28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[baby doll]

I dunno if that's true, really? At least for me. Maybe because we're talking a different level of engagement. It's hard for me to draw sharp lines, or judge whether engagement is due to detailed characters or something else (plot, celebrity, performance, visuals, themes, etc).

Recent examples: I became extremely wrapped up in stuff like "The Hanging Tree" (Gary Cooper western), "Walking Tall" (a trashy 70s shitkicker movie), and "Poldark" (a 19th century bodice-ripping mini-series) but I don't know if I'd quantify my reaction as emotional engagement. Maybe I need you to define what you mean there.

But I mention them because they had good characters and better performances --- similar in my thinking to "La Cérémonie," which I don't think would work nearly as well without Huppert.It's hard for me to respond here since I haven't seen any of the films you refer to, although I agree that good acting can enhance clichéd material, and Bong's films in particular benefit enormously from the contributions of Song Kang-ho. That said, even at his most entertaining, I find that Bong's films--and Park's Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance--evaporate for me the moment they end; they don't linger in my memory the way that a film like La Cérémonie does because their characters are so much less substantial. (A more extreme example would be the Almodóvar of La mala educación and Los abrazos rotos, which seemed to evaporate as I was watching them despite the star power of Gael GarcÃ*a Bernal and Penélope Cruz.)


I suppose that depends on the level of innovation and when it was made (like, who's reading Wilkie Collins in the 21st century?).

But are you saying Chabrol innovated with "La Cérémonie"? It's a better film than "Parasite," sure, but innovative?I wasn't claiming Chabrol's film is innovative necessarily, only that the characters have a level of specificity that makes them more than generic types.

Incidentally, I read The Woman in White last year and thoroughly enjoyed it.


Going back a bit, this is true of Huppert's character --- hers is by far the most detailed character --- but it isn't quite true of the others. I think if I dug around, I could find a few cinematic snobs who could best Georges and Catherine Lelievre (somebody in "Rules of the Game," maybe?).It's true of any narrative film that the more important characters have more specificity and shading than the minor characters. Still, if memory serves (and it's been over fifteen years since I've seen La Cérémonie), Chabrol views the rich family with a certain amount of affection, complicating our sympathy for the Sandrine Bonnaire character and making the ending genuinely shocking (Get Out this ain't).

[Irish]

It's hard for me to respond here since I haven't seen any of the films you refer to, although I agree that good acting can enhance clichéd material, and Bong's films in particular benefit enormously from the contributions of Song Kang-ho. That said, even at his most entertaining, I find that Bong's films--and Park's Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance--evaporate for me the moment they end; they don't linger in my memory the way that a film like La Cérémonie does because their characters are so much less substantial. (A more extreme example would be the Almodóvar of La mala educación and Los abrazos rotos, which seemed to evaporate as I was watching them despite the star power of Gael GarcÃ*a Bernal and Penélope Cruz.)

I was trying to think of genre stuff that engages based on technicals or performance or plot or pacing, and without a surfeit of character detail. The movies Hitch made in the 50s, maybe? Or "Invasion of the Body Snatchers"? "High Noon" fits pretty well, I think. Maybe "Naked Spur," too.

ETA: "Memories of Murder" definitely works as a good example.


Incidentally, I read The Woman in White last year and thoroughly enjoyed it.

Fair enough, but then you're an academic, iirc. This is a bit like citing yourself in your own research. ;)


It's true of any narrative film that the more important characters have more specificity and shading than the minor characters. Still, if memory serves (and it's been over fifteen years since I've seen La Cérémonie), Chabrol views the rich family with a certain amount of affection, complicating our sympathy for the Sandrine Bonnaire character and making the ending genuinely shocking (Get Out this ain't).

Ha, lemme mention it back to you then and say it's worth a rewatch if you have a free evening.

I mostly meant that the audience learns more about Huppert's character than anyone else's. Her performance is also more animated, but that's down to the writing, too. I began to think of it as Huppert's movie toward the end, even though much of the runtime centers on Sandrine Bonnaire.

I agree that the family is likable, which is why I don't buy the perceived social criticism. (This was also my #hottake beef with "Parasite." Neither film goes far enough in sticking it to the rich. Art about so-called class struggle written, directed, and performed by millionaires is fairly useless.)

ETA2: I have a similar complaint about "Get Out," but that's probably better suited for a different discussion.

ETA3: OTOH, Chabrol is caught in a little bit of a narrative trap, because he's doing true crime through an arthouse lens. He can't make the family unlikeable because then it might appear they "had it coming."

[baby doll]

I was trying to think of genre stuff that engages based on technicals or performance or plot or pacing, and without a surfeit of character detail. The movies Hitch made in the 50s, maybe? Or "Invasion of the Body Snatchers"? "High Noon" fits pretty well, I think. Maybe "Naked Spur," too.

ETA: "Memories of Murder" definitely works as a good example.I do love The Naked Spur, although I would argue that, even if we learn relatively little about the characters in that film, they all register as fully developed characters whose actions mesh seamlessly with their traits and desires rather than generic placeholders whose actions serve the plot more than themselves.


Fair enough, but then you're an academic, iirc. This is a bit like citing yourself in your own research. ;)Research is me-search.


Ha, lemme mention it back to you then and say it's worth a rewatch if you have a free evening.

I mostly meant that the audience learns more about Huppert's character than anyone else's. Her performance is also more animated, but that's down to the writing, too. I began to think of it as Huppert's movie toward the end, even though much of the runtime centers on Sandrine Bonnaire.

I agree that the family is likable, which is why I don't buy the perceived social criticism. (This was also my #hottake beef with "Parasite." Neither film goes far enough in sticking it to the rich. Art about so-called class struggle written, directed, and performed by millionaires is fairly useless.)

ETA2: I have a similar complaint about "Get Out," but that's probably better suited for a different discussion.

ETA3: OTOH, Chabrol is caught in a little bit of a narrative trap, because he's doing true crime through an arthouse lens. He can't make the family unlikeable because then it might appear they "had it coming."Considering that Chabrol's Une affaire de femmes is also based on a true story, and he makes no effort to make the heroine (played by Huppert) especially likeable, I'm guessing he didn't feel himself to be in a narrative trap.

Also, I don't agree that making the rich characters likeable in itself necessarily precludes social criticism (or that a rich person can't make an incisive film about class). On the contrary, if the rich characters were jerks, it would diminish any social criticism by implying that the problem is the characters rather than the class structure.

[Grouchy]

I watched La Cérémonie as a teenager and at that time I sometimes watched the tapes I rented with my parents... Boy, did they hate that one.

[Irish]

I do love The Naked Spur, although I would argue that, even if we learn relatively little about the characters in that film, they all register as fully developed characters whose actions mesh seamlessly with their traits and desires rather than generic placeholders whose actions serve the plot more than themselves.

Well, I was never arguing for generic placeholders, more for a certain style of genre. Weaker or thinner characters can work, especially if there's a trade off to be made (a tightly wound plot, a good theme, a great actor with strong ideas, etc).

"Spur" is pretty lean and might have been a routine B-picture in other hands. Personally, I think the entire movie comes down to the last 5 minutes and Stewart's understated turmoil, his emotional freakout trying to convince himself that killing Ryan for money is justified, that he, Stewart, deserves to get his ranch back.

There aren't too many actors who could have sold it the way he did, and the extra oomph wasn't necessarily on the page.

Slightly off-hand comparison: Humphrey Bogart at the end of "The Maltese Falcon" doesn't sell Sam Spade's desperation nearly as well.


Considering that Chabrol's Une affaire de femmes is also based on a true story, and he makes no effort to make the heroine (played by Huppert) especially likeable, I'm guessing he didn't feel himself to be in a narrative trap.

But I think he must've been aware of the trap, the need to explain the killers' actions without condoning them. That's a tricky business.

I haven't seen "Une affaire de femmes," but I've heard of it, and if it's the movie I remember (Vichy? collaborators?), there's an obvious difference there --- Huppert's character absolutely needs to be unlikeable. Not just for the story, but because it's a French film and there's some shit about the war they're still touchy about.


Also, I don't agree that making the rich characters likeable in itself necessarily precludes social criticism (or that a rich person can't make an incisive film about class). On the contrary, if the rich characters were jerks, it would diminish any social criticism by implying that the problem is the characters rather than the class structure.

Hard disagree, and only because I know and have known people at that income level --- they live in a delusional bubble, like real Emperor's New Clothes type shit --- and because I've worked terrible jobs and lived in bad neighborhoods and none of these movies ever quite capture the level of daily hopelessness and humiliation that exists in those worlds. These films imagine poverty to be a lack of resources, or worse, a lack of luxury. But you live it and it's the lack of dignity that gets you, the lack of agency. Because every f'ing day you're robbed of your dignity and your agency by people with money and power, and it never ends.

[Irish]

Just discovered "Une affaire des femmes" is on criterion. Will probably watch it later tonight, lol.

[Wryan]

Naked Spur really bowled me over.

[Grouchy]

Just discovered "Une affaire des femmes" is on criterion. Will probably watch it later tonight, lol.
Le Boucher is excellent if you haven't seen it.

[StanleyK]

I expected a lot more out of A Simple Plan. I just found it so predictable; once they found the money at the beginning I outlined in my head how the rest of the movie would go and it played out pretty much like that. Thornton's character injects some life into the proceedings but the comparisons I've seen to Fargo are unwarranted, except for all the snow.

[quido8_5]

I expected a lot more out of A Simple Plan. I just found it so predictable; once they found the money at the beginning I outlined in my head how the rest of the movie would go and it played out pretty much like that. Thornton's character injects some life into the proceedings but the comparisons I've seen to Fargo are unwarranted, except for all the snow.

Haha, certainly right about the snow. I remember this movie acting like it's a lot smarter than it is. Also, Thornton's character and performance stand out-- forever gave me more empathy for people with broken glasses, that's for sure.

[Grouchy]

A Simple Plan is very well directed but the story is indeed too linear.

[Idioteque Stalker]

Just finished Fat Girl. This is the most out-of-nowhere ending I can remember, and my gut reaction is I really, really did not like it. But I loved the 99% of the movie that came before, so I'm frantically searching for generous readings. Can someone help me?

[Wryan]

I too quite liked most of what came before. I didn't hate the ending so much as feel it was blunt and shocking for little reward. But it's stayed in my mind for years now. So if that was the point, it succeeded...I guess.

[quido8_5]

I too quite liked most of what came before. I didn't hate the ending so much as feel it was blunt and shocking for little reward. But it's stayed in my mind for years now. So if that was the point, it succeeded...I guess.

Exactly. Like it or not, I haven't forgotten it and it's been nearly two decades since I saw it. The entire film is about as unvarnished a portrait of sexual maturation and exploitation that I can think of and the ending forces the viewer to confront some very grim realities about what the purpose of sex is and how that meaning changes as a result of so many individual and societal expectations. Great film, would never fault someone for hating it. Not remembering isn't an option, though...

[megladon8]

I think Fat Girl hits especially hard if you were someone who was ostracized for your appearance in school/home.

*hand up*

[quido8_5]

^^^

[Idioteque Stalker]

After thinking about it for a while, the most generous reading I can think of is Breillat intends to force the viewer to compare the obvious atrocity of the ending with the (shall we say) quieter atrocities we see earlier/throughout the film. Ultimately the coercion somehow seems even more repulsive, while dare I say the ending somehow seems less.

Great movie, but challenging. I'm curious to check out more stuff from Breillat.

[Yxklyx]

Does the Criterion Channel have Nights of Cabiria in HD? How many people here have that channel?

[megladon8]

Does the Criterion Channel have Nights of Cabiria in HD? How many people here have that channel?

Yes it does. Just saw it on there tonight.

[Yxklyx]

Yes it does. Just saw it on there tonight.

Cool, thought about getting the blu-ray but it's only for the European region and Prime just has SD. Will look into getting the channel then.

[Wryan]

Nights of Cabiria is my fave Fellini and one of my fave movies of all time.

[baby doll]

But I think he must've been aware of the trap, the need to explain the killers' actions without condoning them. That's a tricky business.

I haven't seen "Une affaire de femmes," but I've heard of it, and if it's the movie I remember (Vichy? collaborators?), there's an obvious difference there --- Huppert's character absolutely needs to be unlikeable. Not just for the story, but because it's a French film and there's some shit about the war they're still touchy about.Of course, we can't know what Chabrol was thinking when he made these films; we can only judge the results. And in both these films, the choice to make Huppert unlikeable and the rich family somewhat likeable are absolutely the right decisions from a dramatic perspective.


Hard disagree, and only because I know and have known people at that income level --- they live in a delusional bubble, like real Emperor's New Clothes type shit --- and because I've worked terrible jobs and lived in bad neighborhoods and none of these movies ever quite capture the level of daily hopelessness and humiliation that exists in those worlds. These films imagine poverty to be a lack of resources, or worse, a lack of luxury. But you live it and it's the lack of dignity that gets you, the lack of agency. Because every f'ing day you're robbed of your dignity and your agency by people with money and power, and it never ends.I certainly agree that many rich people live in a delusional bubble (https://letterboxd.com/sukiyakiramen/film/my-dinner-with-andre/), although I would argue (a) that rich people's fantasies about class struggle are often unintentionally revealing (see link), and (b) since no one can claim to have an objective perspective on class struggle, films by people who've experienced poverty are likely to be similarly blinkered in their take on the subject as films by directors from affluent backgrounds.

