28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[Irish]

The news would bother me less if RT

- was less ubiquitous (their ratings appear on a lotta commercial streaming services, giving them credibility)
- their methodology didn't suck (they don't weight the ratings)
- the diversity angle was more than a marketing gimmick (increasingly that's all it ever is)
- they actively culled their list of "approved" critics (since newspapers fired their staff writers, rankings are routinely decided desperate stringers and by bozos who had blogs in 1998 and signed up early)
- YouTubers didn't behave like YouTubers (ie, popular opinion wasn't decided by people willing to shill for a Funko bobblehead and a ticket to a red carpet premiere)

[baby doll]

As the kids these days say, I stan for that.Are the kids actually saying this? What does that even mean?

[TGM]

I can attest that they do indeed say that. Just scroll through twitter for five minutes, you'll see it.

[baby doll]

I can attest that they do indeed say that. Just scroll through twitter for five minutes, you'll see it.The only person I follow on Twitter is Alan Alda.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Are the kids actually saying this? What does that even mean?

It's a way of saying you're a fan of something. I think it might come from the song "Stan" by Eminem.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[baby doll]

It's a way of saying you're a fan of something. I think it might come from the song "Stan" by Eminem.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkThat's what I was thinking at first, but then I was like, "No, the kids today don't know that song. The kids today were infants when that album came out." Next you'll be telling me the kids today are also crazy about Tamagotchi and the dancing baby on Ally McBeal.

[TGM]

Decided to revisit my various Best of the Year lists from over the years, and take a look at how they might be revised if I were to redo those lists nowadays. Also felt it was a bit fitting, seeing all the various revisiting years back posts we've seen here lately. Check it out, for those interested, and share some of your own choices, as I ask at the end of the post. What were some of your favorites from years past that may have fallen off for you? Or vice versa, movies that you weren't quite so hot on at the time, but which have really grown on you? http://cwiddop.blogspot.com/2018/08/best-of-year-movie-rankings-revisited.html

[Dukefrukem]

I just recently did this from 2000-2017 and there were a lot of changes in my top 10.

Sucker Punch came out in 2011? Wow that feels like 20 years ago. That's one that's at the bottom of my 2011 list.

[Grouchy]

I'm not saying he's a hypocrite for acting in commercial movies, I'm just saying he draws an arbitrary line at superheroes as if those were the only silly FX extravaganza Hollywood flicks there are.

[TGM]

I just recently did this from 2000-2017 and there were a lot of changes in my top 10.

Did you post it anywhere?

[Dukefrukem]

Did you post it anywhere?

Kind of. I had mentioned it a few pages back (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?14-28-Film-Discussion-Threads-Later/page2711&p=592870&viewfull=1#post592870), but didn't post it. I suppose those who use Letterboxd saw it.

And while re-doing some rankings I made some fun lists (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?14-28-Film-Discussion-Threads-Later/page2712&p=593997&viewfull=1#post593997).

Edit: And apparently Leterboxd appears to be down at the moment. That's a first.

[TGM]

Watched Howl's Moving Castle for the first time last night. God damn what a hell of a movie. That was fucking awesome!

[MadMan]

Rotten Tomatoes apparently has decided to add like 200 new critics that can be included in the Tomatometer score, including podcasts and YouTube channels.

Might as well just use IMDB scores at this point.

And that matters...why?

[MadMan]

Unbreakable is great.

That it is. Valerian was more bland than white bread.

[transmogrifier]

And that matters...why?

I prefer critics to be actual critics rather than randos with a webcam. There are a million sites where you can get average ratings from audiences. We don’t need more dumbing down of cinema analysis.

[Skitch]

I prefer critics to be actual critics rather than randos with a webcam. There are a million sites where you can get average ratings from audiences. We don’t need more dumbing down of cinema analysis.

I agree, which is why I discounted RT's opinions in total when I found out how they aggregate about ten years ago.

[MadMan]

I prefer critics to be actual critics rather than randos with a webcam. There are a million sites where you can get average ratings from audiences. We don’t need more dumbing down of cinema analysis.

I agree, but I stopped taking RT seriously ages ago. I prefer to rely on sites like this one and my own opinion.

[Irish]

Every once and awhile I'm reminded that they actually released a freakin' "Assassin's Creed" movie ... into 3,000 theaters. WTF.

[baby doll]

On the Rotten Tomatoes thing, I actually don't read very many reviews these days, especially since Jonathan Rosenbaum retired from regular reviewing duties. I just choose what to watch based on the film's director and which festivals it played at. If it's a director I know and admire, I'll see it. If it's a director who's films I haven't liked in the past, I need to have some reason to believe it will be different from their other movies. If it's a director I'm unfamiliar with, I'll check it out if it played at a major festival (Cannes, Venice, Rotterdam, Locarno, NYFF). Clearly this is not a perfect system but on the whole it seems to work well enough.

[MadMan]

I had no idea Rosenbaum retired. I am really out of the loop.

[TGM]

Cross posting for anyone who might not visit the creative collective thread. But I just released a new short film, and would love it if you all would check it out, and maybe let me know what y'all think. :)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35MFCdMXfnA

[Peng]

Koyaanisqatsi (1982) - Frequently mesmerizing, but only the last act is outright transporting for me. The slow nature beginning being invaded by the presence of men makes for a thrilling contrast, and nitty-gritty human routines in vast spaces are my personal slow cinema jam. Some of the transitions to footage that seems a bit like banal coverage do take me out though; at times the approach wabbles uneasily between the poetic and the mundane. Still, that third act. The Grid is as great a audio-visual experience as advertised, and ending on a reverse concept of 2001's bone-satellite/primitive-technology matchcut (breaking down instead of leveling up) is powerfully sublime. As one billboard here says, grand illusion indeed. Prefer Baraka by quite a bit though. 7.5/10

I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang (1932) - More than 80 years later, the film's harsh depiction of system's injustice still leaves a mark, with the social commentary being second to its tough, unsentimental pre-code drama. This is largely thanks to Paul Muni's powerful performance, whose increasingly rough exterior never eclipse his vulnerability underneath; almost hard to believe that he is the same man who portrays Scarface's titular gangster in the same year. And of course, one of the great haunting last scenes ever in filmdom. 8/10

[Wryan]

As utterly ridiculous as the notion of "Jack Sparrow is Keith Richards so let's get Keith Richards" is, it's just flat disarming that the scene works as well as it does. Damn but it does have gravitas and a wonderfully subtle power. That's probably helped immensely by all the freakin texture and design work that goes into this scene. The set and costume design and lighting of it all is just wonderful and so inventive. At World's End is certainly the worst of the original three (Davy Jones and a leviathan and the roller-coaster silliness of the action scenes lift the second one just enough for me), but if more of the movie had this kind of commitment to its universe, I think it would have worked a lot better.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfKFHTaGzuU

This moment earlier in the same scene also illustrates the point, I think:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HR6C-sf_eA

[Dukefrukem]

The four sequels are so bland and left no impression on me that I dont recall a single scene except there was a giant squid at some point.
These two clips made me feel like I was watching it for the first time.

[MadMan]

I really liked the second flick. I quit the series after the third one.

[Spinal]

We have space for 1 more player in the new Fantasy Movie League season starting up later this week.

In the Fantasy Movie League, you will 'draft' movies to be released in the next 6 months based on how well you think they will perform at the box office. This means you'll need to be somewhat attentive to the thread for a week or so as the draft takes place. After that, you have no further commitment unless one of your films gets bumped to a different release date.

If you are interested in playing, check out the thread in 'The Kitchen Sink' and claim the spot. We'll begin in about 2 days regardless.

[Yxklyx]

I don't know if we should have a thread for actors that are surprisingly still alive and working but I just realized that Tatsuya Nakadai ("Lear" in Ran, Harakiri, Human Condition) is still alive and was in a movie last year.

[TGM]

Cross posting for anyone who might not visit the creative collective thread. But I just released a new short film, and would love it if you all would check it out, and maybe let me know what y'all think. :)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35MFCdMXfnA

No one?

[Skitch]

I watched it when originally posted. Sorry bud, I didn't care for it. :( Probably just not for me though.

[Dukefrukem]

I liked it. I liked the girl. I thought the acting from the lead needs to be tightened up a bit. Maybe a few more takes would have done it. It takes a bit to get moving which also could be tightened up in the editing. And the hardest part (i think) is getting the right music that fits the tone- which I'm not too sure it does. Overall, not bad. The littlest things make all the difference. Shortening scenes e.g. we don't need to see the door close after someone walks through it. By cutting the scene down to a shot of the interior, but adding in the SFX of the door closing, would make it a much more brisk experience.

[TGM]

Thanks for the feedback, Duke. Gotta spread some rep around before it'll let me give you some more. The most consistent complaint I've received is in regards to the lead actor, but I dunno, he gave me precisely the performance I was looking for for this part, so I was personally 100% satisfied with what he gave me. But then, maybe I'm too close to the project to see his faults, 'cause that one's really leaving me scratching my head, lol. *shrug*

Also Skitch, thanks for watching it as well. Sorry you didn't like this one though. :(

[Skitch]

I didnt have a problem with either of the actors. I felt it could've been shortened by a half tho. I hate critiquing these kind of things, as I've been intimately involved in similar projects and I swear they were no better. Keep going! :) Dont give a shit what anyone (especially me) says.

[Dukefrukem]

Also, cheeky bottoms on the girl next time. It's 2018.

[TGM]

So if anyone's interested, I wrote a new blog looking into some of the background behind my latest short film Sianostra, and also discussing my return to filmmaking: http://cwiddop.blogspot.com/2018/09/sianostra-my-return-to-filmmaking.html

[Ivan Drago]

While the theater can provide experiences from the cathartic and challenging to escapist and life-affirming, the two hours I spent watching Sálo last night were the first to make me feel like I was a prisoner in the 1966 hall. It's one of the most horrifying, disgusting, and torturous films I've ever sat through thanks to the imagery of the graphic stories told, and the harrowing immorality committed on-screen. . .and yet I can't not admire it for the artistry employed to comment on the state of Italy's government during WWII. The minimal use of music on top of the surrealist execution of its production and costume design highlight the prisoners' living nightmare and the grandiose stature of the fascist torturers. It's also worth noting that Pasolini portrays the fascist's psychology in such a way to propose they're as hateful and evil as they are because no one else in the world shares their depraved obsessions. More often than not, I wanted the film to be over more than once, but by the time it finally was, I felt the mix of being called to action to stop atrocities like this from happening, the helplessness of being unable to do so, and horror over the guards' reaction following the grievous climax. I have my doubts I'll ever see Sálo again, but despite refusing to see it for so long, now I'm glad I saw it, and I know I'll never forget it.

Also, Ennio Morricone's theme for this hasn't left my head since last night and my dark sense of humor wants it to be the song I dance to at my wedding.

[Skitch]

I watched the first 40 minutes or so of Salo. Did zero emotional for me. Dont feel bad about quitting.

[Ivan Drago]

I watched the first 40 minutes or so of Salo. Did zero emotional for me. Dont feel bad about quitting.

As you shouldn't. Nobody's kidding when they say it's a movie where your mileage may vary.

[Skitch]

As you shouldn't. Nobody's kidding when they say it's a movie where your mileage may vary.

Man that's truth. In dispensing criticism I rarely go to the "why does this even exist" play, but this...Gummo...maybe Happiness...

[StanleyK]

Seven years ago, I watched Claire Denis' Friday Night; I found it awful and almost unwatchably boring. Today I watched it again and I felt it's pretty good. Go figure.

[Dukefrukem]

Seven years ago, I watched Claire Denis' Friday Night; I found it awful and almost unwatchably boring. Today I watched it again and I felt it's pretty good. Go figure.

That's been happening a lot with me lately. (Rewatches that end up better than I remember them. )

[Skitch]

I love it when my opinion changes to positive on a film.

[megladon8]

Finally saw Interstellar.

Liked it a lot.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Finally saw Interstellar.

Liked it a lot.

Decent flick, but also just fucking beautiful. Easily my favorite-looking Nolan film.

[StanleyK]

That's been happening a lot with me lately. (Rewatches that end up better than I remember them. )

That's cool. With me it's usually the other way around, unfortunately: rewatching something I loved and not liking it as much this time (which actually happened with another Denis film, Trouble Every Day).

[StanleyK]

Today I watched it again and I felt it's pretty good. Go figure.

I was hoping for a repeat of that today when I rewatched Mike Leigh's Naked. Alas, I still find it fucking terrible, which is a shame since I liked High Hopes and loved Life is Sweet.

[MadMan]

Finally saw Interstellar.

Liked it a lot.

I love that movie, so much. I saw it at my local cheap theater. I also may have cried a few times. I am not sure when I will see it again, due to its length and my desire to go for mostly first time viewings these days.

[MadMan]

Killing Zoe is kind of dumb, but I still liked it anyways. Imagine the thieves from Reservoir Dogs or Heat, only they are complete idiots. Eric Stoltz was once a major film actor, and he actually carries this film pretty well. I wish they had given Julie Delpy more to do, also. I would love to visit Paris one day. I chuckled at the "Does this mean our friendship is in trouble?" line.

[Idioteque Stalker]

Today I watched all the trailers for Oscar buzz movies according to gold derby, and I must say the year as a whole looks excruciatingly dull.

