up.

[Derek]

I don't know. The plague of frogs seemed pretty honestly cathartic to me. It's catharsis via the absurd, but I didn't see any irony in it.

PTA on the frogs:

It truly came from a slightly gimmicky and exciting place. I'd read about rains of frogs in the works of Charles Fort (His "Book of the Damned" is the genesis for the rain of frogs), who was a turn of the century writer who wrote mainly about odd phenomena. So I just started writing it in to the script. It wasn't until after I got through with the writing that I began to discover what it might mean, which is this: you get to a point in your life, and shit is happening, and everything's out of your control, and suddenly, a rain of frogs just makes sense. You're staring at a doctor who is telling you something is wrong, and while we know what it is, we have no way of fixing it. And you just go: "So what you're telling me, basically, is that it's raining frogs from the sky." I'm not someone who's ever had a special fascination with UFO's or supernatural phenomena or anything but I guess I just found myself at a point in my life where I was going through some shitty stuff, and I was ready for some sort of weird religious experience, or as close as I could get to one. So then I began to decipher things about frogs and history things like this notion that as far back as the Romans, people have been able to judge the health of a society by the health of its frogs: the health of a frog, the vibe of a frog, the texture of the frog, its looks, how much wetness is on it, everything. The frogs are a barometer for who we are as a people. We're polluting ourselves, we're killing ourselves, and the frogs are telling us so, because they're all getting sick and deformed. And I didn't even know it was in the bible until Henry Gibson gave me a copy of it, bookmarked to the appropriate frog passage.

I know what PTA said, but I don't see why it can't be both cathartic and ironic nor do I put much stock in directors interpretations of their own films. When characters in a film are looking right at you, telling you to wise up, I can't help but think it's directly referencing the expectations we've developed while watching the film. PTA gives his characters that catharsis and shares it with the audience, but also makes a point of showing how absurd it would be to expect the same in life (ie, you might as well be waiting for a rain of frogs). It's emotionally and intellectually gratifying, at least for me.

[Eleven]

The flying door! The billowing curtains! The Red Bull!

Johnny To! Exiled! Fuck yeah!

[Sycophant]

The flying door! The billowing curtains! The Red Bull!

Johnny To! Exiled! Fuck yeah!FUCK YEAH!

[Eleven]

FUCK YEAH!

Now I'm out of breath.

*uses inhaler in stylish slow motion*

[Grouchy]

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y121/HawleyGriffin/CharlieWilsonsWar.jpg?t=120172 8163

Charlie Wilson's War
Mike Nichols, 2007

Mixing good art with politics is a difficult business. On one side, political films have a tendency to be either too hammering or to take only one side. If they avoid that, they can fall into oversimplifying of complicated issues. And then, they can become hard to swallow. I love Syriana, for example, but I wouldn't watch it again. I'd watch this one again anytime it's on TV. I haven't seen enough of Mike Nichols, who seems to me a very intelligent filmmaker. I've loved Who's afraid of Virginia Woolf? and hated/despised Closer, and I don't remember enough of Wolf to pass judgement, and that's about it. This movie has got me interested into the rest of his filmography.

Let's start with the premise - in the Cold War days, U.S. Democrat congressman Charles Wilson enjoys his power and somewhat easy position. In his state, all he has to do is reject guns and lower the taxes for the people to be happy. Meanwhile, he spends leisure time in Vegas, surrounded by busty strippers, drinking scotch and snorting blow. Then one day, a Republican socialite from Houston he wants to shag gets him in trouble and sends him to the Middle East, where he discovers that Afghanistan is fighting the commies with World War I rifles while the Russians are mowing them down from helicopters. And nobody cares, because the US Embassy's mission over there is to keep the Cold War cold. Enter a guy named Gust, who's been trying to "kill commies" unsuccesfully and who has a reputation for stubbornness and a lot of frustration to get rid of. Charlie has the good intentions, Gust has the means, and Joanne from Houston has the nice ass and the dollars.