[megladon8]

I would like to suggest that all movie sequels need to follow the "______ 2: Electric Boogaloo" formula, as it is definitively and objectively the best way of titling a sequel and has never been bested.

[quido8_5]

I would like to suggest that all movie sequels need to follow the "______ 2: Electric Boogaloo" formula, as it is definitively and objectively the best way of titling a sequel and has never been bested.

Agreed. Looking forward to Amour 2: Electric Boogaloo rockin' it out this summer!

[megladon8]

Agreed. Looking forward to Amour 2: Electric Boogaloo rockin' it out this summer!

I'm more of a Bergman fan, so Fanny & Alexander 2: Electric Boogaloo is my jam.

[StanleyK]

In all seriousness I think Breakin' 2: Electric Boogaloo is a great title. I've never seen the movie but the title alone tells me that it's a sequel to Breakin' in which people breakdance in the electric boogaloo style, so it's perfectly descriptive, obviously very memorable, and best of all it's a numbered sequel. I hate how sequels nowadays don't have numbers in them.

[Yxklyx]

Nights of Cabiria is my fave Fellini and one of my fave movies of all time.

Yes, definitely my favorite Fellini. I just signed up with the Criterion channel, lots of great movies to watch and rewatch! Tonight was a rewatch of Chungking Express probably my favorite Kar-Wai Wong film.

[Grouchy]

I have a really tough time settling on a favorite Fellini because there are so many stages to his career. La Strada or Nights of Cabiria might be the best neorealist ones, but I have a hard time comparing those to 8 & 1/2 or Juliet of the Spirits, or even those to Roma or Satyricon.

[megladon8]

Martin Campbell's The Foreigner is a surprisingly decent little political thriller.

Just found it strange that all of the marketing is it being a Jackie Chan movie, when he was really more of a supporting role.

[Skitch]

Really enjoyed that blind buy.

[quido8_5]

I have a really tough time settling on a favorite Fellini because there are so many stages to his career. La Strada or Nights of Cabiria might be the best neorealist ones, but I have a hard time comparing those to 8 & 1/2 or Juliet of the Spirits, or even those to Roma or Satyricon.

Agree. Goes to show how broad his mastery of the form. Having said that, definitely 8 1/2 .

[dreamdead]

Was surprised by the impact that Quo Vadis, Aida? left on me. I'm familiar enough with the Bosnian War between Serbs and Muslims that some events with the United Nations weren't really a surprise, but the care with which Jasmila Žbanić directs this film is just devastating. Reminiscent of the Paul Greengrass and Dardenne brothers strategy of filmmaking, all cinema verite, but it builds and builds with that final crescendo--showing the captives a real film--before the coda cuts to a perfectly infuriating state of barely repressed anger at having to live beside--and teach the children of--those who perpetrated harm on one's own family.

Likely the best film I've seen that was up for any Oscar last year, though there's still several International Film nominees to see (this was better than Another Round, though).

[transmogrifier]

Public service announcement: Do not watch The Woman in the Window. It is terrible. I refuse to make a page for it in the 2021 section. Just avoid.

[Ezee E]

Public service announcement: Do not watch The Woman in the Window. It is terrible. I refuse to make a page for it in the 2021 section. Just avoid.

I'm surprised so many are watching it. Is it because it's on Netflix?

[transmogrifier]

I'm surprised so many are watching it. Is it because it's on Netflix?

In my case, it's because my wife (and I, it must be said) enjoys mystery-thrillers, so what was the harm? Joe Wright is a decent director, after all. Well.... not this time.

[DFA1979]

That movie looked pretty awful. I made a joke about Gary Oldman looking like a creepy congressman on Twitter in response to seeing the trailer for the flick online.

[DFA1979]

On that note I saw last night that Mad Dog Time was on Tubi. I remembered Ebert's hilarious take down of the film and after watching the trailer I thought to myself "Wow he might be right." So I viewed Sabata instead and enjoyed a good old school spaghetti western that is a blast even if the ending is kind of dumb. Sometimes taking people's word for it that a movie is a turkey might be the wise decision.

[Grouchy]

The Sabata theme is one of the finest in all spaghetti western not by Morricone. In what seems like milennia ago I showed it to some friends and they played it with their band for years.


https://youtu.be/TyI8vOsjF60
https://youtu.be/TyI8vOsjF60

[StuSmallz]

https://i.ibb.co/QCG7CQw/1-R7b-TL-H7-E30ov-Einejzai-A.jpg (https://ibb.co/X3Tf3LR)

To say that expectations for The Last Jedi were space-high would be putting it mildly; as the 2nd episode of the new Star Wars trilogy, everyone seemed to wonder if Rion Johnson would continue with the fun, but still fundamentally play-it-safe nature of Force Awakens that was oh-so JJ, tracing over the general outline of its corresponding middle chapter in the original trilogy (that being The Empire Strikes Back) in the process, and doom this entry to never truly step out of its predecessor's iconic shadow... or would Johnson try for something more challenging, more daring, like Empire itself did back in its day? Well, while Last Jedi will inevitably draw comparisons to that classic at times (granted, sometimes to its detriment), I'm still happy to say that, like its new generation of heroes and villains, it finds a way to honor and respect what its legendary predecessors created, while also forging more of its own path forward, something that apparently The Rise Of Skywalker failed to capitalize on (although I still actually haven't seen it yet, so I can't comment on it personally).


Anyway, The Last Jedi follows parallel story threads, with the forces of The First Order launching an devastating assault on the vulnerable New Republic, before pursuing the surviving forces through space for the rest of the film, a plot that's intercut with a young Jedi apprentice training with a wizened, reluctant teacher in the mysterious, sometimes-frightening ways of The Force, just like in, well, Empire. However, I feel Jedi distinguishes itself both from the often derivative elements of Force Awakens by telling a more subversive, surprising story, one that's less reliant on pure nostalgia, and distinguishes itself from the overall Star Wars saga through its greater sense of moral ambiguity, especially through its demythologization of the titular "last Jedi" himself, Luke Skywalker.


When Rey (and we) first see him, Luke is a weary, grey-bearded, grizzled old man, living as a hermit in the ruins of an ancient Jedi temple (which just so happens to be in the middle of space-nowhere), his only company being the local wildlife, and the giant toad-nuns aliens that maintain what's left of the structures there. He is a far cry from the beaming, triumphant hero of the original trilogy, and when Rey approaches him in the hopes of being trained as the first of a new generation of Jedi, Luke just tells her to leave the planet immediately. And, while such reluctance is somewhat to be expected, as it would be narratively dull if Luke just immediately acquiesced to every one of Rey's wishes, I still didn't expect him to be as defeated and downtrodden as he turned out here, since, even after he agrees to teach Rey, he only does it to try to show her why the Jedi must die as a way of life, which, combined with a rather unexpected revelation that arises from his past here, really surprised (and pleased) me, with just how dark Rion was willing to go with his arc.


It's a daring spin on a classic, iconic hero, one that somewhat split the Star Wars fanbase, but one that I appreciate for its unwillingness to coddle us as viewers, and besides that, Rion Johnson continues the trend of Force Awakens in making The Force itself a more mysterious and ethereal, well, force, than the disappointingly literal treatment Lucas gave it in the Prequels, through a series of intriguing psychic conversations that occur between two certain characters here, as well as actually making The Force seem more accessible to the random "nobodies" of the galaxy, as you'll see, and that's all the detail I'll go into on those points, lest I spoil the film even further for you.


Outside of the Force-related shenanigans here, the film's other main plot thread of the scant remnants of The New Republic in constant pursuit by The New Order, their numbers steadily dwindling as the film goes on, is, for the most part, tense, desperate, and above all exciting, with some of the better scenes of combat seen in any Star Wars to date, with a certain subplot involving a new, seemingly cowardly Rebel Admiral taking an unexpected turn, further reenforcing the film's overall ambiguity when it comes to its various characterizations. I mean, don't get me wrong or anything, as The Last Jedi is hardly a perfect film; it's overlong by at least 15 minutes, with one too many climactic battles, some of its comedic relief moments feel a bit forced and unnecessary, and its story doesn't always unfold as smoothly, as it should've, with a particular side-story during the middle act that could've easily been altered, or better yet, erased from the film entirely. However, all that being said, this still a very rousing, borderline mythic piece of pop-storytelling, a vital new continuation of what is surely the defining film series of all time, and a work that left me more hopeful than I had been in a long time for the future of the franchise, if Disney can ever get it back on track again as much as it did with this one; may The Force be with it, indeed.



Final Score: 8.25

[DFA1979]

The Sabata theme is one of the finest in all spaghetti western not by Morricone. In what seems like milennia ago I showed it to some friends and they played it with their band for years.


https://youtu.be/TyI8vOsjF60
https://youtu.be/TyI8vOsjF60

Yes that score was pretty sweet. I forgot to look up who did it, yet props to them all the same.

[StanleyK]

The Friends of Eddie Coyle is so good. I'm surprised it doesn't enjoy a greater reputation as one of the best crime movies of the 70s.

[baby doll]

The Friends of Eddie Coyle is so good. I'm surprised it doesn't enjoy a greater reputation as one of the best crime movies of the 70s.I've been sort of passively avoiding this ever since I read the novel--which is brilliant--because, even though it's obvious how it could be turned into a play or a movie (the book is virtually all dialogue), I doubt the novel's special qualities would survive the translation (in the book, the reader often has to infer from context who's speaking).

[DFA1979]

The Friends of Eddie Coyle is so good. I'm surprised it doesn't enjoy a greater reputation as one of the best crime movies of the 70s.

I liked that one a lot. Robert Mitchum is fantastic as usual.

[Yxklyx]

Has anyone else watched La Flor - Criterion has it for the rest of the month. Even if you don't want to commit to umpteen hours, I highly recommend Part I just on its own.

[DFA1979]

Into The Night-Good cast, subpar movie. This should have been funnier or more entertaining. Some parts work, others fall really flat. Goldblum and Pfeiffer have good chemistry, at least.

Remo Williams coasts on Fred Ward being very charming and likable. Goofy movie, why they had Joel Grey play an Asian man is both confusing and awful. This could have been a fun series but the movie bombed. Both viewed on Tubi.

I'm also watching Stormy Monday which is mostly all style, no substance yet the cast rocks and the style is glorious. I mean you have Tommy Lee Jones standing in front of an American flag. How much more wonderfully obvious can a movie get? Ah the 1980s. Thanks to Arrow Video, which I love dearly.

[megladon8]

Watched Boss Level last night.

What a weird movie.

Will post more later.

[Grouchy]

Has anyone else watched La Flor - Criterion has it for the rest of the month. Even if you don't want to commit to umpteen hours, I highly recommend Part I just on its own.
I still have it pending. I loved Historias Extraordinarias but, well, you know... this one is 14 hours long.

Regardless, Llinás is a really unique talent. Best teacher I had at film school. He's a huge genre fan.

[Peng]

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)

[first time Extended Edition]

I'd always wanted to watch the Extended Editions of these films for a long time, but feel like I should tackle the book boxset gifted to me over a decade ago first. Now that I reread The Hobbit and watched the Maple Edit of its three films last month, I finally figured it's time.

Still the best of three for me (though Return of the King now comes closer), and if anything this time I loved it even more with this Extended Edition, because it expands on what makes this film an instant favorite even on first watch: that sense of a whole new world vividly blooming before your eyes, fully formed. Like the book (of which this is surprisingly a faithful adaptation, right down to even some iconic imagery and lines), the film is, paradoxically and powerfully, an epic of both straight-through focus and expansive, majestic awe.

Watching it, I cannot tell from memory where the additional material begins and ends. It's just that seamless and helps add to the introduction of Middle-earth, which is crucial for this part; spending more time in the Shire establishes an even firmer feeling of fleeting idyll, in which the haunting specter of the Hobbits potentially losing the place packs enormous punch throughout, almost without the film referencing back to it.

And this might be the most cathartic, full-hearted, and gorgeously emotional cliffhanger ending ever in filmdom. The canny adaptation choice of moving incidents around (especially the first chapter of the next book) to have several threads concluding together makes for a most satisfying story pause, as weird as that may sound. Howard Shore and Sean Bean/Astin delivering emotional knock-outs in succession help tremendously, of course. By the time Frodo and Sam embraces after the latter almost drowns, and the camera cuts to a wide shot of them on a small boat in a vast river as "The Breaking of the Fellowship" swells, all the seemingly counterintuitive combining of big-scale and intimate directorial choices is just stirring in the extreme, and the scene exemplifies what Peter Jackson has accomplished in this film as a whole as well: he has created an epic of scope that you feel deeply, intuitively in your gut. 10/10


https://i.makeagif.com/media/5-04-2018/quq__v.gif

[Yxklyx]

I still have it pending. I loved Historias Extraordinarias but, well, you know... this one is 14 hours long.

Regardless, Llinás is a really unique talent. Best teacher I had at film school. He's a huge genre fan.

Finished it - including the 40m credits sequence - ha ha! As a complete thing I'd rate it a 6/10 but Part 1 (eps 1 & 2) would be a 9/10, episode 3 (the original Part 2) would be a 7/10, the original Part 3 probably just be a 4 or 5 out of 10.

[Irish]

Meanwhile...

The Tribeca Film Festival sold itself to ... the Murdoch family? in 2019?! WTF?

https://www.showbiz411.com/2019/08/05/sell-out-and-sell-off-for-deniro-as-murdoch-family-becomes-tribeca-film-festivals-main-investor-under-post-fox-lupa-fund

^ Informative, sorta, with a weird side of editorial, because I can't image being such a rube that anyone would post this:


So yes, we all lose our naivete on this one. The good guys have sold out to the bad guys. James Murdoch is trying to legitimize his family’s horrible history, and their ongoing mayhem at Fox News. Now they’ve taken control of Tribeca. DeNiro et al went for the money. The ideology didn’t matter.