[TGM]

And cross posting here as well. Here's that Ninja Kat film I had mentioned before. Really pleased by how this one turned out personally, and I'd of course love if you all would check it out and let me know what you all think as well. :)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFrhRCpx9OY

[Spinal]

BBC's top 100 foreign language films (http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20181029-the-100-greatest-foreign-language-films)

100. Landscape in the Mist (Theo Angelopoulos, 1988)
99. Ashes and Diamonds (Andrzej Wajda, 1958)
98. In the Heat of the Sun (Jiang Wen, 1994)
97. Taste of Cherry (Abbas Kiarostami, 1997)
96. Shoah (Claude Lanzmann, 1985)
95. Floating Clouds (Mikio Naruse, 1955)
94. Where Is the Friend's Home? (Abbas Kiarostami, 1987)
93. Raise the Red Lantern (Zhang Yimou, 1991)
92. Scenes from a Marriage (Ingmar Bergman, 1973)
91. Rififi (Jules Dassin, 1955)
90. Hiroshima Mon Amour (Alain Resnais, 1959)
89. Wild Strawberries (Ingmar Bergman, 1957)
88. The Story of the Last Chrysanthemum (Kenji Mizoguchi, 1939)
87. The Nights of Cabiria (Federico Fellini, 1957)
86. La Jetée (Chris Marker, 1962)
85. Umberto D (Vittorio de Sica, 1952)
84. The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie (Luis Buñuel, 1972)
83. La Strada (Federico Fellini, 1954)
82. Amélie (Jean-Pierre Jeunet, 2001)
81. Celine and Julie go Boating (Jacques Rivette, 1974)
80. The Young and the Damned (Luis Buñuel, 1950)
79. Ran (Akira Kurosawa, 1985)
78. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (Ang Lee, 2000)
77. The Conformist (Bernardo Bertolucci, 1970)
76. Y Tu Mamá También (Alfonso Cuarón, 2001)
75. Belle de Jour (Luis Buñuel, 1967)
74. Pierrot Le Fou (Jean-Luc Godard, 1965)
73. Man with a Movie Camera (Dziga Vertov, 1929)
72. Ikiru (Akira Kurosawa, 1952)
71. Happy Together (Wong Kar-wai, 1997)
70. L’Eclisse (Michelangelo Antonioni, 1962)
69. Amour (Michael Haneke, 2012)
68. Ugetsu (Kenji Mizoguchi, 1953)
67. The Exterminating Angel (Luis Buñuel, 1962)
66. Ali: Fear Eats the Soul (Rainer Werner Fassbinder, 1973)
65. Ordet (Carl Theodor Dreyer, 1955)
64. Three Colours: Blue (Krzysztof Kieślowski, 1993)
63. Spring in a Small Town (Fei Mu, 1948)
62. Touki Bouki (Djibril Diop Mambéty, 1973)
61. Sansho the Bailiff (Kenji Mizoguchi, 1954)
60. Contempt (Jean-Luc Godard, 1963)
59. Come and See (Elem Klimov, 1985)
58. The Earrings of Madame de… (Max Ophüls, 1953)
57. Solaris (Andrei Tarkovsky, 1972)
56. Chungking Express (Wong Kar-wai, 1994)
55. Jules and Jim (François Truffaut, 1962)
54. Eat Drink Man Woman (Ang Lee, 1994)
53. Late Spring (Yasujirô Ozu, 1949)
52. Au Hasard Balthazar (Robert Bresson, 1966)
51. The Umbrellas of Cherbourg (Jacques Demy, 1964)
50. L’Atalante (Jean Vigo, 1934)
49. Stalker (Andrei Tarkovsky, 1979)
48. Viridiana (Luis Buñuel, 1961)
47. 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days (Cristian Mungiu, 2007)
46. Children of Paradise (Marcel Carné, 1945)
45. L’Avventura (Michelangelo Antonioni, 1960)
44. Cleo from 5 to 7 (Agnès Varda, 1962)
43. Beau Travail (Claire Denis, 1999)
42. City of God (Fernando Meirelles, Kátia Lund, 2002)
41. To Live (Zhang Yimou, 1994)
40. Andrei Rublev (Andrei Tarkovsky, 1966)
39. Close-Up (Abbas Kiarostami, 1990)
38. A Brighter Summer Day (Edward Yang, 1991)
37. Spirited Away (Hayao Miyazaki, 2001)
36. La Grande Illusion (Jean Renoir, 1937)
35. The Leopard (Luchino Visconti, 1963)
34. Wings of Desire (Wim Wenders, 1987)
33. Playtime (Jacques Tati, 1967)
32. All About My Mother (Pedro Almodóvar, 1999)
31. The Lives of Others (Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck, 2006)
30. The Seventh Seal (Ingmar Bergman, 1957)
29. Oldboy (Park Chan-wook, 2003)
28. Fanny and Alexander (Ingmar Bergman, 1982)
27. The Spirit of the Beehive (Victor Erice, 1973)
26. Cinema Paradiso (Giuseppe Tornatore, 1988)
25. Yi Yi (Edward Yang, 2000)
24. Battleship Potemkin (Sergei M Eisenstein, 1925)
23. The Passion of Joan of Arc (Carl Theodor Dreyer, 1928)
22. Pan’s Labyrinth (Guillermo del Toro, 2006)
21. A Separation (Asghar Farhadi, 2011)
20. The Mirror (Andrei Tarkovsky, 1974)
19. The Battle of Algiers (Gillo Pontecorvo, 1966)
18. A City of Sadness (Hou Hsiao-hsien, 1989)
17. Aguirre, the Wrath of God (Werner Herzog, 1972)
16. Metropolis (Fritz Lang, 1927)
15. Pather Panchali (Satyajit Ray, 1955)
14. Jeanne Dielman, 23 Commerce Quay, 1080 Brussels (Chantal Akerman, 1975)
13. M (Fritz Lang, 1931)
12. Farewell My Concubine (Chen Kaige, 1993)
11. Breathless (Jean-Luc Godard, 1960)
10. La Dolce Vita (Federico Fellini, 1960)
9. In the Mood for Love (Wong Kar-wai, 2000)
8. The 400 Blows (François Truffaut, 1959)
7. 8 1/2 (Federico Fellini, 1963)
6. Persona (Ingmar Bergman, 1966)
5. The Rules of the Game (Jean Renoir, 1939)
4. Rashomon (Akira Kurosawa, 1950)
3. Tokyo Story (Yasujirô Ozu, 1953)
2. Bicycle Thieves (Vittorio de Sica, 1948)
1. Seven Samurai (Akira Kurosawa, 1954)

[Winston*]

Do silent films count as foreign language films?

[PURPLE]

That's not a very impressive list. It's not awful, but it's a mix of predictable and unpredictably populist which is not interesting to look at and most easily forgotten.

[baby doll]

BBC's top 100 foreign language films (http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20181029-the-100-greatest-foreign-language-films)

98. In the Heat of the Sun (Jiang Wen, 1994)
59. Come and See (Elem Klimov, 1985)
54. Eat Drink Man Woman (Ang Lee, 1994)
38. A Brighter Summer Day (Edward Yang, 1991)
26. Cinema Paradiso (Giuseppe Tornatore, 1988)These are the only films on the list I haven't seen, although I've heard of all of them and own copies of both the Jiang and Klimov films. I've also been meaning to see the Yang for ages, but have little to no desire to see the Lee or the Tornatore. At least some the individual ballots are interesting, notably Shigehiko Hasumi putting Naruse's little-known Tsuruhachi Tsurujiro third on his top ten. (North American critics tend to have less interesting lists simply because it's less likely they'll include something I'm unfamiliar with.)

[Idioteque Stalker]

These are the only films on the list I haven't seen, although I've heard of all of them and own copies of both the Jiang and Klimov films.

Come and See is amazing.

[Spinal]

100. Landscape in the Mist (Theo Angelopoulos, 1988)
99. Ashes and Diamonds (Andrzej Wajda, 1958)
98. In the Heat of the Sun (Jiang Wen, 1994)
95. Floating Clouds (Mikio Naruse, 1955)
94. Where Is the Friend's Home? (Abbas Kiarostami, 1987)
88. The Story of the Last Chrysanthemum (Kenji Mizoguchi, 1939)
74. Pierrot Le Fou (Jean-Luc Godard, 1965)
70. L’Eclisse (Michelangelo Antonioni, 1962)
69. Amour (Michael Haneke, 2012)
65. Ordet (Carl Theodor Dreyer, 1955)
63. Spring in a Small Town (Fei Mu, 1948)
62. Touki Bouki (Djibril Diop Mambéty, 1973)
61. Sansho the Bailiff (Kenji Mizoguchi, 1954)
54. Eat Drink Man Woman (Ang Lee, 1994)
53. Late Spring (Yasujirô Ozu, 1949)
47. 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days (Cristian Mungiu, 2007)
39. Close-Up (Abbas Kiarostami, 1990)
38. A Brighter Summer Day (Edward Yang, 1991)
35. The Leopard (Luchino Visconti, 1963)
32. All About My Mother (Pedro Almodóvar, 1999)
27. The Spirit of the Beehive (Victor Erice, 1973)
21. A Separation (Asghar Farhadi, 2011)
18. A City of Sadness (Hou Hsiao-hsien, 1989)
14. Jeanne Dielman, 23 Commerce Quay, 1080 Brussels (Chantal Akerman, 1975)
12. Farewell My Concubine (Chen Kaige, 1993)

Quite a few I haven't seen (25). I've been meaning to see Ordet and L'Eclisse for about a decade now. Amour is somehow the only Haneke feature I haven't seen (excluding the TV stuff). Every time I see The Spirit of the Beehive or A Separation, I think, oh, I want to see that, but never do. Kiarstomi and Hou hold little appeal to me. If I were to sit down and watch one right now, it would be A Brighter Summer Day.

[Idioteque Stalker]

Ordet is an all-timer for me. L'Eclisse is good but not close to its level.

[transmogrifier]

That's not a very impressive list. It's not awful, but it's a mix of predictable and unpredictably populist which is not interesting to look at and most easily forgotten.

It's a list I would expect a data mining algorithm to come up with.

[Peng]

Thanks to Thai Netflix I cleared up a couple of 80s classics:

Police Story (1985)

Worried early on with the rather standard shootout (although it contains a nice humanizing beat from one very panicked cop), but that feeling is all but eclipsed with the sight of cars careening down and destroying the shack town in spectacular fashion, both in wide shot and close-up, and by the time Jackie Chan is swinging around that bus I've come fully onboard. Humor is much more hit and miss, but energetic and crafted with enough emphasis on choreography to be at least diverting, such as Chan juggling multiple phone calls or Maggie Cheung trying to ride away on motorcycle. Overall police story, though only serviceable, is lively and engaging on a scene-by-scene basis (the court scene, with the exception of Chan's tape, plays out much more seriously than I expect). There's an intriguing throughline of police class anger too, which manifests most clearly in Chan's rant at the superintendent, but is also peppered throughout and informs some plot points: one aside about inspector pay rate, the main motivation for rampant police corruption, etc. 7.5/10

The Blues Brothers (1980)

By all means, this shouldn't have worked -- sloppy storytelling, shapeless comedy, excessive blockbuster mode -- but the whole thing is enveloped in such a strong aura of otherworldly cool that it overpowers those and delivers a grand good time. Even the weakest aspect, chase scenes running a tad too long, is infused with the charm of a light, devil-may-care attitude among those spectacular stunts. In fact, this feels like a most unique, weirdly self-contradictory blockbuster: both glib and sincere, deadpan and over-the-top (the brothers shrugging off wreckage is comedy gold every time), improvisational in spirit yet expensively, meticulously crafted. Not sure if this infectious alchemy has ever been duplicated again; it might just have been all the right people with all those drugs on set. 8/10

[Dead & Messed Up]

Theory: Zemeckis' Forrest Gump is 12th on the IMDB Top 250, but Who Framed Roger Rabbit? is not only substantially better; it's also a more fascinating look at U.S. history, specifically issues of ghettoization and gentrification/capitalism, probably because those subjects feel background given the absurdist context (even though the entire story pivots on emergent freeway development).

[MadMan]

Oh yeah Roger Rabbit is better. Not even really close, and I love Forrest Gump.

[MadMan]

The Wraith (1986) is cheesy as hell, rips off numerous better movies and like many 1980s films is really dated. Still I rather enjoyed a movie featuring an indestructible badass car driven by the alien ghost of a girl's dead boyfriend. There is a strange quality here that elevates the material, and I liked the cast. Also the film makes part of Arizona look and feel as if its survived the apocalypse as is, although perhaps that is the way the state looks.

[Skitch]

Love The Wraith. Supposedly Sheen got cast in Platoon and had to skip most of the filming of The Wraith, which is why it was a different actor to start and he wears a helmet most of the time. The Wraith is deliciously bonkers and has one of the best explosions/explosion reactions ever (the barn blowing up/Clint Howard).

[Dead & Messed Up]

Full Metal Jacket - Um... fine? I'm sure it's not a popular take that the first third of the film is better than the last two-thirds, but there's a forcefulness and focus in the training sequences that's missing in the back portions, where it sprawls out into slice-of-life cul-de-sacs of the Vietnam conflict. I'm thinking a lot about just how thudding it was when Joker talked about the "duality of man," and whether or not the film believes that, and if there's meaning in the film splitting off into two distinct films. The only thing I can think is that the first part shows us how men can be crushed down into animalistic robots (their descending from the bunkers to attack Pyle with soap bludgeons looks like the apes sneaking toward their enemies in 2001), and the second half shows us the conclusion of that mentality: a self-created apocalyptic wasteland. Where all there is to do is wait around, buy the occasional sex (because there's no room for women in this exclusively male universe, only "pussy"), and murder each other. The film also draws a connection between Pyle and the VC sniper at the end; Hartman points out that a sniper in a tower was a former Marine, and we're meant to draw a link between that sniper in a tower and this sniper in a tower, no doubt similarly indoctrinated and abused by a monolithic system like Pyle was. That takes this film back to a general "loss of innocence" ambivalence that we get in Vietnam flicks like Apocalypse Now and Platoon, done better in Apocalypse Now, for sure. Rob Ager has some interesting commentary on the use of sex in the film, but I suspect the larger metaphor is men literally becoming guns, since that's the clue in the title ("jacket" suggesting an anthropomorphization of bullets).