The movie is perfectly acted all around and the dialogue moves at a scary speed, like a screwball comedy written by the Marx Brothers mixed with a West Wing episode. I swear to God, people are gonna kill me over this, but this is the finest Tom Hanks performance ever. He moves and talks like a politician and a man of the world, and the little edges showing the angst and depression on his face are all he needs to explain what goes on behind the face. Hoffman is his usual awesome self. Roberts is not exactly bad, but she's been the most irritating person in Hollywood for a long time now and she doesn't add anything interesting to the character, plus not really being attractive at all. Sharon Stone could have done it better.

The script, of course, is the star of the show. The movie tells tragic situations mixed with abundant sardonic humor. We see kids with their arms blown off, and in the next scene we have the scene where the politicians throw witticisms about the issue, drinking Chivas in an airplane seat. And yet the movie is not manipulative or exploitative - it tells the truth over how the Cold War got really kick-started, and won by the yankees. One issue that's interesting, of course, is that Charlie Wilson is selling to Afghanistan expropriated AK-47s that are now being fired against the Americans. The movie's entire point is this, illustrated by a story told by the Hoffman character where a zen master answers every good or bad news with the worlds "we'll see", indicating that what's a rock solid plan now can become tomorrow's big catastrophe. Nichols gives an epilogue explanation of the irony of America's shaky current situation that I don't entirely agree with, yet it's as good as any. He shows us Charlie Wilson trying to get the same astronomical budget he got for weapons to invest in schools and hospitals for the people in Afghanistan, and America rejecting it strongly. Now that we've won, what do we care about the people in the camels? Wilson's point of view, and the movie's to an extent, is compassionate imperialism, yet it's politics. It's a game of chess and anything goes.

It's fun to compare a movie like this to something like Munich. In that work, which was also strongly political, there was an extended epilogue (almost half an hour long) where the Eric Bana character debated, both with himself and with others, if what he did was right or wrong. While I was watching that, I thought those were the discussions the audience needs to have among themselves. Spielberg shouldn't have wasted film stock in it, it's like if Ridley Scott had filmed a scene with two guys discussing if Deckard is a Replicant. This movie's greatest brilliance is that, once the cards have been laid in the table, it ends, leaving us to think about it. And it ends with the best possible image - Tom Hanks misty-eyed, somewhat confused expression.

[MadMan]

Okay so the film does sort of touch on the fact that the Afghans we armed turned against us? I may actually now consider seeing the film. Good review Grouchy, and I actually am curious to view Tom Hanks' performance since you think its one of his best.

[Qrazy]

I assume this is just a filler post which you'll come back and edit once you've actually thought of something useful to say?

Not really, it's quite obvious from my posts that I'm very fond of the movie. Just because I'm not splooging all over every element of it doesn't mean I don't love it. It's perfectly reasonable to have nitpicks with things you like and to express them. My post was not about realism vs. melodrama or however you want to peg it, that's just a reductive and absurd interpretation and hence the fanboy comment. It seems to assume that I'm a hard-line realist and haven't seen or loved countless surrealistic (bunuel, jodorowsky, lynch) or melodramatic (fassbinder, sirk) works when that's far from the case. Every film has to maintain it's inner reality, even if that inner reality is absurd (tampopo).

Magnolia's inner reality is not absurd in an extreme sense nor melodramatic in an extreme sense and that's why I don't think the sing-along was tonally earned. I'm not suggesting that you're suspension of disbelief is unwarranted. All I'm suggesting is that for me the sing-along temporarily undermines the character-hood of these characters, turning them into puppets for a speech on interconnectedness. On the flip-side this narrative approach could serve a Brechtian intent... which is why I feel the sing-along has thematic merit but doesn't tonally resonate with me.

We're exposed to these characters and their lives and then the narrative thread is suspended so they can have a collective soliloquy to the audience. Hell it's not the singing that bothers me, it's the shift in narrative focus. I don't feel the emotional resonance as a result of this shift which is why I suggest the radio interlocutor as a means of assauging my issue. That way thematic goals are maintained (although now with a very watered down distancing effect) and tonal resonance is preserved.