Ya mean a bunch multi-millionaires went for the money, personal values be damned? I'm shocked. Shocked.

[DFA1979]

That might be worse than Amazon buying up MGM.

[DFA1979]

So I decided to watch The Avengers (1998) last night on Tubi. It wasn't as bad as I expected. Nope, it was worse than I could have imagined. This movie takes a good solid cast and makes them do a bunch of stupid things that would give anyone with a functioning brain a headache. The following occurs:

Eddie Izzard is a henchman that receives zero lines even though he is one of the most gifted comedians in the world. Sean Connery at one point is dressed up in a bear costume because well, I guess the screenwriters though it was a good idea. That scene with people in giant furry bear suits actually happened. I watched the movie sober so I know it did, unfortunately.

There is a double of Uma Thurman because this movie has zero ideas. At one point the double attacks her dressed also in a bear suit. By that part I just assumed I was viewing a dark comedy. Ralph Fiennes and Thurman get attacked by drone bees that is one of the most awful examples of 90s CGI I have ever seen.

None of the fights or car chases are good. They bored the hell out of me. This movie is sadly not even the worst film I have seen from 1998, which is surprising and weird. I guess I have seen so many good or great 1998 movies that the flip side of it is that I have also viewed a good number of awful ones, too.

[DFA1979]

One final note is that The Avengers was directed by the same guy who gave us the much better films Christmas Vacation and Tall Tale. I saw both of them in theaters. Make of that what you will, I guess.

[DFA1979]

Current Top 10 for 1998:

1. The Big Lebowski
2. The Truman Show
3. Rushmore
4. Pleasantville
5. Saving Private Ryan
6. Perfect Blue
7. Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas
8. He Got Game
9. Bulworth
10. Ring/Ringu

Bottom 10:

1. Stepmom
2. Psycho
3. Deep Rising
4. Patch Adams
5. Godzilla
6. Armageddon
7. Lost In Space
8. The Avengers
9. Mafia!
10. Deep Impact

[Yxklyx]

1998 top ten (it was a really good year!)

Run Lola Run (Tom Tykwer) 10
Velvet Goldmine (Todd Haynes) 10
Fucking Åmål (Lukas Moodysson) 9
The Celebration (Thomas Vinterberg) 9
Happiness (Todd Solondz) 9
Pi (Darren Aronofsky) 9
Lovers of the Arctic Circle (Julio Medem) 9
42 Up (TV) (Michael Apted) 9
The Big Lebowski (Joel Coen & Ethan Coen) 9
Buffalo '66 (Vincent Gallo) 8

- not a single match anywhere, oh wait - ;)

[Skitch]

I love Pi.

[DFA1979]

I've also seen Pi. It's really good. Velvet Goldmine, Run Lola Run and Happiness are all ones I need to view.

[quido8_5]

Wow, 1998 certainly was a good year!

1) Rushmore
2) The Big Lebowski
3) Fucking Amal
4) The Celebration
5) Happiness*
6) The Truman Show
7) The Last Days of Disco
8) Fallen Angels
9) Little Dieter Needs to Fly
10) Saving Private Ryan

* I remember seeing this for the first time in 2002 and it just disassembling what I thought film could/should/should be able to depict. Solondz did something special with this one that I don't think he could ever top. Oh goodness, PSH.

[quido8_5]

Bottom 10:

5. Godzilla

I believe you must be mistaken.

[Skitch]

I hated Happiness.

[Philip J. Fry]

Shout out to The Prince of Egypt, Dark City and The Thin Red Line. 1998 was indeed awesome.

[Yxklyx]

I need to re-watch Fallen Angels - and maybe check out Rushmore again. Who has the latter on streaming?

My two favorite Wong Kar-Wai are Chungking Express and Days of Being Wild.

[Peng]

Oh yeah, pretty good year.

1. After Life
2. The Truman Show
3. Show Me Love (Fucking Amal)
4. The Celebration
5. The Thin Red Line
6. Saving Private Ryan
7. Out of Sight
8. Dark City
9. Christmas in August
10. Eternity and a Day

[megladon8]

Deep Rising is easily in my top 5 of 1998. DFA1979 you so crazy.

[baby doll]

1998:
Alone. Life Wastes Andy Hardy (Martin Arnold)
The Apple (Samira Makhmalbaf)
The Big Lebowski (Ethan and Joel Coen)
Eternity and a Day (Theo Angelopoulos)
Flowers of Shanghai (Hou Hsiao-hsien)
The Hole (Tsai Ming-liang)
Histoire(s) du cinéma (Jean-Luc Godard)
New Rose Hotel (Abel Ferrara)
Rushmore (Wes Anderson)
The Thin Red Line (Terrence Malick)

[quido8_5]

I hated Happiness.

There's a lot to hate. It's one of the most disturbing films I've ever seen, which cuts both ways. The feelings of disgust are palpable and any film that can elicit that emotion so strongly, while still making something watchable and even funny, is something special.

[Peng]

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)

[first time Extended Edition]

Have always found this, though still great, my least favorite of the trilogy, and both reading the book and watching the extended edition help clarify things up. Same as in the book, the splitting of core characters poses some structural problems, without yet the sprawl (that some find too much) to counter and give it weight like in Return of the King. This might be a highly My Problem thing, as indeed the Helm's Deep sequence remains a masterpiece of staging big-scale war on film, but I may have, sacrilegiously and against good sense, slightly preferred the next film's Battle of Pelennor Fields over it, as that one's "sprawl" has more emotional layer to support the fighting to be even more involving. To be fair, that one has no imagery as stirring as Gandalf here leading Eomer's army down to the rescue.

Also, restructuring the book makes sense to have this one be manageable film-wise, but I think removing both tail ends of the book's two halves hinder the overall impact a bit. I understand how cleaving it to down to story and thematic focuses appeals and makes this one many's favorite. But it feels lumpy, and even a tad strained in trying to have all the separate parts dovetail into their own catharsis at the same time by the end (like Sam's speech, as tremendously as Sean Astin delivers it). Shortening the Mordor trekking part, especially, has that half be almost too thin if not for Andy Serkis' Gollum, still a most fantastic marriage of rich on-the-page characterization, filmic innovation, and just plain great acting. I also feel the Men part here improves on the book, which starts to veer more towards mythic and larger-than-life language, by investing more human dimensions to it, like tracking two kids torn from family by war, or a father grieving for his fallen son. 9/10

https://64.media.tumblr.com/c608eb6d45ea17b1ac28365e8ab874 cf/tumblr_n8uhf1TXVx1s5qyvoo6_250 .gif

[Stay Puft]

1998:
1. After Life (Hirokazu Kore-eda)
2. Flowers of Shanghai (Hou Hsiao-hsien)
3. The Thin Red Line (Terrence Malick)
4. Khrustalyov, My Car! (Aleksei German)
5. The Hole (Tsai Ming-liang)
6. The Emperor and the Assassin (Chen Kaige)
7. Knock Off (Tsui Hark)
8. Who Am I? (Benny Chan & Jackie Chan)
9. Secret Defense (Jacques Rivette)
10. Show Me Love (Lukas Moodysson)

[Skitch]

Who Am I? has one of the greatest fights ever.

[Stay Puft]

Yeah it's not really one of the "classic" Jackie Chan films overall but the rooftop sequence is one of the best of his career. I've watched it alone countless times, studied the behind-the-scenes footage, etc. The choreography is brilliant and there are so many various filmmaking tricks on display that it provides a real masterclass in action filmmaking, as much as anything in Police Story (albeit on a smaller scale). It blew my mind when I discovered they had a prop leg for the kickboxer in one shot; those kind of simple solutions to on-set problems are amazing haha.

[StuSmallz]

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)

[first time Extended Edition]

Have always found this, though still great, my least favorite of the trilogy, and both reading the book and watching the extended edition help clarify things up. Same as in the book, the splitting of core characters poses some structural problems, without yet the sprawl (that some find too much) to counter and give it weight like in Return of the King. This might be a highly My Problem thing, as indeed the Helm's Deep sequence remains a masterpiece of staging big-scale war on film, but I may have, sacrilegiously and against good sense, slightly preferred the next film's Battle of Pelennor Fields over it, as that one's "sprawl" has more emotional layer to support the fighting to be even more involving. To be fair, that one has no imagery as stirring as Gandalf here leading Eomer's army down to the rescue.

Also, restructuring the book makes sense to have this one be manageable film-wise, but I think removing both tail ends of the book's two halves hinder the overall impact a bit. I understand how cleaving it to down to story and thematic focuses appeals and makes this one many's favorite. But it feels lumpy, and even a tad strained in trying to have all the separate parts dovetail into their own catharsis at the same time by the end (like Sam's speech, as tremendously as Sean Astin delivers it). Shortening the Mordor trekking part, especially, has that half be almost too thin if not for Andy Serkis' Gollum, still a most fantastic marriage of rich on-the-page characterization, filmic innovation, and just plain great acting. I also feel the Men part here improves on the book, which starts to veer more towards mythic and larger-than-life language, by investing more human dimensions to it, like tracking two kids torn from family by war, or a father grieving for his fallen son. 9/10

https://64.media.tumblr.com/c608eb6d45ea17b1ac28365e8ab874 cf/tumblr_n8uhf1TXVx1s5qyvoo6_250 .gifI've always had a soft spot in my heart for Two Towers, Too Furious, since, as the middle chapter of the trilogy, it could hit the ground running, without having to worry so much early on about establishing the world of Middle Earth as best it could for the Tolkien virgins amongst casual theatergoers (like Fellowship had to), or take so much time towards the ends to wrap everything up in a big, triumphant ending like Return, which makes it feel like the shortest, most streamlined Rings as a result. Its darker overall tone definitely gives me those echoes of Empire Strikes Back (which is always a good thing), and I like it slightly more than FotR, and actually about as much as RotK for that matter. Plus, Helm's Deep is my favorite battle scene of the entire trilogy:


https://youtu.be/tn2-PUq1Z84

In fact, I think I'll re-post my old review of it now just for fun...

[StuSmallz]

https://i.ibb.co/PQxWjmY/maxresdefault.jpg (https://ibb.co/Kw6sh0G)

​A new power is rising.



Lord Of The Rings:
The Two Towers can hardly be called a "sequel" in the traditional Hollywood sense of the term, as it's obviously the middle part of the same story that Fellowship began, but however you label it, I feel that TTT is one of the best examples of IT around... whatever "it" may be. Ahem. Anyway, part of the film's success is due to its status as a middle chapter, leaving it free to explore its part of the saga's story without worrying about the heavy weight of world-introduction that weighed down its predecessor at times, or the occasionally redundant post-victory wrapup of Return Of The King. Granted, Towers does drag ever so slightly during its midsection, but considering its three hour length, necessary in order for Peter Jackson to adapt Tolkien's rich, epic mythology (with enough still left over to create an Extended Edition), I can easily overlook that in light of all the great fantasy entertainment we get in return, and even viewed on a ten inch tablet screen, TTT is still one of the most epic things I've ever had the pleasure of watching.


In Towers, as the now-fractured fellowship journeys ever closer to the dark land of Mordor, the battle for Middle Earth officially becomes an all-out WAR, with an even larger scale and action setpieces to match, introducing us to new lands as they are inevitably sucked into The War Of The Ring. However, PJ refuses to allow the scope of the film to swallow up its personal element, or resort to relying on stock fantasy roles, as all the new characters here are fully fleshed-out individuals with their own unique problems and desires, and, as the new characters come into the story, Jackson doesn't forget to continue the arcs for the old players, in a natural, compelling manner. The devil's in the details, and all the fantasy nonsense in the world wouldn't be worth anything if we didn't care about the characters caught in the middle, but we do, and although there's way too many of them to write about in detail, the multitude of smaller character moments included here ultimately keeps us engaged and invested in the larger struggle at hand.

But, as far as the epic fantasy aspects of TTT go, the movie certainly doesn't skimp on that either, expanding on the world & mythology of Middle Earth brilliantly, hinting at a tragic, deeper history for a certain former Hobbit, bringing an undiscovered army of walking, talking TREES into the fray, and resurrecting a previously thought-to-be deceased mentor from the dead in an unexpected twist. It's certainly a ton to unpack, but Jackson & company do so superbly, and tone-wise, Towers keeps things fresh by taking on a surprisingly violent war movie tint, as the armies of men and their allies fight to beat back the forces of Sauron that are devastating the land, climaxing in a stormy, chaotic, absolutely grueling battle at the fortress of Helm's Deep.

The Battle Of Helm's Deep is certainly a marathon, but never feels pointless or repetitive, and is extremely well-structured, as the overall progress of the clash is signified by easily identifiable turning points, which never get delayed amongst the chaos, and in all the epic battles in cinematic history, it's one of the biggest and certainly one of the best of them as well, only outdone (possibly) by one in the next installment of Rings.

In all of this, Towers is definitely a darker film than its predecessor, often quite literally so, with many scenes set at night, as cinematographer Andrew Lesnie providing some of the bluest, most striking nighttime footage I've witnessed since Terminator 2, which serve as a great contrast to the sweeping, daytime landscape shots, which make perfect use of the beautiful New Zealand scenery as Middle Earth, as Howard Shore's soaring, triumphant themes boom at us. Along with these literal rays of light, the thematic glimmers of hope in TTT are what help keep our heads up amongst all the crushing darkness, and give us that special rush of magic that only grand fantasy can provide. Installment, sequel, whatever you want to call this, the bottom line is, the battle for Middle-Earth begins right here; join, or die.