One of the odder elements here is that we watch Joker go on the same journey twice. In the first segment, he's resistant to the system and tries to operate with consideration, but he's eventually pummeled (through authority and peer pressure) into becoming part of the system. And in the second half, uh... it happens again.

[MadMan]

Love The Wraith. Supposedly Sheen got cast in Platoon and had to skip most of the filming of The Wraith, which is why it was a different actor to start and he wears a helmet most of the time. The Wraith is deliciously bonkers and has one of the best explosions/explosion reactions ever (the barn blowing up/Clint Howard).Oh yeah he did do Platoon at the same time. Sheen was a busy guy in the 1980s. The barn explosion was badass. Poor Clint Howard just wanted to work on cars.

I love Full Metal Jacket. I think both parts of the film work just fine.

[Grouchy]

I'm sure it's not a popular take that the first third of the film is better than the last two-thirds, but there's a forcefulness and focus in the training sequences that's missing in the back portions, where it sprawls out into slice-of-life cul-de-sacs of the Vietnam conflict.
Actually, this is the predominant take on Full Metal Jacket. Most casual fans love the training sequences and consider the rest of the film as repetitive and slow.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Actually, this is the predominant take on Full Metal Jacket. Most casual fans love the training sequences and consider the rest of the film as repetitive and slow.

Oh, derp, I worded that wrong, I agree with your point, that the first third would be obviously considered superior to the back two-thirds.

[Skitch]

DaMU was this your first watch? You review reads that like it is.

If so, revisit it sometime. I don't disagree with anything you said, really. I felt that way first few watches, then over the years the second half has taken on more weight. That ending singing Mickey Mouse haunts me. It definitely took a few watches for me to appreciate the second half. Apocalypse Now is still the best Vietnam movie, imo, really makes you feel the horror and confusion and insanity of that war.

[Irish]

Not sure I fully grokked Damu's analysis. I disagreed here and there with what I understood. Good read, as always, though.

My main beef with "Full Metal Jacket" is Kubrick's lazy adaptation of the source material ("The Short Timers" by Gustav Hasford).

- The opening is better because it's a complete story with a discernible beginning, middle, and end, and has a clear point to make. The second half, about the Battle of Hue, isn't as clear. This is because Kubrick and Michael Herr ignored the last third of Hasford's novel. As a result, they made a movie with no ending and a lot of thematic loose ends.

- I liked the Mickey Mouse song the first time around, but nowadays it just strikes me as gross. It's a cheap attempt at an upbeat ending ("I am alive and I am not afraid," the voiceover says) and it contradicts the mood and the message of the rest of the movie.

- To me, the most striking part of the "duality of man" bit isn't about anything Joker says or his potential meaning. It's that some old, pogue-bait colonel gives Joker an absurd pep talk, one that sounds ripped off from a high school football coach, while they are both standing in front of a mass grave. "FMJ" is rife with black humor, like when Joker's CO outlines the Tet Offensive and Joker immediately makes a quip about Anne Margaret.

- To steal from S&E, consider the value system of someone who would praise Lee Harvey Oswald for his markmanship just 5 years after Kennedy's death. That seems to be the biggest point of that scene.

- I don't think there's a real connection to be made between the killings at the end of the first part and the end of the second. It's just Kubrick reusing a device because he's out of ideas. Both sections use gorey, unjust death as a metaphor for the larger war. Kubrick contrasts strange silence and sudden violence to shock the the audience and make them feel it.

- Like every other American movie about the war, "FMJ" ignores any real Vietnamese point of view. So I think it's a leap to assume the VC sniper at the end was "indoctrinated and abused by a monolithic system" like Pyle was.

- Willard from "Apocalypse Now" was presented as a burnout from that movie's first scene, never as an innocent. Because of that movie's source material, it also implicitly says something about imperial power and colonialism, which is absent from both "The Short Timers" and "Full Metal Jacket." (This is a little more evident in Coppola's bloated-but-fascinating "director's cut.")

- Joker doesn't go on the same journey twice. I don't think he really changes from Parris Island to Hue; he's still the same gangly smart ass throughout the movie, right up until the ending.

- This is where the source material shines and the movie doesn't. The character uses wry humor and his position as combat correspondent---more observer than soldier---to shield himself from the war. In the book, he doesn't take responsibility for anything that happens around him and he responds to each fresh horror in a ghoulish, mercenary way. The problem is that the book has a payoff to this central problem---how can you witness this world of shit, and participate in it, and retain your humanity? The movie doesn't have any such payoff. It just sorta hangs there and ends.

- From memory, the women in "FMJ" are street level prostitutes or, at the end, a single sniper. The book has no women in it at all.

- I don't think there's much to be read in the title. It seems like quick riff on Pyle's line in the bathroom, when he's describing his ammunition. The film's larger point isn't a colorful metaphor but that institutions will reduce your humanity if you let them.

[Skitch]

- I liked the Mickey Mouse song the first time around, but nowadays it just strikes me as gross. It's a cheap attempt at an upbeat ending ("I am alive and I am not afraid," the voiceover says) and it contradicts the mood and the message of the rest of the movie..

Ooof, I didn't read it that way at all. I thought it was very gross and depressing because they're all just part of the American imperialist/colonist machine. I felt like his "I'm alive and unafraid" line was as though his eyes are open to just how big a problem it is.

I'm sure it can be ready any way we want it.

[transmogrifier]

Never been a fan of FMJ. It’s not nearly as deep as Kubrick fans want to pretend it is, and some of the leering shots of Pyle going crazy are comically bad. Trying to make England look like Vietnam doesn’t work either.

[Dead & Messed Up]

DaMU was this your first watch? You review reads that like it is.

If so, revisit it sometime. I don't disagree with anything you said, really. I felt that way first few watches, then over the years the second half has taken on more weight. That ending singing Mickey Mouse haunts me. It definitely took a few watches for me to appreciate the second half. Apocalypse Now is still the best Vietnam movie, imo, really makes you feel the horror and confusion and insanity of that war.

Yes, first view. Kubrick runs hot and cold to me, so I was always a bit leery of watching this one, but it's definitely worth checking out (obviously).

[Dead & Messed Up]

- The opening is better because it's a complete story with a discernible beginning, middle, and end, and has a clear point to make. The second half, about the Battle of Hue, isn't as clear. This is because Kubrick and Michael Herr ignored the last third of Hasford's novel. As a result, they made a movie with no ending and a lot of thematic loose ends.

Interesting, I didn't realize much of the source material had been cut.


I liked the Mickey Mouse song the first time around, but nowadays it just strikes me as gross. It's a cheap attempt at an upbeat ending ("I am alive and I am not afraid," the voiceover says) and it contradicts the mood and the message of the rest of the movie.

Like Skitch, I took this ironically. They've all been bullied into becoming part of this club (the war machine), whether by the drill sergeant or by each other.


To me, the most striking part of the "duality of man" bit isn't about anything Joker says or his potential meaning. It's that some old, pogue-bait colonel gives Joker an absurd pep talk, one that sounds ripped off from a high school football coach, while they are both standing in front of a mass grave. "FMJ" is rife with black humor, like when Joker's CO outlines the Tet Offensive and Joker immediately makes a quip about Anne Margaret.

Yeah, that felt a lot like a Strangelove moment, where everyone's thinking too narrowly to see the surrounding absurdity.


To steal from S&E, consider the value system of someone who would praise Lee Harvey Oswald for his markmanship just 5 years after Kennedy's death. That seems to be the biggest point of that scene.

For sure, that's huge too. It's a repulsive moment.


I don't think there's a real connection to be made between the killings at the end of the first part and the end of the second. It's just Kubrick reusing a device because he's out of ideas. Both sections use gorey, unjust death as a metaphor for the larger war. Kubrick contrasts strange silence and sudden violence to shock the the audience and make them feel it.

Maybe not, but I do think it's probably not a coincidence that Ermey's character is smitten with the accuracy of elevated snipers, and the film's second climax revolves around an elevated sniper. I don't know if it's making a larger point, but the recurrence seems suggestive enough that I don't like dismissing it.


Like every other American movie about the war, "FMJ" ignores any real Vietnamese point of view. So I think it's a leap to assume the VC sniper at the end was "indoctrinated and abused by a monolithic system" like Pyle was.

Entirely possible. I'm just trying to be charitable to the film and see if there are recurring elements that might point to a more consistent read. I think it's worth asking how we're supposed to read a sniper's character when the film spends 40+ minutes showing us the American method of producing an accurate marksman (which is a harrowing training). Is it fair to at least partly extrapolate from there? Put it this way - am I convinced of the parallel? No. But like I said, I'm trying to be charitable. To use what The Wire calls "soft eyes" and see if there are clues to lead me to a fuller and better reading. I'm trying to do that more with movies in general. It makes me happier than dismissing them.


Joker doesn't go on the same journey twice. I don't think he really changes from Parris Island to Hue; he's still the same gangly smart ass throughout the movie, right up until the ending.

I don't know. It seemed like the first third had him resisting Hartman's cruelty (his training of Pyle is much more understated and encouraging, which leads to some minor successes), but once it becomes clear that Pyle's errors are having an effect on the entire squad, he chooses to be complicit in the beating of Pyle. This feels to me like a small but tangible arc from compassion/individuality to cruelty/groupthink. The second portion of the film rejiggers him back to that sort of individualism (he's back to being sarcastic and distanced), which is then tested and broken when he gives in to murdering the sniper (again, with his squadmates surrounding him and encouraging him). I don't think either arc is terribly deep or even all that expertly rendered (Kubrick doesn't give us a real sense of Joker's shift from compassion to cruelty in the first half - he's impatient, and then he's suddenly beating Pyle). But I do think they're present, and they aren't there by accident, and, again, it's worth asking the questions.


The film's larger point isn't a colorful metaphor but that institutions will reduce your humanity if you let them.

I mean, it could be? It's entirely possible they chose the title for the reasons you say, but it could also be true that the writers saw added meaning in the title, since they went out of their way to change the title from the source material. I'm honestly surprised you can feel so certain about these things. To me, Kubrick has always been a sticky sort of director, where even his less successful films carry intriguing holistic details that suggest alternative reads and sorta stick in the craw. Sometimes those lead to viewers (like me) missing the forest for the trees, but, again, I see no harm in it. Anyway, I didn't love the flick, just thought there were interesting things happening.

[Irish]

Ooof, I didn't read it that way at all. I thought it was very gross and depressing because they're all just part of the American imperialist/colonist machine. I felt like his "I'm alive and unafraid" line was as though his eyes are open to just how big a problem it is.

Like Skitch, I took this ironically. They've all been bullied into becoming part of this club (the war machine), whether by the drill sergeant or by each other.

I agree there's an ironic element at play. I just don't think it works---mostly because that melody can't be defeated by cynicism. Seriously, stand up right now and sing out M-I-C-K-E-Y-M-O-U-S-E and try not to smile. It's impossible to make that tune downbeat, to make it sound like a dirge.

Lemme put it another way: When the credits rolled, was there any doubt in your mind that Joker would survive the war unscathed? That's what I mean about the ending.

Anyway, Damu's last post inspired me to rewatch the film. (I re-read the book earlier this year.) More thoughts later (maybe).

[Dead & Messed Up]

I agree there's an ironic element at play. I just don't think it works---mostly because that melody can't be defeated by cynicism. Seriously, stand up right now and sing out M-I-C-K-E-Y-M-O-U-S-E and try not to smile. It's impossible to make that tune downbeat, to make it sound like a dirge.

Lemme put it another way: When the credits rolled, was there any doubt in your mind that Joker would survive the war unscathed? That's what I mean about the ending.

Physically? I suspected he would. In a positive psychological space? I don't know. I think the violence at the end would've meant more had I not already had the earlier arc where he compromised himself. That's one place where I think the movie stumbles. It feels like it makes its point, then makes its point again in a more obtuse, less convincing manner.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Hopefully I'm not coming off like one of those Room 237 people. :)

[StanleyK]

Full Metal Jacket is one of my favorites from Kubrick. I enjoy the second half maybe even more than the first, actually. They're both masterpieces.

[Dukefrukem]

I really loved the 2nd half too. Before the internet, before I knew who Kubrick was, it was on HBO one night... After watching it, I went through a war film obsession trying to watch everything I could find taking place during that era as well as WW2. I dont feel like anything comes close to FMJ.

[Irish]

Maybe not, but I do think it's probably not a coincidence that Ermey's character is smitten with the accuracy of elevated snipers, and the film's second climax revolves around an elevated sniper. I don't know if it's making a larger point, but the recurrence seems suggestive enough that I don't like dismissing it.

While we can make the connection, I don't think it's a strong one because there isn't enough context around it. Hartman mentions historical events outside the scope of the film, and neither snipers nor elevated positions are referenced again until the last 30 minutes. His speech is a throwaway. A little bit of fucked up, dehumanizing trivia.

Anyway, I've seen this movie maybe a half dozen times but this time a few things stood out:

At the end of the first act, Pyle says "I am in a world of shit" and then kills Hartman in cold blood. At the end of third act, Joker kills someone in cold blood and then reflects, "I am in a world of shit, but I am alive and I am not afraid."

Hartman makes a speech around the rifle range scene and warns the recruits that if they don't have a "hard heart," they will hesitate at the moment of truth and they will die.

Pyle doesn't hesitate to kill, but he still dies.

Joker's rifle jams when he confronts the sniper, he freaks out, draws a handgun, but is unable to fire. After he's rescued by Raster Man, he insists the squad not leave the injured sniper and kills her. (Animal Mother dares him to do it; the rest of the squad remains silent.) In the final shot, he's happy and smiling and singing along with his squadmates.