Damn, here I said wasn't going to clarify and then I did... you tricky tricky transmogrifier!

[Qrazy]

But also makes a point of showing how absurd it would be to expect the same in life (ie, you might as well be waiting for a rain of frogs).

These things happen all the time! Stop crushing my dreams and raining frogs on my parade!

[MadMan]

Well now I'm left wondering if I should post my Top 10 of the 2000s or not, especially since there's 3 years left in the decade. But its more than that: I just finished watching what is now my new #1 of 2002, a film that has a good shot at being high up on that list that I'm halfway through finishing: Adaptation.
Seriously how and why the fuck didn't this brilliant film get nominated for Best Picture? It deserved to win over pretty much all of the nominees (I've seen all of them except for a few) and defiantly over that goddamn overrated musical Chicago (those Academy assholes sickening love for the musical clearly clouds their vision at times).
I'm not even sure how to review the film, except to say that just wow....I'm blow away by it. This was the first movie I had seen from Spike Jonze, and even if the other films in his filmography aren't up to par he at has this great one. I think the dreaded, over used "masterpiece" label might even apply here. Oh and I was sort of disturbed by how much I could relate to Charlie, although I liked his brother Donald far more.

[Sycophant]

Seriously how and why the fuck didn't this brilliant film get nominated for Best Picture? It deserved to win over pretty much all of the nominees (I've seen all of them except for a few) and defiantly over that goddamn overrated musical Chicago (those Academy assholes sickening love for the musical clearly clouds their vision at times).
Two problems with your post:
1) Talking about Best Picture for Academy Awards five years in the past like it matters.
2) A bizarre swipe at musicals, of which there are not enough.

[Sven]

Two problems with your post:
1) Talking about Best Picture for Academy Awards five years in the past like it matters.
2) A bizarre swipe at musicals, of which there are not enough.

3) Heaping what sounds like unquestioning praise on Adaptation solely due to its first half, when it's the last part that really affects the majority of people's opinion of the picture.

[Qrazy]

3) Heaping what sounds like unquestioning praise on Adaptation solely due to its first half, when it's the last part that really affects the majority of people's opinion of the picture.

Halfway through finishing the list.

[MadMan]

3) Heaping what sounds like unquestioning praise on Adaptation solely due to its first half, when it's the last part that really affects the majority of people's opinion of the picture.What the hell? The entire film is why I think its great, not any just because of either of the halfs.


Two problems with your post:
1) Talking about Best Picture for Academy Awards five years in the past like it matters.
2) A bizarre swipe at musicals, of which there are not enough.1) I'm not the only one who bitches about past mistakes the Academy's made.

2) Obviously you don't know me well enough. I don't think very highly of musicals. :P


Halfway through finishing the list.When it comes to writing I often take my sweet time, as thoughts often don't come quickly. Plus its not like I'm going to stop watching movies just because I'm making some dumb list. Hell I make movie based lists all the time. I just don't post them.

[Eleven]

3) Heaping what sounds like unquestioning praise on Adaptation solely due to its first half, when it's the last part that really affects the majority of people's opinion of the picture.

I believe it the list that he's halfway finished with, but I was a bit confused too.

[Sven]

Halfway through finishing the list.


What the hell? The entire film is why I think its great, not any just because of either of the halfs.



I believe it the list that he's halfway finished with, but I was a bit confused too.

Whoops!

[Eleven]

Whoops!

And here I was thinking that Qrazy thought the list of problems with the post was halfway done, and I unnecessarily dogpiled, sorry about that. Maybe we should all just go back to our neutral corners and come out again after some quiet meditation.

[Rowland]

Hey Spinal, did you ever write a review for Red Road?

[MadMan]

:lol: guys I finished the movie of course. I realize though that I worded it wrong, so it sounded like I had only seen half of the film though. I should have reworded it so I posted "I finished the film, but I'm only halfway through finishing my Top 10 of the 2000s list" so there wasn't any confusion. My bad.