Final Score: 9

[Peng]

I've always had a soft spot in my heart for Two Towers, Too Furious, since, as the middle chapter of the trilogy, it could hit the ground running, without having to worry so much early on about establishing the world of Middle Earth as best it could for the Tolkien virgins amongst casual theatergoers (like Fellowship had to), or take so much time towards the ends to wrap everything up in a big, triumphant ending like Return, which makes it feel like the shortest, most streamlined Rings as a result. Its darker overall tone definitely gives me those echoes of Empire Strikes Back (which is always a good thing), and I like it slightly more than FotR, and actually about as much as RotK for that matter.

Interesting that you cited ROTK as your favorite (if I read that correctly), since I feel like it's either FOTR or TTT from what I've seen. Like among critics I follow, such as Scott Tobias, I've seen the latter being their choices a lot. It's ROTK that is left out, mostly because that one seems (at least from my viewpoint) like a lot of people's second favorite, including mine, lol.

[megladon8]

I love all three LOTR films dearly, but in my books Fellowship is in a completely different league than TTT or ROTK.

The ending battle in the forest is more exciting and emotionally charged than any of the more epic battles of the next two films.

And the deaths of Gandalf and Boromir are the strongest emotional beats of the entire trilogy. Both in the first film.

It also stands on its own, while the other two feel incomplete by themselves.

Fellowship is the perfect and definitive fantasy film of its ilk.

[DFA1979]

Deep Rising is easily in my top 5 of 1998. DFA1979 you so crazy.

It stinks!


I believe you must be mistaken.

Nah it sucks.

[Skitch]

You're alive!!

DAMN RIGHT I AM!!

Love Deep Rising.

[megladon8]

Yeah, genuinely dint understand the dislike of Deep Rising.

It's the only good thing Stephen Sommers has ever done.

[Skitch]

Treat Williams is a treasure.

[DFA1979]

Yeah, genuinely dint understand the dislike of Deep Rising.

It's the only good thing Stephen Sommers has ever done.

Wrong The Mummy and The Mummy Returns. Both superior.

[Grouchy]

Come on man, The Mummy is a classic.

Saw Almodóvar's The Human Voice. Loved it. It's a half hour short that functions as an elaborate acting reel for Tilda Swinton that manages to touch on a lot of topics that became crucial for a lot of people during quarantine (loneliness, longing, communication, mental health) yet it was conceived before COVID, based on a Jean Cocteau play. Almodóvar is on my top 5 living directors.

[megladon8]

The Mummy would be his second best, but it's not very good.

His obsession with having objectively terrible CGI in his movies is so weird.

It's like they did the CGI for the first Mummy movie then he said "perfect. I'm using this for the rest of my career."

[Skitch]

I feel like the first Mummy was pretty damn CGI for its day. Dated now, sure, but back then...

[Philip J. Fry]

I feel like the first Mummy was pretty damn CGI for its day. Dated now, sure, but back then...Yeah. In general, it holds up well.

[megladon8]

I feel like the first Mummy was pretty damn CGI for its day. Dated now, sure, but back then...

Yes for 1999 sure.

But when Van Helsing in 2004 had the same level, then G.I. Joe after that...

[Philip J. Fry]

Nah, Van Helsing's were way worse.

[megladon8]

Every 5 years or so I get a morbid curiosity to try Van Helsing again.

It has so many ingredients that make it seem like I should love it.

But man...that movie sucks.

[DFA1979]

Nah, Van Helsing's were way worse.

I never saw that one. It looked so bad.

[megladon8]

Universal monsters? Check.
Gothic period horror? Check.
Full endorsement by Universal to have the film be considered canon? Check.
Hugh Jackman? Check.

Yet it's still an embarrassing affair.

[Philip J. Fry]

I never saw that one. It looked so bad.
It was.

[Skitch]

I still have fun/comedic time with it.

[Grouchy]

Yeah, Van Helsing is just way too dumb. But The Mummy has a damn good screenplay and tone. Returns I would say is bad, but it does have the Anubis army.

[Peng]

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)

[first time Extended Edition]

Even though my ten-point rating remains the same (9.5), I bumped up half a star to full five (on letterboxd scale) with this rewatch, because it's either the one most benefited from having read the book, or the extended edition does wonder here (or most likely, both). The sprawl just totally works for me, grounded by the emotional depth of Tolkien's text and Jackson's directorial control.

Jackson's horror sensibility has always informed many small moments throughout the trilogy (especially the creature effect and gore), but none more sustained than this one's disquieting opening, a sunny idyll that gets intruded on by murder in a way that recalls his own Heavenly Creatures. This small yet horrific incident shrewdly sets up the stage and casts a shadow over the whole proceeding to come; no matter how gigantic things get, the ring and its effect will always be on the characters' and audience's mind.

This entry has so many indelible moments/sequences throughout, one after another. The imagery around Mount Doom, in close view with Sauron's tower, is just staggering, full of paintery sights that conveys the mythic grandeur of this sinister force so grandly. I happened to start the film around the coming of a rain storm, and the big lightning striking when Sam enters Mount Doom couldn't be more properly timed and and evocatively atmospheric. Speaking of, I adore Sean Astin's performance in this; for this role he may have one of the most wrenchingly, earnestly emotional faces I've seen.

About those "endless" endings that have been mentioned since release, people may have to be more specific about which ones, because I might have been on the verge of or in tears through every one of them. They all color the film's sweet celebration with a hefty dose of bitter realism, thus feeling crucial in tracing the corrosive, far-reaching effect of near-death trauma and war. ("There are some things that time cannot mend") For all the spectacle on display, one of the most lingering images I'll remember from this film will be Frodo stepping on the Grey Havens boat and, when turned to his friends, his face lightening up in full, now able to shrug off any dark shadow that had persisted even after Sauron's defeat at last. 9.5/10


https://i.pinimg.com/originals/bb/33/ef/bb33ef34156147fdf8a864e69bfd07 2c.gif

[DFA1979]

I remember staying for the credits and being sad that the trilogy was over. So glad I saw all of the LOTRs movies on the big screen.

[StuSmallz]

Interesting that you cited ROTK as your favorite (if I read that correctly), since I feel like it's either FOTR or TTT from what I've seen. Like among critics I follow, such as Scott Tobias, I've seen the latter being their choices a lot. It's ROTK that is left out, mostly because that one seems (at least from my viewpoint) like a lot of people's second favorite, including mine, lol.Nah, I like Towers & Return both about the same as each other; yes, the latter is obviously the big, epic, emotional climax of the whole she-bangabang, but the former is the easiest watch, and the most rewatchable as a result, since it feels the shortest. Although, if we're being objective here about which LOTR is the best-regarded in general, Return is at least a couple of points higher than the other films amongst RT critics, so that kind of settles that question if you look at it from that metric.
I love all three LOTR films dearly, but in my books Fellowship is in a completely different league than TTT or ROTK.

The ending battle in the forest is more exciting and emotionally charged than any of the more epic battles of the next two films.

And the deaths of Gandalf and Boromir are the strongest emotional beats of the entire trilogy. Both in the first film.

It also stands on its own, while the other two feel incomplete by themselves.

Fellowship is the perfect and definitive fantasy film of its ilk.I love Fellowship, but I don't know about it feeling more complete than the others, since Aragon's line "Let's hunt some orc!" pretty clearly feels like sequel-bait for the next installments, if you ask me. Still a great movie anyway, though.

[megladon8]

I was pretty disappointed with You Were Never Really Here.

Phoenix is wonderful in it, but the whole film felt...half baked? Under realized?

I was expecting something horrifically ultra violent, which it definitely wasn't. What was with all the press for this film making it sound so shocking and brutal? It wasn't that at all. Not a knock against it, obviously, but what a weird advertising campaign there was for this, now that I've seen it.

It all just felt very empty, and by the end credits I wasn't really sure what the point of it all was.

[Ezee E]

I was pretty disappointed with You Were Never Really Here.

Phoenix is wonderful in it, but the whole film felt...half baked? Under realized?

I was expecting something horrifically ultra violent, which it definitely wasn't. What was with all the press for this film making it sound so shocking and brutal? It wasn't that at all. Not a knock against it, obviously, but what a weird advertising campaign there was for this, now that I've seen it.

It all just felt very empty, and by the end credits I wasn't really sure what the point of it all was.

Same really. I know some people loved it and I couldn't really imagine why except that it definitely had an arthouse feel to it.

[megladon8]

I love a good arthouse.

I just wish it had been more Oldboy and less Taxi Driver Lite.

[baby doll]

I was impressed by Ramsay's style, especially her unsettling juxtapositions of sound and image.

[megladon8]

Her style was nice at times, for sure. The odd score by Jonny Greenwood accentuates the juxtaposition you mention.

But the whole thing just left me feeling...nothing? Whereas I very much got the impression I was supposed to feel quite deeply.

[Skitch]

I didn't get much out of it either. Some of the scenes were well shot, but I agree, plot was undercooked.

[baby doll]

Her style was nice at times, for sure. The odd score by Jonny Greenwood accentuates the juxtaposition you mention.

But the whole thing just left me feeling...nothing? Whereas I very much got the impression I was supposed to feel quite deeply.What I felt mainly was a sense of unease and dread, as if the main character could explode at any moment.

[Grouchy]

I agree. It's a beautiful film technically, but I've never recalled it as a great experience.

Whereas something like We have to talk about Kevin is unforgettable.

[transmogrifier]

From Letterboxd:


74/100

I was not a fan of Ramsey's Ratcatcher, whose mix of high misery and high art came across as alternately precious and dull; as a result, I avoided everything she did after that. But, given that I think Phoenix is the best actor of his generation, I decided to bite the bullet and give Ramsey another shot...

And I've glad I did, because this is a fantastic collision of genre pulp nonsense and a directorial vision that eschews genre pulp nonsense, creating the fever dream of a man who was once committed to helping others the institutional way (army, police) but found that it wasn't enough; darkness always finds a way, and the only choice left is to turn it against itself and commit. Joe commits; it's a lumbering, unemotional commitment, but he does what is necessary to redirect the blackness away from innocents and towards the more deserving.

I've seen some criticize the fact that Nina has no life of her own as a character, but that is the point - the entire film is from Joe's point of view - we do not see any scene between other characters that Joe does not see or hear or hallucinate. Nina is not a character to him. She is a mission, a reminder of what he has committed to doing.

Ramsey keeps things ragged and jagged, as we tumble through Joe's mind. At times, it becomes a little redundant (the flashbacks to Joe as a kid starts to wear after a while...) but she keeps finding indelible images and connections and jarring editing points to keep us firmly stuck in Joe's perspective.

I watched this three years ago and do not remember any details of it. I will not be taking any more questions at this time.

[Skitch]

From Letterboxd:



I watched this three years ago and do not remember any details of it. I will not be taking any more questions at this time.
Imo that's the most damning criticism a movie can get. I have more respect for a movie that is bad but memorable than one that's mediocre and instantly forgotten.

[transmogrifier]

Imo that's the most damning criticism a movie can get. I have more respect for a movie that is bad but memorable than one that's mediocre and instantly forgotten.

In this case, it is a damning criticism of my brain. It is like that for every single movie I ever watch. I will never, ever remember the details of any movie 3 years later - unless I was involved in massive discussions about it at the time where the details get cemented in my long-term memory.

[StuSmallz]

I was pretty disappointed with You Were Never Really Here.

Phoenix is wonderful in it, but the whole film felt...half baked? Under realized?

I was expecting something horrifically ultra violent, which it definitely wasn't. What was with all the press for this film making it sound so shocking and brutal? It wasn't that at all. Not a knock against it, obviously, but what a weird advertising campaign there was for this, now that I've seen it.

It all just felt very empty, and by the end credits I wasn't really sure what the point of it all was.I felt similarly about YWNRH; it was a pretty good Psychological Thriller that could've, should've been a great one instead, and, despite containing a couple of striking individual moments (like when Joe held hands with one of the hitmen as he lay dying on the floor), the overall aesthetic still wasn't as immersive as it should've been, which made the somewhat boilerplate story stick out more, which, at the risk of hyperbole, made it feel less like a grittier version of Drive (http://https://letterboxd.com/stusmallz/film/drive-2011/), and a bit more like an "arthouse" Steven Seagal movie than it should've.

/hottake

[baby doll]

the overall aesthetic still wasn't as immersive as it should've beenPutting aside that people have only started using "immersiveness" as a criterion of value in the last twenty years or so since The Lord of the Rings came out, the whole concept strikes me as fundamentally anti-aesthetic, the idea being that eventually digital photography will achieve such high resolution and three-dimensionality that it will be indistinguishable from real life. But even if that were possible (and I doubt that it is), it doesn't strike me as very desirable. When I watch The Apu Trilogy I don't feel as if I've been transported to West Bengal (for one thing it's in black and white), but I don't think that makes Satyajit Ray a lesser filmmaker than Peter Jackson. Maybe this is a quaint idea but I think movies should be movies and not real life. And in the case of Ramsay's film, I see little evidence that it was her intention to make an immersive film. The whole point of cutting to security camera footage at one point is to distance the spectator from the protagonist.

[DFA1979]

I thought You Were Never Really Here was great. Maybe that's my kind of film I guess.