There's maybe a coupla ways to interpret those scenes: Joker is disturbed by Cowboy's death and kills the sniper as revenge; or, borrowing an idea from the source material, he puts her down because doing otherwise would be inhumane. (This is emphasized by Animal Mother suggesting they "leave her for the mother-lovin' rats." The squad fronts their toughness out of fear. Joker is "hardcore" out of mercy.)

I don't think these are terribly strong connections, either. But I did think it was interesting that both big climaxes end with central character killing in cold blood.

Also: I don't know why I never noticed before, but when the third act starts (with T.H.E. Rock getting sniped), the sniper is in a position almost 90 degrees from the squad. They can't see her and there's no way they can hit her, but they don't know that. So all the ammo they unload into nearby buildings is a completely impotent display of power.


I mean, it could be? It's entirely possible they chose the title for the reasons you say, but it could also be true that the writers saw added meaning in the title, since they went out of their way to change the title from the source material. I'm honestly surprised you can feel so certain about these things. To me, Kubrick has always been a sticky sort of director, where even his less successful films carry intriguing holistic details that suggest alternative reads and sorta stick in the craw. Sometimes those lead to viewers (like me) missing the forest for the trees, but, again, I see no harm in it. Anyway, I didn't love the flick, just thought there were interesting things happening.

I'm going by my gut. In the book, the drill sergeant's name is "Gerheim." In the movie, he's "Hartman." In other instances, the opening borrows dialogue directly from the novel but gives Cowboy's lines to Joker and vice versa. I don't think those changes are particularly meaningful.

Likewise, title change seems equally arbitrary. I mean, most war films have clipped, aggressive titles as part of their marketing. (It's also possible the studio made the change themselves, outside Kubrick's influence.)

[Milky Joe]

Full Metal Jacket is one of my favorites from Kubrick. I enjoy the second half maybe even more than the first, actually. They're both masterpieces.

Yeah it fuckin' rules from start to finish. The ending is haunting. Signed, one of those Room 237 guys.

[Lazlo]

https://vimeo.com/304064569

David Ehrlich's top 25 video is out! I look forward to this every year. He always does a hell of a job.

EDIT: The embed isn't working as far as I can tell so here's the URL (https://vimeo.com/304064569).

[Dukefrukem]

Embed works for me.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I've seen three Rocky flicks so far in my life. Rocky, Rocky Balboa, and Creed. Gonna try and fix that this week, started with Rocky II.

Which is fine, it just feels a little redundant. In general, it feels sorta contrived. The first half shows Rocky acting even more dimwitted than in the first film, spending outrageously with his money and failing to find a sustainable job. As far as kitchen sink melodrama goes, it's a couple steps below the relative delicacy of the original film's Rocky/Adrian dynamic. The premise that his heart isn't in the fight and that he's going through the motions to provide for his son makes for a compelling middle, but then Adrian's getting ill turns into a bit of a plot stall, going on longer than necessary and indulging in a lot of cross-fades (go figure, this is a film that precedes its final act with three montages: dispassionate training, mourning, passionate training). The story builds her illness on a plausible circumstance and - better yet - ties that illness directly to Rocky's actions. But the enactment of that drama feels a little pat, and the resolve to it (Adrian whispering "Win") barely works on account of an overenthusiastic Mickey who all but shouts "Yippeeee!" That said, the final act regains the momentum of the middle section (when Rocky didn't give a fuck, which was an intriguing way to play the drama). It's a strong fight, and the setup of [When will Rocky deploy his southpaw?] leads to a satisfying payoff.

It's the least of the four films I've seen, but I don't regret the time spent watching. The best part is Stallone's ear for Rocky's dialogue. His sideways comments to Apollo's theatrical menace almost always made me chuckle, especially when he started listing the things he wants to buy with the money from the winnings, and he suggests new hats and a snow-cone maker.

[Skitch]

I havent seen the last 2-3 Rocky films, but I've found the series as a whole completely overrated. I revisited Rocky couple weeks ago because of the Creed 2 trailers, and....I just cant get into this series. Its lame. I just dont get Hollywoods fascination with boxing as deep drama. I'm well aware I'm in vast majority on this, but oh well. I've gotten more real feels from old school kung fu.

[Irish]

As a series, it's not very good. III is cheesy fun because of Mr T. IV is the cinematic epitome of Reagan America. Never saw V, but everything else.

I'm not sure any of them were rated highly outside the first. Stallone started well but quickly became a joke by overextending himself ("Cobra," "Assassins," etc). It's amazing the dude never learned his lesson; he squanders audience goodwill faster than anyone I've ever seen.

[transmogrifier]

I don't think I've ever seen a Rocky movie. Maybe the first one lost in the mists of time? Boxing movies have never been that interesting to me.

[Skitch]

I don't think I've ever seen a Rocky movie. Maybe the first one lost in the mists of time? Boxing movies have never been that interesting to me.

Me either. Raging Bull is meh too. There I said it.

[transmogrifier]

Me either. Raging Bull is meh too. There I said it.

Me too. Only seen it once though. New York, New York is better.

[Dukefrukem]

I haven't seen any of the Rocky movies either except for the first. People reference them all the time so I need to get on that.

[Dead & Messed Up]

It's funny, I'm in general not a fan of sports, never been able to get into them, but I find the template of Rocky I / VI / Creed engaging, reassuring, and warm. Part of it is I think they're operating on that template/archetypal level of storytelling, more in the category of flicks like How to Train Your Dragon or the original Star Wars, if that makes any sense. They're spare and direct, and if done well, they can cut through to the heart of me.

[Ezee E]

Rocky is like a good indie in today's movies. Charming, authentic and personal. They all downhill from there, with IV being a joke, albeit entertaining in a way. Is there a Rocky V? If there is, I haven't and won't be seeing it. Rocky Balboa is fine in a remake kind of way.

Creed is somewhere between Rocky and Rocky II.

[Skitch]

Me too. Only seen it once though. New York, New York is better.

I just blind bought NY,NY last week. Will report back.

[Mr. McGibblets]

I've seen three Rocky flicks so far in my life. Rocky, Rocky Balboa, and Creed. I'm pretty sure I've also only seen these three. I barely remember Rocky; Rocky Balboa was better than I thought it would be, but nothing special. I actually really like Creed, though I'm not that into the boxing parts.

[Spinal]

I'm going to offer the opinion that people like the original Rocky because:

a) they like the underdog formula (it's Karate Kid, it's 8 Mile, it's Hoosiers)
b) the music gets them pumped up

[Dukefrukem]

Just when I was about to proclaim this the worst showing year in MC history, we are now only 20 movies away from hitting the current 2017 database.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I'm going to offer the opinion that people like the original Rocky because:

a) they like the underdog formula (it's Karate Kid, it's 8 Mile, it's Hoosiers)
b) the music gets them pumped up

Well, that definitely is your opinion, no doubting that. ;)

[transmogrifier]

Hot take: Casino is better than GoodFellas. Darker, funnier, more ambitious, and a killer soundtrack.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Hot take: Casino is better than GoodFellas. Darker, funnier, more ambitious, and a killer soundtrack.

Ooh! Ahh, burnt my damn fingers on this boiling hot take.

[Haven't seen Casino.]

[transmogrifier]

Do it, it’s great.

[Ezee E]

It is great. Like eating a Thanksgiving-style Goodfellas. You probably ate too much, but it was worth it.

[Skitch]

Hot take: Casino is better than GoodFellas. Darker, funnier, more ambitious, and a killer soundtrack.
While I disagree as mildly as a taco bell hot sauce, totally fair opinion. Casino is GREAT.

How Damu, how?? DO IT

I'm genuinely surprised on that take from you trans. I wouldn't have pegged you for that. Totally fine with it.

[StanleyK]

Nah... I mean, Casino is a great, great movie, but there are few movies better than Goodfellas (one of them is Raging Bull btw).

[StanleyK]

I seldom watch a movie and feel it should be longer, but the ending of Vera Drake seemed rather abrupt. I honestly would've liked another half-hour or so dealing with her prison life, return to society, and her family coping in the meantime and afterwards.

[Ivan Drago]

Yeah, Goodfellas is a masterpiece, but Casino has more memorable moments for me.

The opening titles, Joe Pesci killing a guy with a pen, the Contempt score, and the montage set to 'House of the Rising Sun' are unforgettable.

[MadMan]

Yeah, Goodfellas is a masterpiece, but Casino has more memorable moments for me.

The opening titles, Joe Pesci killing a guy with a pen, the Contempt score, and the montage set to 'House of the Rising Sun' are unforgettable.

Also Pesci's death scene is beyond brutal.

I love both, but I slightly prefer Goodfellas. Casino is far more sprawling and epic, though.

[Dukefrukem]

Hot take: Casino is better than GoodFellas. Darker, funnier, more ambitious, and a killer soundtrack.

They are basically the same film so it's a toss up for me. Both way too long.

[baby doll]

I saw Casino first and it still find it far less successful on its own terms than Goodfellas. It's the cinematic equivalent of a mix tape rather than a unified whole: the Pesci scenes from Goodfellas plus the Cathy Moriarty scenes from Raging Bull plus an expositional docudrama about the mob in Las Vegas plus musical selections from Godard and Pasolini and visual ideas cribbed from Truffaut. There's a lot on the screen but it never amounts to very much.

[Grouchy]

The first Rocky is very good but then the series is just different shades of bad until maybe Balboa. The fourth one is worth it for the camp value, though. I'd like to offer the opinion that the difference between Rocky and other formulaic underdog films from the '80s like Karate Kid is that the title character loses the fight.

I love both Goodfellas and Casino but the former did it first and better.

[Dead & Messed Up]

So, ROCKY III.

The flick's got energy to spare, and in Clubber Lang it finds a new kind of threat to Rocky. And in a movie made with more Hollywood gloss than the previous films, it's interesting how the flick leans into that and turns Rocky into a kitchsy caricature. The Atlas-like statue erected in his honor, the sub-Vegas "training gym" that hawks tacky merchandise. And I liked when the film slowed down for human moments. Rocky and Paulie tussling in the parking garage. Adrian saying they could treat their trip to LA like a honeymoon. And the film repositioning Apollo as Rocky's new mentor lets Weathers show off his formidable charisma again. (Baby, we got a stew going.)

But there's a weird emotional opaqueness in ROCKY III that I can't quite see through. Like I said, Clubber's a new kind of threat, but he's also denied humanity in a series that is always careful to create opponents as sympathetic people instead of villains. *Why* does he hate Rocky? Is it really just that softness he sees in the champ? What does this guy do when he's alone? I have trouble buying into his character. He's an eternal boxing promo, more force of nature than human person. I was expecting a reveal that the man's diet consists solely of coffee and cocaine.

There's also a crucial turning point that requires a beachside pep talk from Adrian. And it's... kinda bad? It's shouty and strained, and it takes time for Rocky to admit that he's afraid. And then it's off to the montage. Something about the scene doesn't feel right to me. I think it needed an extra moment or two, or maybe an epilogue, where Rocky really allows himself to feel that fear inside him and recognize it. (Also, is this movie basically THE DARK KNIGHT RISES? I think it is. Hero who's allowed himself to become soft gets taken out by a vocal single-minded villain and builds himself back up in a seedy location before coming back to fight the villain one last time.)

Also, sometimes musicians on-screen play the Bill Conti ROCKY themes. I'm sorry, WHAT?! It's like in SOLO when the recruitment center plays a muzak major-key Imperial March. I can *feel* my brain melting.

I don't know how I feel about this flick.

[Irish]

What does this guy do when he's alone?

Pities the fool.

Obviously.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Pities the fool.

Obviously.

You know what, forgot to give the film credit. Clubber has the all-time line: "I'm gonna crucify him-- real bad." That is a great line.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Rocky IV is fanterrible.

[Spinal]

Both Bohemian Rhapsody and A Star is Born were nominated for Best Picture - Drama, even though the Golden Globes has a category for Best Picture - Comedy or Musical.

OK.

[Dead & Messed Up]

But the Globes are meaningless, so whatever.

Nominate Hereditary for Best Comedy, nominate Blackkklansmen for Best Animated Feature. Fuck it.

[Irish]

Both Bohemian Rhapsody and A Star is Born were nominated for Best Picture - Drama, even though the Golden Globes has a category for Best Picture - Comedy or Musical.

OK.

They nominated "Vice" in the Comedy/ Musical category, too, which confuses the hell out of me.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lists/2019-golden-globes-nominations-full-list-1165090/item/best-motion-picture-musical-comedy-1165129

[Dead & Messed Up]

Whatever calculus nets them the most high-profile stars for their show. It's a farce.

[Ezee E]

Weak year for Dramas I guess. Studios took advantage.

[Dead & Messed Up]

ROCKY IV time.

Comments I'd read on FB about ROCKY IV being one big montage are not inaccurate. This movie has about 30 minutes worth of story stretched into 90 thanks to the film's constant need to remind you of what you already know. Never so bewilderingly as when Rocky takes a nighttime drive and flashes back to, among other series highlights, Adrian looking at him right before he goes out for that exact same nighttime drive. Two minutes ago. This goddamn movie. But, weirdly, when the film has real story to tell - in its opening act with Apollo Creed stupidly going after Ivan Drago - it hesitates. I took Apollo Creed as much smarter than this, and while I can appreciate that he's operating from vanity and a private desperation that his life is over, the film should've showed him hedging on this, recognizing it, trying to temper it with significant training, and still losing. And he also shouldn't've lost so fast. This should in theory make Ivan Drago more threatening, but it seriously undercuts the final act when Rocky lasts, what, 12 rounds against a man that straight-up murdered somebody in two?