[Qrazy]

And here I was thinking that Qrazy thought the list of problems with the post was halfway done, and I unnecessarily dogpiled, sorry about that. Maybe we should all just go back to our neutral corners and come out again after some quiet meditation.

Mmm quiet medication.

[Eleven]

Mmm quiet medication.

Well, looks like somebody's chart got switched around. We'll just let Nurse Ratched know and see what she thinks.

[Wryan]

4) Wonders about the rampant pedantry of cineastes: is it inborn or learned. NATURE or NURTURE? ONLY TIME WILL TELL.

[Spinal]

Hey Spinal, did you ever write a review for Red Road?

Yes. (http://filmepidemic.blogspot.com/2007/05/red-road-arnold-2006.html)

[Rowland]

Yes. (http://filmepidemic.blogspot.com/2007/05/red-road-arnold-2006.html)Good thoughts. I'm on the same page as you, only I felt the overly tidy writing and sometimes-leaden metaphors were a bit more detrimental to its overall effect than you. The Orwellian nature of the piece and its implicit criticism as evinced through psychological means struck me as particularly powerful, free from the explicit commentary a less assured filmmaker may have indulged in. Also notable is how strikingly she captures an evocative milieu, and how acutely she infuses it with a palpable air of seductive sexuality when the material calls for it. The sex scene is a powerhouse.

[Spinal]

The Orwellian nature of the piece and its implicit criticism as evinced through psychological means struck me as particularly powerful, free from the explicit commentary a less assured filmmaker may have indulged in. Also notable is how strikingly she captures an evocative milieu, and how acutely she infuses it with a palpable air of seductive sexuality when the material calls for it. The sex scene is a powerhouse.

Right on.

[Melville]

I know what PTA said, but I don't see why it can't be both cathartic and ironic nor do I put much stock in directors interpretations of their own films. When characters in a film are looking right at you, telling you to wise up, I can't help but think it's directly referencing the expectations we've developed while watching the film. PTA gives his characters that catharsis and shares it with the audience, but also makes a point of showing how absurd it would be to expect the same in life (ie, you might as well be waiting for a rain of frogs). It's emotionally and intellectually gratifying, at least for me.
Sorry, I should have had some kind of introductory phrase leading into the PTA quote. The quote was just intended to be a continuation of the string of references to things that PTA had said about the frogs; it wasn't meant to corroborate my own statement.

But regarding irony v. catharsis, don't you think a catharsis would be subverted by pointing out its impossibility? I thought the storm of frogs was definitely meant to be something that really happens, a grandiose statement that the absurd really does infiltrate and rupture our stifled, self-destructive patterns, and that such a rupture gives us a moment of clarity in which we are given the opportunity to "wise up". But I'll have to rewatch the movie and ponder the direct addresses to the audience (especially the final shot) to see if I can reconcile our two viewpoints.

On another note, I agree with everything Qrazy has said. I always thought that Jimmy Gator's fate was left purposely ambiguous, and that the universal sing-along disrupts the momentum of the narrative in a way that doesn't quite fit with the tone of the rest of the film. (Although such a disruption would seem to fit with Derek's interpretation.)

[Sycophant]

It's Always Fair Weather - Is that...? Is that Gene Kelly... tap-dancing in roller skates? Yes, it is. Yes, it fucking is.So, I watched this tonight. The mentioned scene is one of my favorite things I've seen Kelly do (I experienced pure exhilaration while I was watching it) and I'm left only to scratch my head and wonder why he wasn't dancing more. I liked a lot of the basic story elements, but the plot just meandered and digressed too much for my taste. And there just wasn't a whole lot interesting going on visually. By far the weakest Comden-Green collaboration I've seen, but a fun film altogether.

[MacGuffin]

How is The Seventh Continent in comparison to Michael Haneke's other movies?

[Spinal]

How is The Seventh Continent in comparison to Michael Haneke's other movies?

One of his best.