[Grouchy]

Putting aside that people have only started using "immersiveness" as a criterion of value in the last twenty years or so since The Lord of the Rings came out, the whole concept strikes me as fundamentally anti-aesthetic, the idea being that eventually digital photography will achieve such high resolution and three-dimensionality that it will be indistinguishable from real life. But even if that were possible (and I doubt that it is), it doesn't strike me as very desirable. When I watch The Apu Trilogy I don't feel as if I've been transported to West Bengal (for one thing it's in black and white), but I don't think that makes Satyajit Ray a lesser filmmaker than Peter Jackson. Maybe this is a quaint idea but I think movies should be movies and not real life. And in the case of Ramsay's film, I see little evidence that it was her intention to make an immersive film. The whole point of cutting to security camera footage at one point is to distance the spectator from the protagonist.
I rewatched Drive the other day. That's a good example of a non-immersive film. It goes all out for aesthetic distancing.

[DFA1979]

Drive is probably my favorite movie of the 2010s.

[Skitch]

Drive is awesome.

[Philip J. Fry]

Dat elevator scene.

[Skitch]

Dat elevator scene.

Sooooo brilliant. So much is revealed without a word.

[Philip J. Fry]

Sooooo brilliant. So much is revealed without a word.
Yup.

[quido8_5]

Maybe this is a quaint idea but I think movies should be movies and not real life. And in the case of Ramsay's film, I see little evidence that it was her intention to make an immersive film. The whole point of cutting to security camera footage at one point is to distance the spectator from the protagonist.

I'm probably misinterpreting what you wrote, but I don't think films should be anything-- that's what makes it an exciting and unique medium. FWIW, I find the Apu trilogy immersive even if it is in black and white (?). It may be lacking some vibrant colors, but that doesn't mean it lacks vibrancy. A little perplexed by this comparison.

[DFA1979]

The elevator scene rules. As does the opening scene. And the hotel ambush sequence. That's the short list, really cause I could think of five more at least.

[baby doll]

I'm probably misinterpreting what you wrote, but I don't think films should be anything-- that's what makes it an exciting and unique medium. FWIW, I find the Apu trilogy immersive even if it is in black and white (?). It may be lacking some vibrant colors, but that doesn't mean it lacks vibrancy. A little perplexed by this comparison.I don't think I'm being overly prescriptive in suggesting that movies should be movies since, after all, they very well can't be anything else. Hence, to claim that a given movie is "immersive" is absurd: if people were so immersed in The Lord of the Rings films that they mistook the images on the screen for reality, they would run for their lives during the battle scenes instead of remaining in the theatre. In other words, the spectator is always conscious of looking at a movie (unless they're very stupid, insane, or on drugs), and at the risk of sounding prescriptive, that's as it should be. As I've said elsewhere on this forum, cinema is always heightened in relation to natural perception or else one wouldn't perceive it as aesthetic in the first place. Praising a film as "immersive" (or criticizing it for being insufficiently so) misrepresents the experience of watching a movie by denying aesthetic perception.

[quido8_5]

I don't think I'm being overly prescriptive in suggesting that movies should be movies since, after all, they very well can't be anything else. Hence, to claim that a given movie is "immersive" is absurd: if people were so immersed in The Lord of the Rings films that they mistook the images on the screen for reality, they would run for their lives during the battle scenes instead of remaining in the theatre. In other words, the spectator is always conscious of looking at a movie (unless they're very stupid, insane, or on drugs), and at the risk of sounding prescriptive, that's as it should be. As I've said elsewhere on this forum, cinema is always heightened in relation to natural perception or else one wouldn't perceive it as aesthetic in the first place. Praising a film as "immersive" (or criticizing it for being insufficiently so) misrepresents the experience of watching a movie by denying aesthetic perception.

This kind of reductive view of the form and the audience is rampant in academia. You speak of being "conscious" of what they're looking at when no one even knows what consciousness is (although, I will say that one of the most prominent models of consciousness would disagree with your characterization: https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198735410.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780198735410-e-1). Moreover, you treat the audience with disdain, call them crazy if they become invested in the world of a film. How about you try enjoying a film and becoming immersed in it? I assure you it's possible.

[Grouchy]

I love Drive as well, it's a masterpiece. I only meant to point out that it's an aesthetic punch and not so much an immersive one - although the chase sequences are tight.

[quido8_5]

Dat elevator scene.

I went to the bathroom during this scene. :-(

[baby doll]

This kind of reductive view of the form and the audience is rampant in academia. You speak of being "conscious" of what they're looking at when no one even knows what consciousness is (although, I will say that one of the most prominent models of consciousness would disagree with your characterization: https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198735410.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780198735410-e-1). Moreover, you treat the audience with disdain, call them crazy if they become invested in the world of a film. How about you try enjoying a film and becoming immersed in it? I assure you it's possible.That an idea is pervasive in academia is not necessarily evidence the idea is false. As it happens, in this case, something close to the opposite idea--namely, that the film spectator is mentally passive and mistakes filmic representation for reality--was the dominant hypothesis in film studies during the heyday of apparatus theory in the 1970s and still resurfaces from time to time as a justification for self-reflexive modernism in the cinema (see, for instance, Kate Mondloch's book Screens: Viewing Media Installation Art). Surely it is more reductive, and more disdainful of the audience, to assume that they mistake films for reality than it is to assume that they are mentally active and critical. Moreover, the former hypothesis is demonstrably false: one doesn't need a fully developed theory of consciousness to observe that audiences do not behave as if they believed that the images they see on the screen are real. Even people who shout at characters in horror movies to get out of the house don't expect the characters to listen to them. Nor is there any reason to assume that "immersion," defined as mistaking filmic representation for reality, is a necessary precondition to enjoying a film. I still enjoy watching Goodfellas even though Scorsese's repeated use of freeze frames and disembodied voice-overs (which don't exist in real life) should disabuse me of any illusion that I'm looking at anything but a movie.

[Philip J. Fry]

I went to the bathroom during this scene. :-(Curse them sphincters!

[Grouchy]

Goodfellas is actually a perfect example of the rare film that manages to be completely "immersive" (I take that as being that elusive quality that makes you react to characters as if they were real people and not think about the fact that you're watching a film) and keep a strong style at the same time. I think this is because it completely owns the first person narrative - we're watching a confession unfold.

[quido8_5]

That an idea is pervasive in academia is not necessarily evidence the idea is false.

That is not what I was saying. Rather, I was saying that academics are committed to the idea that their idea is not false and that they understand a more objective truth about cinema; however, art is inherently subjective, hence my point about consciousness.


As it happens, in this case, something close to the opposite idea--namely, that the film spectator is mentally passive and mistakes filmic representation for reality--was the dominant hypothesis in film studies during the heyday of apparatus theory in the 1970s and still resurfaces from time to time as a justification for self-reflexive modernism in the cinema (see, for instance, Kate Mondloch's book Screens: Viewing Media Installation Art).

Thanks professor!


Surely it is more reductive, and more disdainful of the audience, to assume that they mistake films for reality than it is to assume that they are mentally active and critical. Moreover, the former hypothesis is demonstrably false: one doesn't need a fully developed theory of consciousness to observe that audiences do not behave as if they believed that the images they see on the screen are real.

Once again, not what I said. Of course viewers are active and critical. I’m not sure if you looked at the link I posted, but the theory of consciousness is that it is an enacted experience that requires a reciprocal, dynamic relationship between what is being perceived and the percipient. It is dynamic and gives more credit to the viewer, and the medium, to recognize this. An explanation of the viewing experience as merely screen and viewer is overly simplistic and, without a more nuanced discussion of what’s going on, it can quickly lead to ideas like film can’t be immersive.
What I was referring to as disdainful is that you describe anyone who may become so involved with a film that they do, in fact, forget they’re watching a screen as “stupid, insane, or on drugs.” I find the first two terms highly offensive, but regardless: people often have panic attacks while watching films, there’s the famous example of someone having a seizure at Pulp Fiction’s premiere. Nothing insane or stupid about that, just someone being so immersed that their perception had a physical effect on their body.


Even people who shout at characters in horror movies to get out of the house don't expect the characters to listen to them. Nor is there any reason to assume that "immersion," defined as mistaking filmic representation for reality, is a necessary precondition to enjoying a film. I still enjoy watching Goodfellas even though Scorsese's repeated use of freeze frames and disembodied voice-overs (which don't exist in real life) should disabuse me of any illusion that I'm looking at anything but a movie.

I think a large part of this argument, aside from being epistemologically divergent, is the definition of immersion. Immerse comes from the Latin “to plunge into, sink, submerge.” For you, the freeze frames and disembodied voice-overs disabuse you of any “illusion” that you’re not doing anything other than watching a gangster movie, a stylized telling of Henry Hill’s life. For me, those same techniques offer an enhanced view into the subjective reality of the character, the place, and the time.

[baby doll]

That is not what I was saying. Rather, I was saying that academics are committed to the idea that their idea is not false and that they understand a more objective truth about cinema; however, art is inherently subjective, hence my point about consciousness.Not everything is subjective. If someone claims either that audiences mistake filmic representation for real life, or that they remain cognizant of the fact of looking at a movie, they're making a factual claim about the mental activity of spectators rather than just expressing an opinion.


Once again, not what I said. Of course viewers are active and critical. I’m not sure if you looked at the link I posted, but the theory of consciousness is that it is an enacted experience that requires a reciprocal, dynamic relationship between what is being perceived and the percipient. It is dynamic and gives more credit to the viewer, and the medium, to recognize this. An explanation of the viewing experience as merely screen and viewer is overly simplistic and, without a more nuanced discussion of what’s going on, it can quickly lead to ideas like film can’t be immersive.
What I was referring to as disdainful is that you describe anyone who may become so involved with a film that they do, in fact, forget they’re watching a screen as “stupid, insane, or on drugs.” I find the first two terms highly offensive, but regardless: people often have panic attacks while watching films, there’s the famous example of someone having a seizure at Pulp Fiction’s premiere. Nothing insane or stupid about that, just someone being so immersed that their perception had a physical effect on their body.I hadn't heard of anyone having a seizure while watching Pulp Fiction, but I'm not sure what that proves. Having a rare medical condition that causes one to have an adverse reaction to certain kinds of visual stimuli is rather different than confusing a filmic representation for the thing being represented. The former is a physiological, bottom-up reaction to unprocessed visual stimuli, whereas the latter, if it ever happens, involves top-down mental processing. (For one thing, in order to forget that one is watching a film, your brain would need to override all the visual cues indicating that the screen is a flat surface, such as the fact that you can't see around a character in a film by changing your viewing position.)

As for people having panic attacks and other extreme emotional responses to films, the fact that films sometimes have a physical effect on the spectator's body does not prove that the person experiencing the film confuses what is represented in the film for the thing itself. As I said earlier, Ramsay's film provoked in me a feeling of unease and dread (as much through its style as through its narrative), yet even while responding affectively to the film, I never forgot that I was in a theatre watching a film.


I think a large part of this argument, aside from being epistemologically divergent, is the definition of immersion. Immerse comes from the Latin “to plunge into, sink, submerge.” For you, the freeze frames and disembodied voice-overs disabuse you of any “illusion” that you’re not doing anything other than watching a gangster movie, a stylized telling of Henry Hill’s life. For me, those same techniques offer an enhanced view into the subjective reality of the character, the place, and the time.Although some of Scorsese's camera techniques are obviously motivated expressionistically as an approximation of the characters' subjective states of mind, ultimately those techniques are only ever approximations. When Scorsese and Michael Ballhaus simultaneously zoom in on and dolly away from Ray Liotta and Lorraine Bracco in order to express the characters' sense of entrapment by having the walls appear to literally close in on them, not only does the spectator not feel entrapped themselves but they are aware that the apparent movement of the back wall is an effect of the camera. In other words, filtering an event through a character's subjective viewpoint doesn't make a film more "immersive," if immersiveness means causing the spectator to forget that they're watching a movie.

[DFA1979]

I love Drive as well, it's a masterpiece. I only meant to point out that it's an aesthetic punch and not so much an immersive one - although the chase sequences are tight.

I actually prefer the second chase sequence over the opening one just because of how it works. The opening one deserves plenty of love and credit but the second one feels like something out of a 90s or 70s action movie.

[StuSmallz]

Putting aside that people have only started using "immersiveness" as a criterion of value in the last twenty years or so since The Lord of the Rings came out, the whole concept strikes me as fundamentally anti-aesthetic, the idea being that eventually digital photography will achieve such high resolution and three-dimensionality that it will be indistinguishable from real life. But even if that were possible (and I doubt that it is), it doesn't strike me as very desirable. When I watch The Apu Trilogy I don't feel as if I've been transported to West Bengal (for one thing it's in black and white), but I don't think that makes Satyajit Ray a lesser filmmaker than Peter Jackson. Maybe this is a quaint idea but I think movies should be movies and not real life. And in the case of Ramsay's film, I see little evidence that it was her intention to make an immersive film. The whole point of cutting to security camera footage at one point is to distance the spectator from the protagonist.The underlying reason why the film switched to the cameras during that scene wasn't because it was Ramsay's first preference in presenting it, though, but because of the limited timeframe they were given to make the film in (less than one month), which forced them to figure out a way to shoot that scene in one day's time, which is part of the reason why the scene (and the film as a whole) failed to be immersive as it should've been, since it was a creative decision motivated more by the limitations placed upon the production, and less by what would've been the most effective for the scene (and, since it's a graphic moment in a Psychological Thriller that otherwise takes the PoV of an extremely disturbed, unstable individual, detaching us from it makes little sense). That being said though, you misunderstood me when I mentioned the "immersiveness" of movies' aesthetics, because when I discuss that, I'm not talking about being immersed in the reality of a film's world to the point that we forget that we're watching a movie, I mean that a film's style immerses us deeply into a particular atmosphere, headspace, or mood (like the lush daydream vibe of Drive), regardless of whether it not that feels "real" or not.