That said, the most interesting character is Ivan Drago. Dolph Lundgren does a fabulous job hinting at a character's inherent tragedy while keeping stoic. Imagine this movie told purely from his perspective, and it's a classic Frankenstein tale, with Rocky as the angry villagers out to settle the score after Drago did *the very thing he was designed to do.* The ending scene, with him rebelling (as much as he can) against his creators, declaring he wants to win this fight for him instead of Mudder Russia, is a highlight in a film whose highlights are more a consequence of how strange they are than how effective they are. Like, say, oh, I don't know, Paulie getting a robot that looks like the love-child of Johnny 5 and a disco ball. And then Paulie programs it to sound like a woman and sorta be into him. Calls it a wife. Guys, gals, I have to ask. Did Paulie bang this robot? And if so, what in f**k is it doing looking after children? This creepy-ass sexbot.

Look, I get it. The ROCKY movies are going through this thing where they somehow get both worse as they go... and more memetic. "Eef he diez, he diez." Rocky tearing away Ivan's picture. "I mahst braykh yoo." "If I can change..." Bits of this movie are fun, even unforgettable (Apollo's arrival is a masterpiece of idiotic excess). But what a disappointment that cartoon absurdity is the only option left in a series that started out so attentive and human.

[Irish]

Possibly relevant to your interests: Gene Siskel's original newspaper review of "Rocky IV" from November, 1985

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1985-11-27-8503220074-story.html

I love that he was so enthusiastic about something trivial, contrary to his usual style.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Nice! Thanks for the link. It's fun to read his thoughts, and I'd concede he's right that, for all my misgivings about these sequels, they often create vivid images and moments and do at least try to mix it up within the narrow confines of what they are. Like Siskel says, Clubber is not a repeat of Apollo, Drago is his own thing. Even in Rocky V, which I just watched (and will get to eventually), Tommy Gunn is a dark mirror of early Rocky, which makes some contextual sense to Rocky going "back to his roots."

[Ivan Drago]

I love how First Reformed gets snubbed at the Golden Globes after Paul Schrader said he would still work with Kevin Spacey, yet nobody bats an eye after Viggo Mortenson says the n-word at a post-Green Book Q&A. LOL, Hollywood Foreign Press.

Also, Rocky IV rules.

[transmogrifier]

First Reformed is awesome

[transmogrifier]

Support the Girls!

[Grouchy]

I love how First Reformed gets snubbed at the Golden Globes after Paul Schrader said he would still work with Kevin Spacey, yet nobody bats an eye after Viggo Mortenson says the n-word at a post-Green Book Q&A. LOL, Hollywood Foreign Press.
Eh, it's different. "Nigger" depends a lot on its context and intentions to be offensive while a pedophile rarely gets a pass to even walk the street. They're too wildly different things to constitute a double standard.

[Lazlo]

Also, First Reformed isn't really Golden Globes' cup of tea (or Draino). The movie itself is why it didn't get nominated, not Schrader's comments.

[MadMan]

Rocky III is my favorite one in the series because of Clubber Lang and Apollo. According to Rocky IV, Rocky helps end communism in 1985 ;)

[Dead & Messed Up]

Never posted my thoughts on ROCKY V, d'oh!

After wishing that the previous two films hadn't rocketed into caricature and absurdity, ROCKY V seems like a return to the low reality of the original two. And, go figure, there are things I very much liked about this movie. A circular return to Rocky's neighborhood, making Adrian a more prominent voice after her being sidelined in the prior two films. Most interesting to me was the promise of a sobering look at boxing. Boxing isolates Rocky from his family. Boxing gives Rocky a mild sort of brain damage (movie brain damage, admittedly). Boxing produces anger-driven violent men like Tommy Gunn. Boxing is full of predatory promoters like George Washington Duke (who's the most interesting new personality in the film). In short, boxing has problems.

Sure, the movie starts out with an odd contrivance: Paulie accidentally signed away power of attorney for Rocky's estate, which then went deeply into debt. The legalese doesn't track, and you'd figure Rocky has a number of options for paying off his debts (print advertisements, fundraisers, an appeal to the city that loves him so much they gave him a goddamn statue). And then Sage Stallone as Rocky's son doesn't quite have the talent to pull off his own scenes (he's not terrible, he's just not charismatic). And then you realize that Tommy Gunn is being held up less as a dark mirror to Rocky and more as a foil for Rocky's relationship with his son, who Rocky evidently doesn't care about, and we can't really blame Rocky's negligence on brain damage, so we're left with "Rocky is stupid about his son because the film needs him to be stupid, or else there's no story." And then you realize that Tommy Gunn similarly lacks charisma. You see the single-mindedness, but, like Clubber Lang, what you see is what you get (even then, Tommy Gunn doesn't have the presence or specificity of Mr. T's Clubber).

These storylines converge in a final scene of surprising awfulness, in which Rocky settles the score with Tommy Gunn in a street fight. After the film has repeatedly painted Rocky's potential boxing as problematic at best and deadly at worst (apparently Stallone first wrote the ending so Rocky would die), the film then totally contradicts itself with Rocky triumphantly reuniting with his family and settling grudges through the power of punching. It's like the film is saying, "Boxing is a complicated and ultimately unfortunate business-- NEVERMIND PUNCH THAT MEAN BOY."

I thought this film would be absurdly awful, given its historical status as the worst of the films. And I think that people are right, that ROCKY V is the worst one. But what surprised me is how much I thought the film could've been, and how gradually - almost imperceptibly - it slid from promising to dull to disappointing to just plain stupid.

[Also, we should've seen the robot from ROCKY IV being sold at the estate sale, and you watch Paulie's tearful face as it rolls out of his life.]

[Dead & Messed Up]

Anyway:

1. Rocky - A
2. Creed - A-
3. Rocky Balboa - B+
4. Rocky II - B
5. Rocky III - C+
6. Rocky IV - C
7. Rocky V - C-

Though I will admit that III and IV have some A-level moments and images.

[Grouchy]

I've seen some movies I hadn't seen before!

Harold and Maude was a pretty big revelation. I went to the Mar del Plata film festival recently and there was an Ashby retrospective and I couldn't quite fit this one in - I traded for Shampoo which was fun but pretty slow and dated. H&M is one of the most original, endearing films I've ever seen. I love how the movie keeps playing with the audience's expectations of where these kind of drama tropes usually end up. I wish more directors attempted this zany mix between depressing drama and outrageous comedy. There's an uniqueness to this movie that is hard to describe and even harder to accomplish as a filmmaker. There's always less to say about a great work of art than about a meddling one so I'm gonna make this one short. Suffice it to say that Wes Anderson's entire filmography is ripped off from this gem - and that's not entirely a bad thing.

The only Mamet-directed films I'd seen before House of Games were State and Main and The Spanish Prisoner. The former I remember as a witty comedy while the latter (also con-related) left me with the same feelings as this one. The script is unquestionably great but the direction (and that includes the performances) is weirdly stiff. I sense that this is a deliberate choice by Mamet but it makes me feel there's a better movie hidden somewhere. I love how he methodically constructs the set up for the final, tragic confrontation but he has to know the audience has seen this type of story before - this is the '80s and RififÃ*, The Sting and Paper Moon were already classics. You don't have to waste seconds in explaining stuff that everyone should have grasped already. The female character is also unrealistically naive at times. And speaking of ripping off, this isn't quite that but I'd never realized the late Fabián Bielinsky had based the entire tone of Nine Queens on this one.

Two-Lane Blacktop is a beautiful indie road movie that needs more love. It's unquestionably ahead of its time in the unprejudiced, methodical way in which it explores its subjects, the so-called "road freaks" and the drifters. Based on the quality of this one, Monte Hellman should have directed more films. Warren Oates gives an Oscar-worthy performance and the widescreen cinematography is equally overlooked as it must have been a big influence on subsequent road epics. Harry Dean Stanton has an appearance as a horny gay hitch-hiker that probably lasts less than a minute and is even more memorable than the already memorable film around it.

Kundun was the last fiction film by Scorsese I had yet to see. Scorsese is by far my favorite director of all time but (like most of his fans, I suppose) I'm more drawn to his movies about daredevil capitalism junkies and outsiders than I'm about the part of his canon that deals with religious martyrdom - The Last Temptation of Christ, Silence and this one. I understand these are not separate themes - Scorsese's work is all about the individual vs. (and sometimes using) the society that already exists around him/her, and in all three religious films there's a quest to better society that is strongly repressed. Regardless, I think the story of how China managed to effectively bury the film from international distribution (it wasn't even released in Argentina) is even more fascinating than the film itself, which is standard biopic stuff with the artistic flair a master like Scorsese gives it. It was still a good watch but it might be my least favorite of his work next to Gangs of New York. If I want Scorsese do Visconti or that type of film I'll always have a masterpiece like The Age of Innocence.

[Skitch]

I've seen some movies I hadn't seen before!

Two-Lane Blacktop is a beautiful indie road movie that needs more love.

I'm pretty sure that one has plenty of love. I watched it for the first time a few months ago (on glorious VHS). I enjoyed it as well. The reason I blind bought it was because I've seen it listed in so many car movie lists.

[Grouchy]

Well, it's a cult item, but come on, on purely cinematic terms it's a lot better than Easy Rider.

EDIT: I get your point, though.

[transmogrifier]

Easy Rider is actually very well-directed.

[Dukefrukem]

I just watched the Sound of Music for the first time. It checks out.

[Irish]

Two-Lane Blacktop is a beautiful indie road movie that needs more love. It's unquestionably ahead of its time in the unprejudiced, methodical way in which it explores its subjects, the so-called "road freaks" and the drifters. Based on the quality of this one, Monte Hellman should have directed more films. Warren Oates gives an Oscar-worthy performance and the widescreen cinematography is equally overlooked as it must have been a big influence on subsequent road epics. Harry Dean Stanton has an appearance as a horny gay hitch-hiker that probably lasts less than a minute and is even more memorable than the already memorable film around it.

Yes! I saw it a year or so ago and was taken aback. Everything about it is perfect.

The film engages without a hard plot and neither lead was a pro actor. Fucking remarkable. Not only was I shocked to find the movie, I was doubly shocked that I've never heard anybody talk about it.

[MadMan]

I love both Easy Rider and Two-Lane Blacktop. Each is a great, if bleak, take on the American rode trip.

[Yxklyx]

I just watched the Sound of Music for the first time. It checks out.

I like the first half a lot but the second half has too much story and only one new song (and it's not that great). The second half just drags...

Yeah, one of the first things I thought of when watching (as Grouchy mentioned very original) Harold and Maude was Wes Anderson's flicks.

Both Two Lane Blacktop and Easy Rider are very good - I forgot Stanton is in the former so queued that one up again (it's still on netflix dvd).

Somewhat related to both of these though I strongly recommend Bigelow's The Loveless ('82) starring Dafoe as a biker (on netflix dvd). I think it's co-directed by the "cowboy" from Mulholland Dr.

[Grouchy]

I forgot Stanton is in the former so queued that one up again (it's still on netflix dvd).
He's in it for like one minute and knocks it out of the park.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Captioning Quigley Down Under at work, never would've given this movie the time of day, but Alan Rickman plays the villain, and boy, it's just too much fun watching Rickman chew into villainy. It's like in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, where the main drama lacks juice, but Rickman turns every scene he's in into joyful burlesque.

[MadMan]

Quigley is merely a solid movie at best, but I do enjoy watching Tom Selleck and Alan Rickman face off.

[Irish]

Glancing at this list from JustWatch (https://www.justwatch.com/us/movies?release_year_from=2018&release_year_until=2019&rating_imdb=5&rating_tomato=50), I honestly can't decide.

[Dukefrukem]

Can't decide what to watch next?

[Irish]

Can't decide if 2018 was a good year at the movies. Every single Triple-A blockbuster wannabe disappointed me, but there was at least interesting smaller / indie films to fill that void.

[Dukefrukem]

Can't decide if 2018 was a good year at the movies. Every single Triple-A blockbuster wannabe disappointed me, but there was at least interesting smaller / indie films to fill that void.

My Letterboxd ratings say no, it wasn't (granted I only saw 60 2018 films)

[Dead & Messed Up]

I mean, I'm more judicious with what I watch, but of the sub-20 flicks I saw this year, I enjoyed most of them. I tend to think every year is a great year for movies, just in different ways-- what a precious little Pollyanna this boy can be.

[baby doll]

Can't decide if 2018 was a good year at the movies. Every single Triple-A blockbuster wannabe disappointed me, but there was at least interesting smaller / indie films to fill that void.Speaking personally, if I take what I saw last year as a far from random sampling of 2018's offerings, I would say that even the best films I've seen (i.e., Hotel by the River, Jinpa, El Laberinto, Le Livre d'image, and The Stone Speakers) were less impressive than the best films I saw in 2017 (Cocote, The Florida Project, Laissez bronzer les cadavres, Life and Nothing More, Western) and 2016 (Hermia & Helena, La Mort de Louis XIV, The Ornithologist, Safari, The Woman Who Left).

[transmogrifier]

2018 was the year blockbuster fatigue finally set in for me. Skipped Fantastic Beasts 2, not interested in Aquaman or Bumblebee, I'm going to skip Captain Marvel unless my wife drags me to it even though I know it will probably have a bearing on The Avengers 4, which will be my last Marvel movie I think, outside of an interesting director taking one of the movies.

One of the most frustrating things is seeing stupid and hollow things like The Meg/Venom make a tonne of money and have a lot of people defend them on the basis of "check your brain at the door, they are made to be fun" and then a lot of the same people will turn around and criticize the hell out of something that is competently made and trying something different like Hereditary for having a kind of silly ending.

I just get the feeling that more and more we are excusing lazy filmmaking because (a) we just want fun! and/or (b) it's part of a unified universe and thus it is okay for an individual movie to be lacking because it is crammed with references to other films and acts as a stepping stone to the next commercial play date.

Of course, there are exceptions (the animated Spider-man apparently, though I haven't seen it) but I truly believe that critical groups (e.g., Rotten Tomatoes/Metacritic) are becoming softer and softer on mainstream films and genuine film criticism has been jettisoned for a focus on how a film will play with a general audience.