[Derek]

One of his best.

What he said.

[ThePlashyBubbler]

Hey, everybody. Long time lurker/first time poster toeing in to this great place to discuss film, so be gentle! I just rented The Death of Mr Lazarescu, what can I expect?

[Velocipedist]

Hey, everybody. Long time lurker/first time poster toeing in to this great place to discuss film, so be gentle! I just rented The Death of Mr Lazarescu, what can I expect?

The best movie of the Romanian renaissance.

Anyway, welcome!

[soitgoes...]

How is The Seventh Continent in comparison to Michael Haneke's other movies?
I think it's his best.

[Qrazy]

Rescue Dawn was pretty average, bit of a let down.

I found this and find it pretty interesting.

http://www.rescuedawnthetruth.com/

It was probably discussed to death back when the film came out but I missed the hub-bub. If the film had been more dramatically successful with it's changes then I wouldn't fault them but as it is now I don't feel the changes really add that much to the work.

The Lookout was awful.

[Watashi]

Jeff Daniels is awesome in The Lookout.

The rest... not so much.

[transmogrifier]

I'm Not There

Some fantastic individual images, and a joyous sense of controlled anarchy, but unfortunately this only serves to hide the fact that this is deeply conventional in content, and in fact a little lazy, happy as it is to merely play up the Dylan mystique without ever having the guts to question it, or the man himself.

Notorious

Middle-tier Hitchcock that takes an age to get going, the first half only really interesting for his typically sharp mise-en-scene. It's not until late that we finally start to become engaged in the otherwise tired espionage plot, mainly as a result of the depiction of the blank-faced banality of evil. Picks the least interesting ending, but caps it with a lovely final shot.

[number8]

Well, Hatchet was disappointing.

Second coming of slashers my ass. The Tripper was better than this.

[Boner M]

weekend

Le Trou
The River
3:10 to Yuma
The Blade
The Bad and the Beautiful

[Ezee E]

Yep, Saw IV continues my idea that it is the definitive torture porn, with scenes of random acts of cruel violence happening for the sake of it, because I have no idea what the story was about. Something that was sort of a prequel mixed with a sequel, with a future sequel in mind of course. Hell, it starts off with coroners (I think) dissecting the body of the villain in ways that I don't even think exist, much less make any type of logical sense.

Awesomly bad.

[Spinal]

Hey, everybody. Long time lurker/first time poster toeing in to this great place to discuss film, so be gentle! I just rented The Death of Mr Lazarescu, what can I expect?

The marketing pitched it as a dark comedy. But it's not really. Might be good to know that going in.

[Rowland]

I liked The Lookout. The first half is a perceptive portrait of the Levitt character, and the rest is a generic genre piece that hums along smoothly enough. Nothing about it struck me as terribly memorable though, and there are assorted flaws (Fisher is wasted, the cop about to have a baby is a hilariously manipulative device, etc.), but it's a fine first feature propped up with strong lead performances.

[Rowland]

The marketing pitched it as a dark comedy. But it's not really. Might be good to know that going in.Oh, I don't know, the premise of the film and how it plays out can maybe be construed as dark comedy... really fucking dark comedy. :lol:

[Mysterious Dude]

I have heard that Romanians may find Lazarescu more comedic than Americans, because they are familiar with the kinds of situations you see in the film.

[megladon8]

Well, Hatchet was disappointing.

Second coming of slashers my ass. The Tripper was better than this.


Ugh - The Tripper is bad. I definitely liked Hatchet a hell of a lot more. I'd see another Victor Crowley movie in a heartbeat.

[Ezee E]

I liked The Lookout. The first half is a perceptive portrait of the Levitt character, and the rest is a generic genre piece that hums along smoothly enough. Nothing about it struck me as terribly memorable though, and there are assorted flaws (Fisher is wasted, the cop about to have a baby is a hilariously manipulative device, etc.), but it's a fine first feature propped up with strong lead performances.
When it becomes a genre piece is where it starts falling apart. I really liked the first half though.