That's also the reason why I wouldn't single out the LotR trilogy for having a particularly "immersive" aesthetic, as, while they're all well-directed films, and did immerse me deeply into the world of Middle Earth, that had less to do with their maniuplation of the stylistic elements that are unique to movies as a medium (cinematography, editing, sound design, etc.), and more to do with the practical elements of the costumes, the locations, or the esoteric, fantasy-based dialogue, all of which would also have immersed me if I had merely been there on-set to personally witness the scenes being filmed myself, similar to the effect that people get from playing a LARP, going through a really good "Haunted House", or attending a Renaissance Fair, you know?

[StuSmallz]

Thanks professor!Hey now, this was a bit uncalled for...

[StuSmallz]

Sooooo brilliant. So much is revealed without a word.Absolutely, and it's why I'm baffled by the complaints I've seen about the film not being interested in digging into why The Driver's penchant for violence runs strong, when that's very self-explanatory from what the film presents to us; he's an extremely solitary guy making a living in a violent world, meets a woman that he falls deeply in love with, and he violently lashes out when she's threatened, because she's pretty much the only person in his world that he truly loves. What more do we need? Because personally, I find that a more compelling characterization than the fragments of Joe's past traumas that You Were Never Really Here spoon-fed us with by comparison.

[baby doll]

The underlying reason why the film switched to the cameras during that scene wasn't because it was Ramsay's first preference in presenting it, though, but because of the limited timeframe they were given to make the film in (less than one month), which forced them to figure out a way to shoot that scene in one day's time, which is part of the reason why the scene (and the film as a whole) failed to be immersive as it should've been, since it was a creative decision motivated more by the limitations placed upon the production, and less by what would've been the most effective for the scene (and, since it's a graphic moment in a Psychological Thriller that otherwise takes the PoV of an extremely disturbed, unstable individual, detaching us from it makes little sense). That being said though, you misunderstood me when I mentioned the "immersiveness" of movies' aesthetics, because when I discuss that, I'm not talking about being immersed in the reality of a film's world to the point that we forget that we're watching a movie, I mean that a film's style immerses us deeply into a particular atmosphere, headspace, or mood (like the lush daydream vibe of Drive), regardless of whether it not that feels "real" or not.As far as I'm concerned, the behind-the-scenes info is irrelevant; all that counts is what winds up on the screen. And in this case, precisely because the protagonist is a disturbed, unstable individual whom we can neither root for unproblematically nor reject outright, it makes sense that Ramsay's style would vacillate between aligning the spectator with his subjective impressions and a more distanced, outside perspective on his actions.

[Skitch]

Absolutely, and it's why I'm baffled by the complaints I've seen about the film not being interested in digging into why The Driver's penchant for violence runs strong, when that's very self-explanatory from what the film presents to us; he's an extremely solitary guy making a living in a violent world, meets a woman that he falls deeply in love with, and he violently lashes out when she's threatened, because she's pretty much the only person in his world that he truly loves. What more do we need? Because personally, I find that a more compelling characterization than the fragments of Joe's past traumas that You Were Never Really Here spoon-fed us with by comparison.

Yep! And it also explained why he only drives. He doesn't want to put himself in a situation where violence is possible (maybe I'm reading too much into it).

[Grouchy]

In the not-so-humble opinion of the board, what are the best Miami films?

[Skitch]

Miami Vice is pretty damn good. Bad Boys series. Miami Connection lol

[quido8_5]

Not sure if this counts, but I feel like I Am Cuba is a insanely good film that provides a sense of the culture and it's roots than many of the whitewashed films that like to provide stereotypical representations of what Miami culture seems like from the outside.

[quido8_5]

Hey now, this was a bit uncalled for...

???

[StuSmallz]

???It was a bit rude, IMO.

[baby doll]

In the not-so-humble opinion of the board, what are the best Miami films?I haven't seen the movie but Charles Willeford's novel Miami Blues is pretty great.

[Ezee E]

Man. Looking at upcoming movies and there's nothing that really gets me excited for most of the summer. I'll see Zola, but other than that, sheesh....

[Yxklyx]

I haven't seen the movie but Charles Willeford's novel Miami Blues is pretty great.

The movie is really good - seen it twice already and will probably see it again. Probably the best Miami movie.

[Stay Puft]

s/o Miami Connection which contains maybe the greatest title card drop in film history

[quido8_5]

Man. Looking at upcoming movies and there's nothing that really gets me excited for most of the summer. I'll see Zola, but other than that, sheesh....

But Venom 2! Fall/Winter look promising, though.

[Irish]

A few titles where I think a Miami/ South Florida setting is essential to the story:

- Adaptation
- Cocaine Cowboys
- Goldfinger
- Out of Sight
- The Birdcage
- Body Heat
- Thunderball
- Wild Things


I haven't seen the movie but Charles Willeford's novel Miami Blues is pretty great.

If novels had double bills, I'd pair this with Elmore Leonard's "Stick" (and then carefully avoid the movies made from these books).


That's also the reason why I wouldn't single out the LotR trilogy for having a particularly "immersive" aesthetic, as, while they're all well-directed films, and did immerse me deeply into the world of Middle Earth, that had less to do with their maniuplation of the stylistic elements that are unique to movies as a medium (cinematography, editing, sound design, etc.), and more to do with the practical elements of the costumes, the locations, or the esoteric, fantasy-based dialogue, all of which would also have immersed me if I had merely been there on-set to personally witness the scenes being filmed myself, similar to the effect that people get from playing a LARP, going through a really good "Haunted House", or attending a Renaissance Fair, you know?

The phrase you're probably looking for is mise-en-scène.

[DFA1979]

s/o Miami Connection which contains maybe the greatest title card drop in film history

Hell yeah.

I liked Miami Vice (the movie). I need to see Miami Blues. Hey it's on Tubi, sweet!

[Ivan Drago]

After my first viewing of 8 1/2 in several years, I remember why I didn’t understand much about it when I was in high school: It's really heady and packed with philosophical ideas about life, art and the film industry, leaving viewers with a lot to ruminate on well after the film’s conclusion. That said, I still love how grounded the dream sequences are while still feeling surreal, I love the soundtrack, and the film has been impeccably restored. At the end of it all, though, what is clear is the film's point that making a film is a replication of existence on Earth. Despite the pressures and stressors that come with it, the act of filmmaking is a grand union of eclectic stars and businessmen with eccentric artists, all of whom are carrying personal stories and employ them to not only put on a show for all audiences to enjoy, but also to replicate the spectacle of life itself.

And I intend to see it again sometime next month because it's coming back as part of a month-long Fellini retrospective! My favorite arthouse theater here is playing mostly 4K DCPs of 8 1/2 and the following (bolded are the films I plan to see):

La Strada
The White Sheik
I Vitelloni
Il Bidone
Nights of Cabiria (have seen and liked)
La Dolce Vita
Juliet of the Spirits
Amarcord (have seen before and did not like)
Orchestra Rehearsal
And The Ship Sails On

Anything else in this retrospective I should definitely seek out? Fellini's one of my blind spots as a cinephile so I can't wait to fill it in the coming weeks.

[StuSmallz]

De Palma's Scarface (https://letterboxd.com/stusmallz/film/scarface-1983/)is a good movie IMO, but I don't know if I should bring it up as a good example of a Miami movie, even though it's probably the most iconic depiction of that city to come out of Hollywood, since most of it was actually shot in LA, haha.

[Ezee E]

I definitely don't think any movie has really captured what South Beach is like.

At least with Wild Things, it felt muggy and humid.

Haven't seen The Birdcage...

[Idioteque Stalker]

I watched Miami Blues not long ago. Like the actual city, it has its highlights but I'm not a fan overall.

[Grouchy]

Miami Blues was a great recommendation, thanks guys! Loved Alec Baldwin's offbeat character.

[Grouchy]

De Palma's Scarface (https://letterboxd.com/stusmallz/film/scarface-1983/)is a good movie IMO, but I don't know if I should bring it up as a good example of a Miami movie, even though it's probably the most iconic depiction of that city to come out of Hollywood, since most of it was actually shot in LA, haha.
It was the first and only one I could think of.

Anyway, I made a list (https://letterboxd.com/grouchy/list/miami/by/rating/).

[Skitch]

Link isnt working for me

[Grouchy]

There, I made it public.

[Skitch]

Sweet! And followed ;)

Didn't True Lies have some Miami? Where they blew up the bridge? I guess thats the Keys but isn't that close?

[Grouchy]

Yes! Bit hesitant with the ones who only have one sequence though, like the 007 ones Irish mentioned.

[Skitch]

Hey man, make your list with any damn rules you please. I hate Rules Police on movie list making.

[DFA1979]

I definitely don't think any movie has really captured what South Beach is like.

At least with Wild Things, it felt muggy and humid.

Haven't seen The Birdcage...

Wild Things is good. The Birdcage is hilarious.

I really need to see more Fellini. My local library has a bunch of his movies plus Criterion of course so I have no excuse. 8 1/2 is excellent and I own it on DVD.

[DFA1979]

I don't really consider True Lies to be a Miami film but hey whatever it's close enough.

[DFA1979]

Return of Godzilla (1984)


https://youtu.be/hhnPJ9wLTFI

The big guy comes back and he's all pissed off again because the humans woke him up. Man is he cranky in the morning oh wait this happens at night. Nevermind. Naturally he sets out for Japan again, meanwhile the Soviets and the US want to nuke the creature even though the Japanese would be affected and that's how they got stuck with an angry fire breathing monster in the first place. Read the room, USSR and the US!

The humans in this movie are solid enough-I cracked up at the one drunk guy who wasn't afraid to talk smack to Godzilla when he should have been running away. How they defeat Godzilla is actually not bad. I liked it for being a simple plan. Also at one point the JDF sends a cool spaceship to attack Godzilla and it actually is oddly effective. Also why doesn't Godzilla tower over the buildings I thought he was much bigger. Hmm, odd.

This film definitely had some influence on both the 2014 Godzilla and Shin Godzilla. I liked it a lot and I'm looking forward to seeing more of the 1980s/1990s Godzilla movies. Also I used a random Internet site to watch this I mean via legitimate means, I swear. Wink wink. This flick was missing the wicked sweet Godzilla theme music though which is a bummer. Oh well, 8.5/10, check it out.

[DFA1979]

PS: I've only seen 24/36 total which is if you count the American ones which I do. I've seen most of the 1999-2004 Godzilla ones.

[Dukefrukem]

It was the first and only one I could think of.

Anyway, I made a list (https://letterboxd.com/grouchy/list/miami/by/rating/).

Florida project was Orlando?

[Grouchy]

Florida project was Orlando?
Yeah. That one and Escape from Tomorrow belong on another list.

[Wryan]

The Florida Project, man....I've never been so fucking infuriated by an excellent movie.

[Philip J. Fry]

Man, The Mirror was so very fucking weird.

[Idioteque Stalker]

The Florida Project was excellent. Sean Baker is an exciting filmmaker. Pumped for his new movie.

[Yxklyx]

The Florida Project was excellent. Sean Baker is an exciting filmmaker. Pumped for his new movie.

One of the best films to come out these past few years. You should check out Tangerine.

[quido8_5]

Had a lot of fun watching House. Best movie I've seen in some time. I can see how the style would be divisive, but I ate it up. Just hearing the characters' names made me laugh. Also, fabulous ending.

[Ezee E]

The Florida Project, man....I've never been so fucking infuriated by an excellent movie.

How do you mean?

I just knew someone would say Florida Project as Miami, lol.

I figured St Petersburg too.

South Florida (maybe all of Florida) is just weird.

[DFA1979]

Had a lot of fun watching House. Best movie I've seen in some time. I can see how the style would be divisive, but I ate it up. Just hearing the characters' names made me laugh. Also, fabulous ending.

Is that the Japanese one or the 1986 one? I like both.

The Florida Project is great but man what a hard flick to get through. The ending made me tear up a little.

[StuSmallz]

https://i.ibb.co/ZKNh7hR/20210414-203845.jpg (https://ibb.co/WFscjcN)

The mission is a man.

Despite its status as one of the most momentous events in living memory, one that defined the entirety of "The Greatest Generation" as we know it, I don't think we got a truly definitive World War 2 film out of Hollywood for a long time, at least, not one that tried to deliver a fairly vivid impression of the war itself. Sure, we got some iconic films set around it, like Casablanca, but that's more of a Romantic Drama that's not really about the war directly, and the same thing goes for something like The Dirty Dozen, which was more of a men-on-a-mission flick that served as an early prototype for the modern Action movie, you know? On the other hand, just a few years after the Vietnam War, we get Apocalypse Now; doesn't really seem fair to the prior conflict, does it? However, over half a century after WWII ended, we finally did get a film that has come to define that war in a cinematic sense, with Stephen Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan, a movie that both upheld a number of previous cultural perceptions of that conflict, while also radically changing certain others, resulting in a work that has stood tall within the genre of War films in general, and has endured in the decades since its release as one of the finest films in Spielberg's lengthy, unparalleled career.