[baby doll]

Of course, there are exceptions (the animated Spider-man apparently, though I haven't seen it) but I truly believe that critical groups (e.g., Rotten Tomatoes/Metacritic) are becoming softer and softer on mainstream films and genuine film criticism has been jettisoned for a focus on how a film will play with a general audience.Given the accelerating degradation of Western culture, which just in my own lifetime has progressed at such an alarming rate that it's now possible to look back wistfully upon the Hollywood cinema of the 1990s as relatively refined and sophisticated, it's not surprising that people have degraded along with it, accepting as normal things that would have seemed appalling in an earlier, more civilized age.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Is it possible that some of that culture has shifted in general? While pop-mainstream movies can be a barometer of a certain kind of media viewer/reader, the explosion of television and streaming has created new opportunities for more adult-targeted material, to the point that Scorsese and the Coens, among others, have migrated to those mediums. Certainly Netflix and Amazon Prime, among others, are blurring the boundaries of where and how films can be distributed.

Just as an example of the shifting landscape of "what we watch," my primary source of media the past however-many months has been YouTube, largely due to the philosophy/analysis/comedy videos put out by channels like Contrapoints, Collative Learning, Monster Factory (just some examples). I wouldn't say for a second that those are the next iteration of films, but they have widened my definition of what visual media is and how it can function.

I'm not arguing anyone's points here, just wondering aloud if the "degradation" of USA filmmaking is in some ways a response to the overall widening of media itself.

[transmogrifier]

I'm not arguing anyone's points here, just wondering aloud if the "degradation" of USA filmmaking is in some ways a response to the overall widening of media itself.

I think it is just more of the fact that audiences increasingly crave familiarity, the feeling of continuity, and the ability to see things they and others recognize on screen, combined with this a general love of expensive-looking set-pieces combined with the same generically smart-arse humor style. Marvel has harnessed that to excellent effect, and now everyone is doing it. It is not always successful because not everyone can do it well, but the homogenization of mainstream cinema is real, and I think the reviewers are complicit in allowing their inner geekdom (or their general wokeness) to override their critical analysis of the elements of film-making involved.

Note that I'm definitely not saying that blockbusters are worse than in the past, because the 80s and 90s had a lot of shitty money makers or money-maker wannabes; I'm just of the opinion that the big-budget movies these days tend to be shitty or good in a more similar way to each other than in the past (and that reviewers are much less critical of them now). I honestly think there was more variety in the past than there is now. Smaller budget films are still chugging along as they always have, and the new distribution methods have helped their exposure, so I don't think they are really suffering, but mainstream studio films are a crashing bore, by and large.

[transmogrifier]

One thing I have definitely learned (finally!) is that if a bunch of people on Rotten Tomatoes or Letterboxd describe something as "silly but fun" or similar, I'm staying far, far away. Hence no Aquaman for me.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I think it is just more of the fact that audiences increasingly crave familiarity, the feeling of continuity, and the ability to see things they and others recognize on screen, combined with this a general love of expensive-looking set-pieces combined with the same generically smart-arse humor style. Marvel has harnessed that to excellent effect, and now everyone is doing it. It is not always successful because not everyone can do it well, but the homogenization of mainstream cinema is real, and I think the reviewers are complicit in allowing their inner geekdom (or their general wokeness) to override their critical analysis of the elements of film-making involved.

Oh, sure, and there's a lot to unpack in terms of how internet commentators and access journalism have accelerated the homogeneity you're talking about, especially as it pertains to franchise films. (Basically, all hail the eternal franchise, o great giver of pageclicks.)

Basically, I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm wondering how much of this is a consequence of, like, dumbed-down populace (degradation!) and how much is a consequence of studios shifting their focus out of a perceived necessity, due to a more competitive media landscape. So they have to try to interlink franchise films, because they need that extra incentive to push people to watch a film in the theater (fear of missing out, etc.). And they have to push more brand names, because a brand name will make investors 20% more willing to invest in a project. And they have to either tentpole or Blumhouse their films, because it by and large isn't worth it to chase medium-budget adult-targeted films, because those types of viewers are watching The Marvelous Miss Marple or whatever the hell it is on Amazon.

[Note that they don't actually have to do any of this, but the calculus of risk when dealing with major-release films has shifted dramatically. A consequence of this is that a success like Crazy Rich Asians inspires studio head-scratches-- who would've thought that a mass audience might want to see a fun, comparatively low-concept romantic comedy. Imagine that.]

[Dead & Messed Up]

One thing I have definitely learned (finally!) is that if a bunch of people on Rotten Tomatoes or Letterboxd describe something as "silly but fun" or similar, I'm staying far, far away. Hence no Aquaman for me.

Glad I saved you a couple of hours. :cool:

[Skitch]

One thing I have definitely learned (finally!) is that if a bunch of people on Rotten Tomatoes or Letterboxd describe something as "silly but fun" or similar, I'm staying far, far away. Hence no Aquaman for me.

I don't think I'd recommend you any superhero film. And thats not a dig at you, just doesn't seem like a thing you like, which is totally fine.

[Dukefrukem]

I mean, I'm more judicious with what I watch, but of the sub-20 flicks I saw this year, I enjoyed most of them. I tend to think every year is a great year for movies, just in different ways-- what a precious little Pollyanna this boy can be.

My criteria of a good year in cinema are films I would want to watch again. For me the last great year was 2012.

[Dukefrukem]

2018 was the year blockbuster fatigue finally set in for me. Skipped Fantastic Beasts 2, not interested in Aquaman or Bumblebee, I'm going to skip Captain Marvel unless my wife drags me to it even though I know it will probably have a bearing on The Avengers 4, which will be my last Marvel movie I think, outside of an interesting director taking one of the movies.

One of the most frustrating things is seeing stupid and hollow things like The Meg/Venom make a tonne of money and have a lot of people defend them on the basis of "check your brain at the door, they are made to be fun" and then a lot of the same people will turn around and criticize the hell out of something that is competently made and trying something different like Hereditary for having a kind of silly ending.

I just get the feeling that more and more we are excusing lazy filmmaking because (a) we just want fun! and/or (b) it's part of a unified universe and thus it is okay for an individual movie to be lacking because it is crammed with references to other films and acts as a stepping stone to the next commercial play date.

Of course, there are exceptions (the animated Spider-man apparently, though I haven't seen it) but I truly believe that critical groups (e.g., Rotten Tomatoes/Metacritic) are becoming softer and softer on mainstream films and genuine film criticism has been jettisoned for a focus on how a film will play with a general audience.

I really like this theory.

[Dukefrukem]

One thing I have definitely learned (finally!) is that if a bunch of people on Rotten Tomatoes or Letterboxd describe something as "silly but fun" or similar, I'm staying far, far away. Hence no Aquaman for me.

I dunno, There's some really neat horror elements that you can tell Jams Wan had fun with. That stuff is fun. The stuff that isn't is the villain stuff, but I would not put this movie in the same category as Meg or Venom. It's the best DCEC film by far.

[transmogrifier]

I don't think I'd recommend you any superhero film. And thats not a dig at you, just doesn't seem like a thing you like, which is totally fine.

I'm interested in the animated Spider-man, and if Waititi comes back for one, I'll support that for sure. But, yeah, Logan is the best "superhero" film I've ever seen, and that is like, a 73/100, with Batman Returns at around 70.

[transmogrifier]

I really like this theory.

I don't, because it leads to samey films and no-one around to hold their feet to the fire :)

[transmogrifier]

I dunno, There's some really neat horror elements that you can tell Jams Wan had fun with. That stuff is fun. The stuff that isn't is the villain stuff, but I would not put this movie in the same category as Meg or Venom. It's the best DCEC film by far.

I've been burnt too many times in the past. The Meg and Venom were breaking points because they earned so much money. It means, more is on the way.

It doesn't help that I thought Aquaman was boring in Justice League.

[Dukefrukem]

I've been burnt too many times in the past. The Meg and Venom were breaking points because they earned so much money. It means, more is on the way.

It doesn't help that I thought Aquaman was boring in Justice League.

That's because Jason Momoa is not a charismatic lead.

[MadMan]

I liked The Meg. It was solid. Meanwhile the animated Spider-Man movie was pretty awesome and gave me mostly everything I could want in a superhero movie. Comparing the two is odd, obvious blockbuster appeal aside.

So far 2017 is better, although I still have much to view from 2018.

[Spinal]

That's because Jason Momoa is not a charismatic lead.

He really is more compelling performing in his native language: Dothraki.

[baby doll]

Is it possible that some of that culture has shifted in general? While pop-mainstream movies can be a barometer of a certain kind of media viewer/reader, the explosion of television and streaming has created new opportunities for more adult-targeted material, to the point that Scorsese and the Coens, among others, have migrated to those mediums. Certainly Netflix and Amazon Prime, among others, are blurring the boundaries of where and how films can be distributed.

Just as an example of the shifting landscape of "what we watch," my primary source of media the past however-many months has been YouTube, largely due to the philosophy/analysis/comedy videos put out by channels like Contrapoints, Collative Learning, Monster Factory (just some examples). I wouldn't say for a second that those are the next iteration of films, but they have widened my definition of what visual media is and how it can function.

I'm not arguing anyone's points here, just wondering aloud if the "degradation" of USA filmmaking is in some ways a response to the overall widening of media itself.When I refer to the overall degradation of American cinema, I'm not just referring to a shift away from adult-targeted material toward more childish story lines (although that's certainly part of it), but also an aesthetic degradation that's been accelerating since the 1960s. When it comes to what David Bordwell has termed intensified continuity, directors like Scorsese and the Coens have demonstrated that this style isn't altogether artistically bankrupt, but when you compare their work with that of studio-era directors like Ford, Lang, Ophüls, Preminger, Sirk, Sternberg, et al., you get a sense of how much, and how quickly, American cinema has declined aesthetically since 1960. Indeed, if Scorsese and the Coens appear to us today as relative giants, it's in large part because they seemed until recently to be among the few contemporary US directors who still composed their images for the big screen; now that they've moved into television, it's less likely that they will improve the quality of streaming content than that streaming will degrade them.

[Dead & Messed Up]

When I refer to the overall degradation of American cinema, I'm not just referring to a shift away from adult-targeted material toward more childish story lines (although that's certainly part of it), but also an aesthetic degradation that's been accelerating since the 1960s.

Got it, thanks for the clarification!

[MadMan]

So the 1970s wasn't a great decade for American cinema?

[Skitch]

So the 1970s wasn't a great decade for American cinema?

Heh. *makes popcorn*

[Dukefrukem]

So the 1970s wasn't a great decade for American cinema?

It's my least favorite decade by far.

[baby doll]

So the 1970s wasn't a great decade for American cinema?In terms of the number of great movies it produced, it was more impressive than the 1960s, or any decade after, but far less so than the 1930s, '40s, or '50s.

[Skitch]

Don't get hooked, MM.

[MadMan]

All he had to say was "I think the 70s are overrated." Which I think is wrong, but ok.

[MadMan]

My favorite decade for film is the 1980s, anyways.

[Skitch]

Probably me too. Probably whatever decade you were a kid. So baby doll is likely 112.

[transmogrifier]

70s > 60s > 90s > 00s > 80s > 10s

[baby doll]

The conversation seems to have veered from American cinema in the '70s to cinema in the '70s, which are clearly not the same thing. My point was that American cinema has declined steadily since the end of the 1950s with the collapse of the old studio system and the advent of a découpage style increasingly aligned with the aesthetics of television, particularly in mainstream filmmaking. There were of course great films made after 1960, but with each decade, the share of great films made in Hollywood diminishes. At the same time, however, there was a huge explosion in the number of films being produced in smaller countries, particularly in the global south, but the most impressive third world filmmakers that I'm aware of--people like Ousmane Sembène, Abbas Kiarostami, Abderrahmane Sissako, Lav Diaz, Apichatpong Weerasethakul, and Carlos Reygadas--are all festival directors. Personally, I love Straub/Huillet and late Godard and Pedro Costa, but I also like to see good Hollywood films as well. Yet we never seem to have both at the same time.

Incidentally, I would argue that the influence of Hollywood filmmakers who considered themselves artists (Altman, Coppola, Cimino, De Palma, Scorsese, et al.) was largely negative, as it led to a conception of style as something extrinsic to the narrative that is the private property of a single filmmaker and is applied to a story like a coat of paint. (This also accounts, I think, for the unevenness of a lot of festival directors, notably Reygadas, who by necessity had to assert himself as an auteur from day one in order to have a career at all.)

And for the record, I was born in the '80s.

[MadMan]

Eh my favorite decade for film changes a lot. When I was a kid, it was the 90s. High school, the 70s. College, the 60s. I think the 1950s is the best decade for film currently but that could also change.

[Lazlo]

Some of my Letterboxd stats from 2018:

412 diary entries (viewings; 401 total films)
7.9 movies per week

First Film: The Running Man
Last Film: Kill Bill: Vol. 1

Most Watched Actors:
Tom Cruise - 30
Anthony Daniels - 11
Denzel Washington, Frank Oz, Samuel L. Jackson - 9
Alec Baldwin, Matt Damon, Andy Serkis, Simon Pegg, Kenny Baker, Ving Rhames - 8
Mark Hamill, Chris Evans, Don Cheadle, Meryl Streep, Willem Dafoe, Nicole Kidman, Debi Derryberry, John Ratzenberger - 7
Robert Englund - 6

Most Watched Directors:
Wolfgang Reitherman - 6
Steven Spielberg - 5
Steven Soderbergh, George Lucas - 4
John McTiernan, Paul Thomas Anderson, Brad Bird, Ron Howard, Christopher McQuarrie, Alfred Hitchcock, Stanley Kubrick, Oliver Stone, Christopher Nolan, Robert Zemeckis - 3
Henri-Georges Clouzot, Jon Turteltaub, Lee Chang-dong, Ethan Coen, James Foley, Jason Reitman - 2

Highest Average Letterboxd Score - Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (4.5/5)
Lowest Average Letterboxd Score - Catwoman (1.3/5)

[Skitch]

I'm so behind on Letterboxd. I've just now caught up to May. Hoping to get caught up over the next week of vacation.