It tells the story of John Miller, an Army Captain who, in the bloody wake of D-Day, is tasked to lead a squad of men in order to locate Private Ryan, a random, lowly soldier whose three brothers were all just killed in action, leading him to be chosen for early removal from combat, in order to ensure that an entire generation of a family isn't lost to the all-consuming maw of the war. Of course, Ryan's location in the active, chaotic war zone that is Normandy is currently unknown, leading Miller and his men into a grueling mission across the blood-stained landscape, as they're continually forced to engage with the enemy, their already meager numbers are steadily whittled down in the process, and they increasingly question whether saving one man is worth all of this torment, pain, and sacrifice on their parts.

Of course, if this makes it sound as though Ryan is questioning our collective cultural & cinematic perception of World War II as being America's token "good war" of the 20th century, that's because it is to a certain extent; of course, it also engages in a re-valorization of The Greatest Generation's exploits during the conflict at times, particularly in a bookending frame device that some might (not unjustifiably) describe as sappy, but I feel the film justifies this by putting us through the absolute wringer to get there, with its brutally honest, unflinching portrayal of warfare, one that places a tremendous emphasis on the traumatizing effects of combat (a stark contrast to certain WWII films that portrayed combat as "adventurous" or exciting), with Janusz Kamiński's grim, grey, desaturated cinematography, which makes extensive use of a jittery, immersive, "you are there"-style handheld camerawork, and makes it feel as though the production sent a cameraman back in time in order to document the war firsthand for the film.

This is also reflected in the film's overall unflinchingly realistic level of gore, which almost certainly would've earned it an NC-17 rating had it not had the historical background as justification for it, as SPR feels less like watching a movie at times, and more like being fed through a literal meat grinder, particularly during the now-legendary D-Day sequence, which feels like the closest thing to experiencing the war firsthand short of actually fighting in it, with such sensory details as the absolutely deafening, never-ending sound of machine gun fire, or the sight of a mortally wounded soldier screaming for his mother as his intestines are spilling out all over the sand, with the battle being portrayed in such a chaotic, vivid, and disturbing manner, it actually lead the Department Of Veterans Affairs to create a hotline for veterans to call for counseling upon the film's release.

This de-glamorization of the war also extends to the film's portrayal of the American soldiers as well, whether it be the sight of them straight-up murdering a couple of enemy soldiers who were attempting to surrender, the way that Miller's men are increasingly hesitant to follow his orders as their losses pile up (culminating in an attempt to straight-up desert the mission at one point), and the way that Miller himself is emotionally burdened by the weight of having to lead men into combat to die, in addition to the way that he's shown to be suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder throughout, with the first shot of him being as close-up of his hands quivering as he (tries to) steel himself for battle, which not only helps to conveys the massive weight of the sacrifice he and the rest of his generation gave during the conflict, but also showcases the inherently messy, ugly reality of any war, regardless of how justified the involvement in it may be on the part of any one nation.

And finally, the film excels not just through the unparalleled intensity of its scenes of combat, but during the quieter moments outside it as well, as its potentially hackneyed "I miss home so much" dialogue exchanges succeed through the sheer, meticulous amount of craft behind the filmmaking, avoiding feeling manipulative in order to become genuinely emotional in the best of ways, and, while some people may decry some moments here as just more examples of Spielberg giving into his overly sentimental nature, as far as I'm concerned, like the titular character himself, Saving Private Ryan "earns" it, and then some.


Final Score: ​10

[StuSmallz]

The phrase you're probably looking for is mise-en-scène.Almost, but not quite, since dialogue isn't considered part of that concept (at least, it isn't in my experience), so I felt I should avoid lumping it into that term alongside the other, visually-based elements I mentioned.

[quido8_5]

Is that the Japanese one or the 1986 one? I like both.

The Florida Project is great but man what a hard flick to get through. The ending made me tear up a little.

Japanese. Intrigued by the 1986. Is it also campy and more comedy than horror? I'd be interested to see more horror-first take.

The Florida Project is a punch in the gut. One of those "starts bad and gets worse and worse" type stories. Still, fantastic film. I may actually prefer Tangerine, though. Will never cease to be amazed that it was made on an iPhone.

[quido8_5]

Saw this on Twitter and thought it'd be fun to see what other folks on the board have: Movies you've watched the most (not necessarily included in your top ten).

Mine:

1) Star Wars: A New Hope*
2) Can't Hardly Wait*
3) Monty Python and the Holy Grail
4) Pulp Fiction
5) The Big Lebowski
6) Rocky Horror Picture Show
7) Magnolia
8) Manhattan
9) Best in Show
10) A Clockwork Orange

* Watched one of these to fall asleep to most nights when I was 11 or so

[Dukefrukem]

Saw this on Twitter and thought it'd be fun to see what other folks on the board have: Movies you've watched the most (not necessarily included in your top ten).

Mine:

1) Star Wars: A New Hope*
2) Can't Hardly Wait*
3) Monty Python and the Holy Grail
4) Pulp Fiction
5) The Big Lebowski
6) Rocky Horror Picture Show
7) Magnolia
8) Manhattan
9) Best in Show
10) A Clockwork Orange

* Watched one of these to fall asleep to most nights when I was 11 or so

Might would look something like

1. Ghostbusters
2. Army of Darkness
3. The Mummy (1999)
4. The Matrix (I watched the shit out of this on DVD and just had it playing in the background)
5. Fight Club
6. Die Hard with a Vengeance
7. Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
8. Return of the Jedi
9. Greatest Showman
10. Avengers

[Grouchy]

Back when I was a teen and taped movies off TV Carrie and Carlito's Way were a fixture to have in the background.

[Wryan]

How do you mean?

Equal parts angry at and angry for the characters.

[Ezee E]

Hmm... Most watched?

-Children of Men
-Dumb and Dumber
-Forrest Gump
-Ghostbusters
-Goodfellas
-Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
-Kill Bill
-No Country for Old Men
-Pulp Fiction
-Superbad

Most watched foreign film is easily Amelie.

[Skitch]

Might would look something like

1. Ghostbusters
2. Army of Darkness
3. The Mummy (1999)
4. The Matrix (I watched the shit out of this on DVD and just had it playing in the background)
5. Fight Club
6. Die Hard with a Vengeance
7. Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
8. Return of the Jedi
9. Greatest Showman
10. Avengers

1. Spaceballs
2. Monty Python and the Holy Grail
3. Fight Club
4. Original Star Wars Trilogy
5. Back to the Future trilogy
6. Batman Begins
7. Batman
8. Aliens
9. Predator
10. Hunt for Red October

11. Akira

I love Akira so much that I avoid watching it too much so I can continue to be amazed by how great it is.

[megladon8]

When I was a teen and missed a year of school, I watched Blade and Starship Troopers on a neverending loop.

I've seen Young Frankenstein more than 100 times.

In 2005 I watched Oldboy every night for a month.

Most of the Bond films pre-Craig I have seen more than 100 times each.

Also a selection of horror films that Jen and I watch several times a year every year (Evil Dead, Halloween, Night of the Living Dead, Dawn of the Dead, a handful of Argento and Bava stuff).

[Ezee E]

I forgot The Shining.

And I probably should add Do The Right Thing. I watch it almost yearly.

[megladon8]

The Shining and The Thing would be tops for me, too, especially since I frequently sleep to them on repeat.

[Skitch]

I probably should have Chinese Connection and Fist of Fury on there.

[Dukefrukem]

Might would look something like

1. Ghostbusters
2. Army of Darkness
3. The Mummy (1999)
4. The Matrix (I watched the shit out of this on DVD and just had it playing in the background)
5. Fight Club
6. Die Hard with a Vengeance
7. Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
8. Return of the Jedi
9. Greatest Showman
10. Avengers

Replace Greatest Showman with the Burbs or the Thing.

[Idioteque Stalker]

The Princess Bride is definitely my #1. After that it’s probably Wall-E, Stranger than Paradise, and the Wind in the Willows. Oh, and Star Wars.

[Yxklyx]

Is that the Japanese one or the 1986 one? I like both.

The Florida Project is great but man what a hard flick to get through. The ending made me tear up a little.

While there's a lot to tear up on - there's also a lot to smile on! The scene where the two girls are under a tree while the rain is falling - that's got to be one of the greatest shots in all of cinema - and I loved the ending! There is a lot of hope if you can see it.

[DFA1979]

Japanese. Intrigued by the 1986. Is it also campy and more comedy than horror? I'd be interested to see more horror-first take.

The Florida Project is a punch in the gut. One of those "starts bad and gets worse and worse" type stories. Still, fantastic film. I may actually prefer Tangerine, though. Will never cease to be amazed that it was made on an iPhone.The 1986 one is campy, comedic, has lots of horror movie elements and while not as crazy as the 1977 Japanese flick it's still pretty nuts imo. I need to see Tangerine at some point.

[DFA1979]

While there's a lot to tear up on - there's also a lot to smile on! The scene where the two girls are under a tree while the rain is falling - that's got to be one of the greatest shots in all of cinema - and I loved the ending! There is a lot of hope if you can see it.

Oh no that's very true. And the ending is insanely moving. Plus I loved Willem Dafoe's character celebrating getting the power back on. That part made me smile.

[DFA1979]

Hmm movies seen the most times.

1. Jurassic Park
2. The Wizard of Oz
3. Finding Nemo
4. The Big Lebowski
5. *Insert pre 1990s Bond film here*
6. Homeward Bound: The Incredible Journey
7. Big Trouble In Little China
8. Halloween 78
9. Night of the Living Dead 68
10. Monty Python and the Holy Grail

[Skitch]

I need to see Tangerine at some point.

It's worth a watch as a no-budget expirament, but I don't see myself revisiting.

[Grouchy]

The Shining and Blade 2 for me too.

[DFA1979]

It's worth a watch as a no-budget expirament, but I don't see myself revisiting.

Oh, well that still sounds good enough to me. Also I completely forgot about Holy Grail. I think my sister and I watched our VHS copy so many times I'm amazed it didn't burn out. Honorable mentions go to Godzilla vs King Kong and Night of the Creeps.

[DFA1979]

Horror movie edition of the same idea:

1. Halloween 78
2. Night of the Living Dead 68
3. Night of the Creeps
4. The Horror Express
5. The Omega Man
6. King Kong vs Godzilla
7. Scream
8. House on Haunted Hill (original)
9. Tucker and Dale vs Evil
10. Jason Takes Manhattan (really any of the 1980s Jason movies)

[DFA1979]

Comedy edition:

1. Monty Python and the Holy Grail
2. Dumb and Dumber
3. Tommy Boy
4. Groundhog Day
5. Caddyshack
6. Blazing Saddles
7. Grandma's Boy
8. Happy Gilmore
9. Animal House
10. Dr. Strangelove

[DFA1979]

Westerns:

1. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
2. Once Upon a Time in the West
3. The Searchers
4. El Dorado
5. Silverado
6. Rio Bravo
7. The Outlaw Josey Wales
8. The Proposition
9. The Professionals
10. Unforgiven

[Skitch]

So weird. Yesterday I said Batman Begins is on my list of most watched (I used to be my go-to fall asleep to it, I loved it so much). Today is the day it was released in 2005. 16 years old.

[Skitch]

Westerns:

1. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
2. Once Upon a Time in the West
3. The Searchers
4. El Dorado
5. Silverado
6. Rio Bravo
7. The Outlaw Josey Wales
8. The Proposition
9. The Professionals
10. Unforgiven

1. Dances with Wolves
2. My Name is Nobody
3. Three Amigos
4. Maverick
5. Blazing Saddles
6. Once Upon a Time in the West
7. Quigly Down Under
8. Hidalgo
9. Open Range
10. Nobody is Still My Name

I have only seen the dollars trilogy a time or two, but thats on purpose. Saving every viewing.

[quido8_5]

DFA takin' it to the next level! Imma' have to think about some of those genre specific categories. I also realized that I've watched My Neighbor Totoro about 12 times in the last two years, so that is probably creeping up there (I had seen it maybe twice before that).

[Skitch]

Is MC familiar with the My Name is Nobody films? Or that comedy duo? If not, shame.

[StanleyK]

I'm not sure about the order, but I'm positive I've seen these movies at least 6-7 times:

1. 2001: A Space Odyssey
2. The Big Lebowski
3. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
4. Jurassic Park
5. Shrek

My dad claims I made him watch Aladdin with me dozens of times but I have no memory of that.

[StanleyK]

Is MC familiar with the My Name is Nobody films? Or that comedy duo? If not, shame.

Is there more than one film? Because I've seen My Name Is Nobody and it is great. Bud Spencer isn't in it though.

[Skitch]

Oops, my bad, i think it's They Call Me Trinity. That's the one I've seen a ton. They made so many movies I get them confused lol.

Also Trinity is Still my Name.

Terence Hill and Bud Spencer are genius.

[quido8_5]

I'm not sure about the order, but I'm positive I've seen these movies at least 6-7 times:

1. 2001: A Space Odyssey
2. The Big Lebowski
3. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
4. Jurassic Park
5. Shrek

My dad claims I made him watch Aladdin with me dozens of times but I have no memory of that.

Sounds like he sure does. :-) That's one reason why Totoro will soon eclipse many others... And Moana isn't far behind. Whatever, they're all great movies.

[Skitch]

I've watched Finding Nemo with my niece roughly 127,093 times. My sister used to watch Grease five times a day.

On a completely unrelated note, I hate Grease with all the fires of hell.