[Irish]

Tom Cruise - 30

I dig Cruise but JFC, Laz. ;)

Is there a story there or did you just feel the need?

[Ezee E]

I dig Cruise but JFC, Laz. ;)

Is there a story there or did you just feel the need?

Ving Rhames is up there, so the Mission Impossible marathon was basically 1/3 of it, :)

[transmogrifier]

I think watching 30 Cruise films in a year might drive me somewhat bonkers.

[Lazlo]

I dig Cruise but JFC, Laz. ;)

Is there a story there or did you just feel the need?

I feel the need!

Since May I've been doing a weekly podcast with my buddy discussing a different TC movie. It's called The Cruise Cruise and there's a link to it in my signature if you're at all interested in checking it out. Would love to hear your thoughts!

[Lazlo]

I think watching 30 Cruise films in a year might drive me somewhat bonkers.

It is a lot to deal with sometimes, haha, though I think his movies are generally excellent and/or very interesting.

[Skitch]

It's a good pod! I'm a fan.

[Irish]

I feel the need!

Since May I've been doing a weekly podcast with my buddy discussing a different TC movie. It's called The Cruise Cruise and there's a link to it in my signature if you're at all interested in checking it out. Would love to hear your thoughts!

Ahhhh yeah, that's right! I remember you talking about it back when. I'll give it a listen.

[Lazlo]

Thanks fellas!

[MadMan]

Tom Cruise usually makes some fun and entertaining films. Mission: Impossible-Fallout was one of the best films of 2018.

[Lazlo]

Tom Cruise usually makes some fun and entertaining films. Mission: Impossible-Fallout was one of the best films of 2018.

Fixed.

[transmogrifier]

As a professional editor/proofreader, my eye just twitched.

[Lazlo]

As a professional editor/proofreader, my eye just twitched.

Whoops, strikethrough'd too many words.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Whoops, strikethrough'd too many words.

Nothing gets passed Trans's eyes.

[transmogrifier]

Nothing gets passed Trans's eyes.

*twitching intensifies*

[Skitch]

You guys, are cruel.

[Dukefrukem]

My constant typos must drive trans crazy.

[transmogrifier]

My constant typos must drive trans crazy.

Nah, typos are typos - I make them all the time on message boards, they are just part of typing quickly and not editing. I don't judge anyone on typos. (I DO judge people on "I could care less", because that's just silly).

The twitch was for the ironic "fixed" comment, which reminded me of a handful of overconfident clients who can't really write to save themselves, but who are weirdly sure about what they think is right or not (e.g., I had one client request that I stop using semi-colons because they weren't formal... um, what?). To be fair, the vast majority of my clients are non-native English users, so I'm fine with grammar errors and the like - that's what I'm here for - it's just those weird few who think they know English better than a native speaker because some high school teacher taught them something incorrectly and they took it as gospel.

[Wryan]

Any mod gonna make the "2019 releases" sticky in the Yearly Database section?

[Dukefrukem]

Any mod gonna make the "2019 releases" sticky in the Yearly Database section?

I'm an admin, and I dont have the ability to do anything but change thread titles and move threads.

[Ezee E]

I'm an admin, and I dont have the ability to do anything but change thread titles and move threads.

Same. Seems like that ability went away.

[Dukefrukem]

I'd rather not have ban ability anyway (even though that was the main reason someone recommended me, was so I could ban spammers). I'm not sure MC would accept/trust me with that kind of power.

[Peng]

Eight Hours of Terror (1957)

My first Seijun Suzuki, which is basically Lifeboat on a bus. Blissful blend of nervy suspense, pointed post-war sociopolitical snapshot, and some delicious tonal whiplashes -- a baby is both a source of tenderness (bus singalong) and taboo-pushing sights (gun being put to its head more than once). Masterful in navigating both cramped bus space and open moutain area too. 7.5/10

Animal House (1978)

I posit that the dated aspects (rapey jokes, eye-boggling racism) not only clang with modern sensibilities, but also actively work against the film on a formal level, with its infectiously loose-limbed, hang-out ethos sometimes stopped dead in favor of extended easy, tiresomely low-hanging-fruit hijinks. Still enjoyable because of the superb cast and that ethos, plus some proto-Blues Brothers delightfully orchestrated deadpan jokes/chaos/anarchy (all the horse stuff, food fight, most of the climax, etc). 6.5/10

[Skitch]

I posit that the dated aspects (rapey jokes, eye-boggling racism) not only clang with modern sensibilities, but also actively work against the film on a formal level,

This was my reaction to revisiting this film as well.

[baby doll]

I saw the film in my early 20s (circa 2007) so it's never not been rapey and racist for me.

I kinda wish the whole movie had been about Donald Sutherland's character.

[MadMan]

I haven't seen Animal House in years. I am not sure how I would judge it now. I kind of prefer Real Genius over it when it comes to college comedies.

[Peng]

A Man for All Seasons (1966) - Watching a traditional period drama right after The Favourite does the former no favor at all, and the staidly direction and languorous pacing only compound its problem of being a thuddingly obvious theater adaptation even more. Paul Scofield is marvelous though, conveying a ton of thoughts and feelings under stolid surface and carefully measured words, which makes his brief cracks of overwhelmed emotions towards the end so heartrending, and gives his thunderous climatic speech all the weight it needs for that epilogue to be absolutely haunting. 6.5/10

[StanleyK]

Watched Sean Baker's Starlet; it's been a long time since I've watched a movie with no expectations at all and liked it so much. Great performances by a bunch of unknowns, great score and a beautiful, understated story, somewhat reminiscent of the Dardenne brothers's earlier and better efforts. Why isn't this talked about more?

[Yxklyx]

Issur Danielovitch Demsky is still alive.

[Peng]

Rewatched Unbreakable (2000) in preparation of Glass.

This almost slid from 3.5/5 into 3/5 on rewatch for me, actually, and now that Split bumps up to my #3 of his, it clarifies a whole lot about Shyamalan for me. A director of genre infused with Importance (especially in pacing), he has the formal chop and imaginative conceptual ambition, but kind of needs a spark or more from his actors to make his ponderous self-seriousness gain human dimension and deep feeling (my frustrated thought, pre-cinephile, while watching Signs: "why do these people seem all braindead?!").

The Sixth Sense has Haley Joel Osment and maybe his most consistent story to date; The Village, his best film, has a killer ensemble cast where all his characters seem like actual humans for a change, and I still can't believe Shyamalan is really capable of that tender, heartfelt romance (big credit to Bryce Dallas Howard); Split, apart from a great interplay between committed McAvoy and Taylor-Joy, finds the director finally lean into pulpiness and delivers an unhinged, actual genre direction that looks great on him. In contrast, Unbreakable just seems like a very novel concept and some exquisite visual/direction in search of that kind of spark. Here's hoping that new-phase Shyamalan and that cast has me more receptive to what he's serving up in Glass.

[Wryan]

Lots of credit to Sean Baker and the girl and mom actors in The Florida Project for their near-immaculate verisimilitude, but Jesus fucking Christ I couldn't stand them. I could barely get thru the movie with my blood pressure intact. Guess the movie worked super well 'cause I was so damn angry at and for all of them by the end of it.

[MadMan]

The Florida Project made me cry at the end.

[MadMan]

I have seen Unbreakable at least 5 times. Maybe more. I love that movie, flaws and all.

[Peng]

Lupin the Third: The Castle of Cagliostro (1979)

Remarkably sustains the exhilarating, whatever-go spirit of Saturday morning cartoon the whole way through, with about four or five times the length and at much higher craft. This being his first feature, someone else’s property (even if the characters are reshaped as milder to suit the director more), and made in barely half a year, the film still feels very much of Miyazaki’s sensibility, if not as deep in his later films' serenely articulated, thematic concern: rollicking adventure (this almost feels like a warm-up to Castle in the Sky), fluidly animated action especially around architecture, and a healthy dose of authority distrust. Fun and charming debut. 7.5/10

[StanleyK]

Lots of credit to Sean Baker and the girl and mom actors in The Florida Project for their near-immaculate verisimilitude, but Jesus fucking Christ I couldn't stand them. I could barely get thru the movie with my blood pressure intact. Guess the movie worked super well 'cause I was so damn angry at and for all of them by the end of it.

Sean Baker seems to be really adept at making great movies about insufferable people. These types of movies usually infuriate me, but he's got a Midas touch that makes them compelling. And what a great director of actors he is; most of the parts are played by non-actors and are excellent. I was especially impressed by the kids in The Florida Project. Child actors very rarely give convincing performances, but the ones here are genuinely Oscar-worthy.

[Yxklyx]

The Florida Project made me cry at the end.

One of the best movies I've seen recently. What's crazier than Possession is this script:

https://www.springfieldspringfield.co. uk/movie_script.php?movie=possess ion

which I'm going to have to go through because the audio (and Adjani's accent) has always made me miss something. One of the key new lines I understood on tonight's rewatch is:

Because it's here with you?
-Yes!

[transmogrifier]

My Top 15 Directors strictly according to average scores of all the films of theirs I have seen. Four film minimum. Bolded are those names I never would think about if asked to name my favorite directors, though I certainly don't dislike them.



Peter Greenaway
David Fincher
Sergio Leone
Fred Zinneman
John Sayles
Nicholas Roeg
Pedro Almodovar
Dennis Hopper
Jacques Becker
Paul Thomas Anderson
David Lean
Bernado Bertolucci
Michael Powell
Michael Mann
Michel Gondry
Jean-Pierre Melville


I would have said that my favorite director is Robert Altman, but his long career means a number of bombs drag his average down a bit. But goddamn I miss him.

[Irish]

The Criterion Channel service launches April 8, and will be available on desktop, Roku, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, iOS, and Android devices for the monthly fee of $10.99 (or $99.99 annually).

Charter subscribers get some additional benefits, especially if they subscribe before the April launch date, including reduced pricing for the life of their subscriptions along with other benefits, including a prelaunch Movie of the Week every Wednesday until launch, starting with the complete, newly released Criterion edition of “Mikey and Nicky,� with a new restoration supervised by Elaine May, along with all of its supplemental features.

https://theplaylist.net/criterion-channel-launch-date-20190130/

Yay...?

[Dukefrukem]

By that price, does that mean it will offer some of the extra feature stuff that's on some of the DVDs?

[StanleyK]

During the opening credits of Memoirs of an Invisible Man I was thinking "There's no John Carpenter font, and where's his synthy score? This is all wrong." Then I remembered that I don't actually like John Carpenter's movies and thought I might enjoy this one. And I did enjoy quite a bit. I think I've finally found a filmmaker with which I can be a proper Match Cut contrarian.

[Dukefrukem]

During the opening credits of Memoirs of an Invisible Man I was thinking "There's no John Carpenter font, and where's his synthy score? This is all wrong." Then I remembered that I don't actually like John Carpenter's movies and thought I might enjoy this one. And I did enjoy quite a bit. I think I've finally found a filmmaker with which I can be a proper Match Cut contrarian.

What are some of his other movies you dislike and why>?

[StanleyK]

What are some of his other movies you dislike and why>?

I hated They Live, Prince of Darkness and The Fog. I didn't particularly care for Big Trouble in Little China, Assault on Precinct 13 or Halloween.

In general, his movies have interesting concepts, but the execution is sloppy. For example in They Live, the idea of sunglasses that you can put on to see reality is neat; but as soon as Roddy Piper puts them on, he loudly announces to the aliens that he can see them and starts shooting at random, which is just about the stupidest thing he could do. Later he punches Keith David for 45 minutes because he won't put on the glasses. That's the other main problem I have with Carpenter: the pacing is awful. There always seems to be a point in his movies where the story comes to a halt and just spins its wheels without going anywhere. For instance in Halloween, between Michael arriving at his hometown and him killing Annie, nothing happens. There are no new stakes, no pieces being moved around the chessboard, so to speak. I think it's supposed to be a slow burn building up to an explosive ending, but with nothing new at stake the effect is tedium rather than tension.

The only movie where I think he was successful at this was The Thing. I also enjoyed Escape from New York, and to some extent Dark Star.

[Dukefrukem]

Fair. I dislike Prince of Darkness and The Fog too. Totally agree with you on Halloween.

Was ready to rumble if you badmouthed the Thing.

Big Trouble in Little China is a masterpiece.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I hated They Live, Prince of Darkness and The Fog. I didn't particularly care for Big Trouble in Little China, Assault on Precinct 13 or Halloween.

In general, his movies have interesting concepts, but the execution is sloppy. For example in They Live, the idea of sunglasses that you can put on to see reality is neat; but as soon as Roddy Piper puts them on, he loudly announces to the aliens that he can see them and starts shooting at random, which is just about the stupidest thing he could do. Later he punches Keith David for 45 minutes because he won't put on the glasses. That's the other main problem I have with Carpenter: the pacing is awful. There always seems to be a point in his movies where the story comes to a halt and just spins its wheels without going anywhere. For instance in Halloween, between Michael arriving at his hometown and him killing Annie, nothing happens. There are no new stakes, no pieces being moved around the chessboard, so to speak. I think it's supposed to be a slow burn building up to an explosive ending, but with nothing new at stake the effect is tedium rather than tension.

Wow. Hats off to you for throwing in an opinion I am completely unprepared for. I don't like it, but damn it do I respect it.

[MadMan]

My Top 15 Directors strictly according to average scores of all the films of theirs I have seen. Four film minimum. Bolded are those names I never would think about if asked to name my favorite directors, though I certainly don't dislike them.



Peter Greenaway
David Fincher
Sergio Leone
Fred Zinneman
John Sayles
Nicholas Roeg
Pedro Almodovar
Dennis Hopper
Jacques Becker
Paul Thomas Anderson
David Lean
Bernado Bertolucci
Michael Powell
Michael Mann
Michel Gondry
Jean-Pierre Melville


I would have said that my favorite director is Robert Altman, but his long career means a number of bombs drag his average down a bit. But goddamn I miss him.

I have never seen a Almodovar or Becker film. I don't recall if I have ever viewed a Gondry. Interesting list, as several of those are among my favorites.

[MadMan]

Lupin the Third: The Castle of Cagliostro (1979)

Remarkably sustains the exhilarating, whatever-go spirit of Saturday morning cartoon the whole way through, with about four or five times the length and at much higher craft. This being his first feature, someone else’s property (even if the characters are reshaped as milder to suit the director more), and made in barely half a year, the film still feels very much of Miyazaki’s sensibility, if not as deep in his later films' serenely articulated, thematic concern: rollicking adventure (this almost feels like a warm-up to Castle in the Sky), fluidly animated action especially around architecture, and a healthy dose of authority distrust. Fun and charming debut. 7.5/10

I saw that movie on the big screen two years ago. Pretty rad flick, and most likely an influence on Cowboy Bebop. I loved Castle In The Sky.

[MadMan]

One of the best movies I've seen recently. What's crazier than Possession is this script:

https://www.springfieldspringfield.co. uk/movie_script.php?movie=possess ion

which I'm going to have to go through because the audio (and Adjani's accent) has always made me miss something. One of the key new lines I understood on tonight's rewatch is:

Because it's here with you?
-Yes!

Possession is one ot those batshit crazy movies I am glad I have seen. I watched it late one night on TCM and I wasn't really able to sleep afterwards.

[MadMan]

I love John Carpenter. To each their own, I guess.

[Dukefrukem]

My Top 15 Directors strictly according to average scores of all the films of theirs I have seen. Four film minimum. Bolded are those names I never would think about if asked to name my favorite directors, though I certainly don't dislike them.



Peter Greenaway
David Fincher
Sergio Leone
Fred Zinneman
John Sayles
Nicholas Roeg
Pedro Almodovar
Dennis Hopper
Jacques Becker
Paul Thomas Anderson
David Lean
Bernado Bertolucci
Michael Powell
Michael Mann
Michel Gondry
Jean-Pierre Melville


I would have said that my favorite director is Robert Altman, but his long career means a number of bombs drag his average down a bit. But goddamn I miss him.

Was this compiled through letterboxd?

[transmogrifier]

Was this compiled through letterboxd?

No, I have an Excel spreadsheet of all the movies I have watched. I would never be able to remember things I've seen or not otherwise, let alone individual scores.

[Dukefrukem]

No, I have an Excel spreadsheet of all the movies I have watched. I would never be able to remember things I've seen or not otherwise, let alone individual scores.

I have a huge excel file too, but 2018 was the first year I didn't add movies to it. I was hoping I could rely on Letterboxd for stuff like this. That director rating would be a really nice feature to have.

[Skitch]

No, I have an Excel spreadsheet of all the movies I have watched. I would never be able to remember things I've seen or not otherwise, let alone individual scores.

Nice. I keep a word file for each, plus compile a file by month and year. I'm only about 9 months behind thanks to work.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Made it about halfway through The Nutty Professor, the Jerry Lewis original, before I finally had to tap out. There was exactly one sequence where I chuckled, when the stentorian dean chews him out, and Lewis keeps sinking further and further into his chair. The rest was just nothing. I liked Jim Carrey back in the day, and I still have affection for Jim Varney's Ernest P. Worrell, but this character was just insufferable. Eddie Murphy's 1996 remake did a fantastic job of making Sherman Klump clutzy and nervous instead of obnoxious and abrasive.

[Wryan]

Dunno where else to put this, but twitch is streaming a ton of Shaw brothers movies in the next week or so, with some other "movie nights" coming up in the next weeks: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/shaw-brothers-twitch-marathon-schedule-1179098

Lots of cycling schedules in case you miss anything.

One-Armed Swordsman
The Five Deadly Venoms
The 14 Amazons
The Kid With the Golden Arm
The Lady Is a Boss
The Savage Five
The 36th Chamber of Shaolin
Return to the 36th Chamber
Disciples of the 36th Chamber
New One-Armed Swordsman
Executioners From Shaolin

and more.

MOVIE NIGHTS

Feb. 15

5:03 p.m.: King Boxer
6:43 p.m.: Five Element Ninja

Feb. 16

5:03 p.m.: Come Drink With Me
6:36 p.m. Super Inframan

Feb. 22

5:03 p.m.: Chinatown Kid
6:32 p.m.: All Men Are Brothers

Feb. 23

5:03 p.m.: My Young Auntie
7:00 p.m.: Dirty Ho

March 1

5:03 p.m.: Crippled Avengers
6:46 p.m.: Masked Avengers

March 2

5:03 p.m.: Challenge of the Masters
7 p.m.: Vengeance

March 7

5:03 p.m.: The Web of Death
6:32 p.m.: Death Duel

March 8

5:03 p.m.: Mad Monkey Kung Fu
6:39 p.m.: Eight Diagram Pole Fighter

Twitch channel: https://www.twitch.tv/gammaray_tv

I think I'll make a new thread with this post too just so more people can see it since Twitch streaming is sort of not thought of much when it comes to movies (it didn't really have rights to stream movies for a good while, so little things like this are trickling in now more and more).

[Irish]

Can't remember if anyone here lives in or around NYC, but Brian DePalma's "Hi, Mom!" (1970) is playing at the Film Forum on February 6: https://www.artforum.com/film/philippa-snow-on-brian-de-palma-s-hi-mom-1970-78567

[StanleyK]

I've just learned that Sergio Leone was apparently first choice for directing The Godfather, but he turned that because he wanted to do Once Upon a Time in America. I wonder how differently it would have turned out; could it possibly have been even greater?

[Ezee E]

I've just learned that Sergio Leone was apparently first choice for directing The Godfather, but he turned that because he wanted to do Once Upon a Time in America. I wonder how differently it would have turned out; could it possibly have been even greater?

Nah.

[Grouchy]

It would be nothing like the cultural milestone that comes to your head when you hear the words The Godfather, so you wouldn't be able to gauge if it's better or worse.

[Peng]

Rocky IV is the first Rocky sequel in between the original and Rocky Balboa I have seen. Amidst the 80s extreme cheese and excess, these characters retain their personalities and life-sized emotions/interactions from the original more than I expected, which helps inject a little investment into the rushed storytelling. Also, apart from a uselessly random flashback-filled one, some damn good montages here.

[Irish]

Heads up! The Academy Award nominated documentary Hale County This Morning, This Evening is streaming free on PBS until February 25 (the day after the Oscars):

------> https://www.pbs.org/video/hale-county-this-morning-this-evening-sayve8/

Trailer:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlOeSyl-zZk

[Morris Schæffer]

I went to a concert (in Belgium) of Ennio Morricone yesterday, as part of his farewell tour, scheduled to end in Rome, his place of Birth.

It was amazing and very emotional of course with some rarer pieces of music such as the amazing "love theme" for The Red Tent. Casualties of War was a high point, my God is that haunting and powerful.

https://i.imgur.com/1TmSnJB.jpg

[Yxklyx]

Does someone know of an analysis of the opening sequence of Tati's Playtime? The first five minutes seems to be the most dense and I feel like I'm missing a lot.

[baby doll]

Does someone know of an analysis of the opening sequence of Tati's Playtime? The first five minutes seems to be the most dense and I feel like I'm missing a lot.I can't think of any analysis of just the opening sequence but Kristin Thompson analyses the film as a whole pretty thoroughly in Breaking the Glass Armor. In any case, I wouldn't worry about not catching everything since there's too much on the screen to take it all in on one viewing.

[Peng]

Sense and Sensibility (1995) - Superb performances, great Ang Lee direction, and from what I glean from wiki and other comments, a beautifully adjusted adaptation, so I wish I was taken with the core story more. This makes me realize in retrospect how much I like Pride and Prejudice and its protagonist, whose personality, which seems like a combination of two sisters' here, ensures that the mores of the time and most men in her life (S&S, being Austen's first work, really does feel like a test run for P&P, right down to Mr. Willoughby being proto-Mr. Wickham) don't shade into borderline emotional cruelty that makes this rather rough for me at times. Thompson's sublimely acted moment of carthasis near the end alone is worth the watch though. 7.5/10

[baby doll]

Jane Austen ranked:

Pride and Prejudice (1813)
Mansfield Park (1814)
Sense and Sensibility (1811)
Northanger Abbey (1817)
Emma (1815)
Persuasion (1817)

[Yxklyx]

Jane Austen ranked:

Pride and Prejudice (1813)
Mansfield Park (1814)
Sense and Sensibility (1811)
Northanger Abbey (1817)
Emma (1815)
Persuasion (1817)

I will have to check out Mansfield Park. Recently read Pride and Prejudice for the first time after having watched the '95 "mini-series" several times. What an awesome book!

First dysfunctional family in film? Is that Dreyfuss and Garr's family in Close Encounters of the First Kind? I can't recall any other before this. Did Spielberg invent the dysfunctional family?

[Irish]

First dysfunctional family in film? Is that Dreyfuss and Garr's family in Close Encounters of the First Kind?

I dunno. Depends on how broadly you define "dysfunctional."

Like, the Bates ("Psycho") and the Sawyer/Hewitts ("The Texas Chain Saw Massacre") probably have Spielberg's little obsessives beat.

Or any of the people in "Imitation of Life" or "Through a Glass Darkly" or "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?"

Or the Trasks ("East of Eden") or the Starks ("Rebel Without a Cause").

Or the McAdams ("Winchester '73"). Or the Edwards ("The Searchers").

Or the Kanes ("Citizen Kane") or the Ambersons ("The Magnificent Ambersons").


Did Spielberg invent the dysfunctional family?

I can't tell if you're joking.

ETA: By that I mean I took the question seriously (maybe I shouldn't have?). I suspect I'm working off a very different definition than you are, in any case.

[Yxklyx]

I dunno. Depends on how broadly you define "dysfunctional."

Like, the Bates ("Psycho") and the Sawyer/Hewitts ("The Texas Chain Saw Massacre") probably have Spielberg's little obsessives beat.

Or any of the people in "Imitation of Life" or "Through a Glass Darkly" or "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?"

Or the Trasks ("East of Eden") or the Starks ("Rebel Without a Cause").

Or the McAdams ("Winchester '73"). Or the Edwards ("The Searchers").

Or the Kanes ("Citizen Kane") or the Ambersons ("The Magnificent Ambersons").



I can't tell if you're joking.

ETA: By that I mean I took the question seriously (maybe I shouldn't have?). I suspect I'm working off a very different definition than you are, in any case.

Ah well, then the modern interpretation. From what I've read, the term didn't come into play until the 70s. TCSM is a bit out there.

[Irish]

TCSM is a bit out there.

Well, ya can't get much more dysfunctional than killing and eating people ... as a family. :D

[baby doll]

Oedipus' family was pretty messed up.

[megladon8]

Jaws is such a great movie.

[transmogrifier]

Jaws is such a great movie.

Woah, that kind of talk should be reserved for the Unpopular Opinions thread!

[Peng]

Kicking and Screaming (1995) - Still need to see Margot at the Wedding and Greenberg to have this confirmed (or refuted), but me giving this the same rating as The Squid and the Whale feels like I only like Baumbach post-Greta Gerwig. Even his weakest film there (While We're Young) still injects more of a pulse and actual layered humans into his dry wit. I'll give that this is one of his strongest endings though. 5.5/10

[StanleyK]

F.W. Murnau:

Journey Into the Night - 5.5
The Haunted Castle - 7
Nosferatu - 5.5
The Burning Soil - 5.5
Phantom - 4
The Grand Duke's Finances - 5.5
The Last Laugh - 8.5
Tartuffe - 4
Faust - 7
Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans - 10
City Girl - 8.5
Tabu - 7



Nosferatu was pretty dull, and the second half of Faust ruined the masterful first half, but Sunrise alone ensures he deserves his reputation.

[Peng]

There are a bunch of Johnnie To's on Thai Netflix, so I get to make a very great double feature here:

Election (2005)

This is more streamlined that I expected, despite the dizzying array of characters and shifting dynamics, because the film's main thrust boils down (almost hilariously) to a competitive treasure hunt, in which the MacGuffin has been endowed with such grand ritualistic power that it overwhelms everything else, including honor and loyalty. Its propulsive momentum and Johnnie To's exacting thriller craft draws us more easily into its bleak, insinuous worldview, where To can both exercise a lean, mean gangster film entry and harshly rebuke the genre's often romanticized code in the process. Appropriate that this ends on an innocent's shell-shocked face, because when the code of thieves is tested against powerful capital to be seized within reach, no one here escapes clean. Plus, a machete fight in the middle of the film! 8/10

Election 2 (2006)

It feels productive to compare Johnnie To's Election diptych against the first two Godfather films, as they have some similar character arcs and tone changes. This sequel makes up for the story dynamic being almost a retread of the first by plunging deeper into the underworld's heart of darkness (figuratively and literally), not unlike The Godfather Part II. In both cases, I slightly prefer the original's first glimpse into a closed world over its sequel's scope expansion, but Election 2 is still very worthy, full of memorable set-pieces, and avoids being stale by making its moral rot deeper and more systematic. One main character's arc over the two films echoes Michael from the first Godfather, but in the last act here he seems to encompass the positions of both Michael and Kay at that film's closing image, becoming ruthless to achieve what he wants, and then growing horrified as the door closes him into this world. In place of a door, Election 2 has him looking out a window cage, forever locking him heavily there. 8/10