[baby doll]

The movies I've seen the most number of times are all films my family owned on VHS when I was a kid (Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, Last Action Hero, Mrs. Doubtfire, Wayne's World, Wayne's World 2), followed by movies I owned on VHS as a teenager (Apocalypse Now, Boogie Nights, Eyes Wide Shut, JFK, Pulp Fiction, Schindler's List, Taxi Driver, Trainspotting), followed by movies I owned on DVD in the early 2000s (L'avventura, Bande Ã* part, The Big Sleep, Citizen Kane, 8½, Manhattan, Le Mépris, Mulholland Dr.).

According to Letterboxd, the films I've watch the most times since 2016 are Back to the Future, Before it Gets Dark, Ceremonies, The Cheat, The Chronicle of Anna Magdalena Bach, The Green Fog, Der letzte Mann, Leviathan (2012), La Passion de Jeanne d'Arc, Pyaasa, Rouge (1987), and Stray Dogs (twice each). In fact, I've watched Ceremonies, The Cheat, and The Chronicle of Anna Magdalena Bach three times each since 2016 (and I'd seen the latter three or four times before that) but I didn't realize until recently that you could log the same movie more than once.

[transmogrifier]

I've watched Finding Nemo with my niece roughly 127,093 times. My sister used to watch Grease five times a day.

On a completely unrelated note, I hate Grease with all the fires of hell.

Grease is fantastic. I could watch it anytime, anywhere.

[Skitch]

The only possibility of me being subjected to Grease ever again is if one of my kids is in a play. And I will actively try to secretly sabotage that production.

[Dukefrukem]

What's wrong with Grease??

[DFA1979]

1. Dances with Wolves
2. My Name is Nobody
3. Three Amigos
4. Maverick
5. Blazing Saddles
6. Once Upon a Time in the West
7. Quigly Down Under
8. Hidalgo
9. Open Range
10. Nobody is Still My Name

I have only seen the dollars trilogy a time or two, but thats on purpose. Saving every viewing.

I forgot about Dances With Wolves. I'm doing these off the top of my head and it shows.

[DFA1979]

Is MC familiar with the My Name is Nobody films? Or that comedy duo? If not, shame.

I thought the first one with Fonda was really good. I've seen it twice.

[DFA1979]

DFA takin' it to the next level! Imma' have to think about some of those genre specific categories. I also realized that I've watched My Neighbor Totoro about 12 times in the last two years, so that is probably creeping up there (I had seen it maybe twice before that).

That movie rocks. I saw it on the big screen a few years back.

[Skitch]

What's wrong with Grease??

Everything. Its awful. The best way to enjoy it is a fever dream of a drowning death.

[DFA1979]

Everything. Its awful. The best way to enjoy it is a fever dream of a drowning death.

I hate it but I wouldn't go that far haha.

[transmogrifier]

What's wrong with Grease??


Everything. Its awful. The best way to enjoy it is a fever dream of a drowning death.

Nothing. Its perfect. The best way to enjoy it is having Skitch tied up next to you Clockwork Orange-style.

[megladon8]

Everything. Its awful. The best way to enjoy it is a fever dream of a drowning death.

This should be on BluRay cover, with a 5 star rating.

[Skitch]

The best way to enjoy it is having Skitch tied up next to you Clockwork Orange-style.

The only way its gonna happen.

[quido8_5]

The movies I've seen the most number of times are all films my family owned on VHS when I was a kid (Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, Last Action Hero, Mrs. Doubtfire, Wayne's World, Wayne's World 2), followed by movies I owned on VHS as a teenager (Apocalypse Now, Boogie Nights, Eyes Wide Shut, JFK, Pulp Fiction, Schindler's List, Taxi Driver, Trainspotting), followed by movies I owned on DVD in the early 2000s (L'avventura, Bande Ã* part, The Big Sleep, Citizen Kane, 8½, Manhattan, Le Mépris, Mulholland Dr.).

According to Letterboxd, the films I've watch the most times since 2016 are Back to the Future, Before it Gets Dark, Ceremonies, The Cheat, The Chronicle of Anna Magdalena Bach, The Green Fog, Der letzte Mann, Leviathan (2012), La Passion de Jeanne d'Arc, Pyaasa, Rouge (1987), and Stray Dogs (twice each). In fact, I've watched Ceremonies, The Cheat, and The Chronicle of Anna Magdalena Bach three times each since 2016 (and I'd seen the latter three or four times before that) but I didn't realize until recently that you could log the same movie more than once.

Really liked the way your organized this. Thinking about worn VHS made me nostalgic: the satisfying click when putting the cassette in; the terrifying sound of the tape getting gargled when ejecting. It also makes me wonder how much format has changed (if any) the way I evaluate movies. Like, would L'avventura have the same effect on VHS that it does on DVD, given that it's such a visually spectacular film? Also, I didn't know that you could log the same movie more than once... looks like I may have another reason to go down the Letterbox'd rabbit hole.

[DFA1979]

Nothing. Its perfect. The best way to enjoy it is having Skitch tied up next to you Clockwork Orange-style.

This sounds like a horror movie where some fan snaps and ties up people who bash their favorite movies and forces them to watch them. I call dibs but I'm sure someone already made it.

[DFA1979]

The movies I've seen the most number of times are all films my family owned on VHS when I was a kid (Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, Last Action Hero, Mrs. Doubtfire, Wayne's World, Wayne's World 2), followed by movies I owned on VHS as a teenager (Apocalypse Now, Boogie Nights, Eyes Wide Shut, JFK, Pulp Fiction, Schindler's List, Taxi Driver, Trainspotting), followed by movies I owned on DVD in the early 2000s (L'avventura, Bande Ã* part, The Big Sleep, Citizen Kane, 8½, Manhattan, Le Mépris, Mulholland Dr.).

According to Letterboxd, the films I've watch the most times since 2016 are Back to the Future, Before it Gets Dark, Ceremonies, The Cheat, The Chronicle of Anna Magdalena Bach, The Green Fog, Der letzte Mann, Leviathan (2012), La Passion de Jeanne d'Arc, Pyaasa, Rouge (1987), and Stray Dogs (twice each). In fact, I've watched Ceremonies, The Cheat, and The Chronicle of Anna Magdalena Bach three times each since 2016 (and I'd seen the latter three or four times before that) but I didn't realize until recently that you could log the same movie more than once.I really need to watch my copy of Straw Dogs at some point. Also yey Last Action Hero, heh.

[Philip J. Fry]

1. The Lion King. There was a summer when I was 12 or 13 when I watched that movie once per day. I've easily watched it over a hundred times.
2. Blade Runner
3. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
4. The Shawshank Redemption
5. Princess Mononoke
6. Robin Hood (1973)
7. The Fox and the Hound
8. Back to the Future
9. The Matrix
10. Fargo

[Skitch]

Really liked the way your organized this. Thinking about worn VHS made me nostalgic: the satisfying click when putting the cassette in; the terrifying sound of the tape getting gargled when ejecting. It also makes me wonder how much format has changed (if any) the way I evaluate movies. Like, would L'avventura have the same effect on VHS that it does on DVD, given that it's such a visually spectacular film? Also, I didn't know that you could log the same movie more than once... looks like I may have another reason to go down the Letterbox'd rabbit hole.

I started [re]collecting VHS a couple years ago. When I got the OG Star Wars trilogy, I broke out the boxset VHS I have and watched those (because some of the OG singles were sealed). Yes, I rewatched them full frame, with no special edition, and it was super nostalgic, because thats how I watched them over and over growing up. My top loader still works as my main player. I enjoy every part of the VHS experience, but it is really nostalgia. The clicks, the wirrs, the tracking adjustments, the rewinder.

I need to get back at the tapes, theyre piling up in my office lol

[transmogrifier]

Movies I have watched more than twice from 2000 to 2009. Those in bold I plan to watch again at some stage:

LOTR: The Fellowship of the Ring (10)
LOTR: The Two Towers (9)
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (8)
Mulholland Dr. (8)
Before Sunset (7)
LOTR: Return of the King (7)
The Emperor's New Groove (6)
Zodiac (6)
School of Rock (6)
Memento (4)
Oldboy (4)
United 93 (4)
8 Mile (4)
Battle Royale (3)
Spirited Away (3)
About a Boy (3)
Finding Nemo (3)
The Departed (3)

King Kong (3)
Terminator 3 (3)
Shaun of the Dead (3)
Dawn of the Dead (3)

Punch-drunk Love (3)
Wonder Boys (3)
Panic Room (3)
Mystic River (3)
Collateral (3)
The Host (3)
28 Days Later (3)
Joy Ride (3)

Basically I tried to like these, but just don't:
The Incredibles (3)
Kill Bill Vol. 1 (3)
Signs (3)

Here are the movies from 2010 to 2020 that I have watched more than twice:


[obviously time is a factor and a couple of films that I have already seen twice from this period will definitely join the list - Mission Impossible Fallout, Hereditary, Game Night, Blade Runner 2046, Sicario, Gone Girl, Boyhood, Before Midnight, This is the End, Killing Them Softly I'd all watch again - but I've been severely underwhelmed by the last decade at the movies]

[Yxklyx]

I couldn't get through Grease the second time I saw it. I think I rather watch Xanadu.

I've always seen Jack Lemmon play assured characters, who know where they are in the world but whoah I've never seen him play a character like the one he plays in Days of Wine and Roses. I never imagined he could play a role like that!

Most watched movies would be 2001, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly and Nights of Cabiria.

[DFA1979]

Heh based on people's lists I forgot a bunch more films. I've seen FOTR double digit times, and the other two LOTRs movies at least four or five times each apiece. I think that would put it all at maybe 20, I think.

[Philip J. Fry]

1406167977834262533

[Philip J. Fry]

1406175612411260931

[megladon8]

Yeah, wtf is up with that cover?

Feels like they tried to go for a Criterion-esque poignant and striking image...but went about it all wrong.

[Philip J. Fry]

Yeah, wtf is up with that cover?

Feels like they tried to go for a Criterion-esque poignant and striking image...but went about it all wrong.The cover would've been perfectly fine without the revolver.

[Yxklyx]

The cover would've been perfectly fine without the revolver.

Probably some twenty-something son of a billionaire got the gun in.

And I've seen the The Fellowship of the Ring nearly double-digit times....

Fox and His Friends is definitely one you want to watch if you want to explore some of Fassbinder's films - Criterion has a great selection of his films.

[DFA1979]

That whole cover is just weird.

[Philip J. Fry]

Probably some twenty-something son of a billionaire got the gun in.A twenty-something son of a billionaire who hasn't watched the movie.

[StanleyK]

I think I found a goof in Sabrina (1954).

It's in a scene near the beginning when she's in cooking school in Paris and fails to bake a souffle. The Baron tells her that she forgot to turn the oven on, but you can clearly see the flame burning (it's the last oven, with the flame under Hepburn's chin).
https://i.imgur.com/uqeFM4e.png

I didn't see this in IMDB or anywhere else, so I had to post it. This might be the only time ever I noticed something that no one else did.

[DFA1979]

So I did finally view Miami Blues. It's a funny, oddly touching at certain points, yet darkly comedic movie. Baldwin and JJL are nice together and Ward is the cop giving chase. The poor guy lost his dentures! This would make for a good double bill with Grosse Point Blank since George Armitage made both films.

[quido8_5]

From a technical standpoint, this film is nearly flawless. The direction is striking: virtuosic, but also restrained, Joon-ho’s preternatural skill and confidence are on full display here. He sets a tone that is elegiac and profoundly human. Part of what stands out, in fact, is how all the characters feel lived-in, their arcs slowly interweaving and becoming more complex. One thing really stands out, though: how funny the script is. I was smiling, if not outright laughing, for a surprising number of scenes, considering the overall melancholy of the film. At the end of the day, I was left with an odd feeling. Although I should have seen the end coming, I didn’t and how things ultimately turn out is unsettling. I guess everyone does return to the scene of the crime—both the killers and the cops. ****/*****

[megladon8]

Glad you enjoyed it.

In my books, Se7en and Memories of Murder are the undisputed champions of modern serial killer thrillers. And nothing really comes close.

[megladon8]

Just got two trilogies of Takashi Miike films by Arrow...

The Black Society trilogy
Dead or Alive trilogy

I freaking love Arrow. Criterion-level quality.

[StuSmallz]

From a technical standpoint, this film is nearly flawless. The direction is striking: virtuosic, but also restrained, Joon-ho’s preternatural skill and confidence are on full display here. He sets a tone that is elegiac and profoundly human. Part of what stands out, in fact, is how all the characters feel lived-in, their arcs slowly interweaving and becoming more complex. One thing really stands out, though: how funny the script is. I was smiling, if not outright laughing, for a surprising number of scenes, considering the overall melancholy of the film. At the end of the day, I was left with an odd feeling. Although I should have seen the end coming, I didn’t and how things ultimately turn out is unsettling. I guess everyone does return to the scene of the crime—both the killers and the cops. ****/*****I'd give it about the same score myself, since I found it to be quite engaging in general; I still maintain that it would've been slightly better if it hadn't fabricated as many plot details as it did, like the unnecessary red herring with the guy caught pleasuring himself at the scene of the crime, which feels like a salacious detail that would be better suited to an episode of Law & Order: SVU (which is part of the reason why I slightly prefer Zodiac (https://letterboxd.com/stusmallz/film/zodiac/)and its more consistently grounded approach to its case), but it speaks to the strength of the cast and the overall craft of Bong's filmmaking that the film was still as strong an experience as it was anyway.


Glad you enjoyed it.
...
In my books, Se7en and Memories of Murder are the undisputed champions of modern serial killer thrillers. And nothing really comes close.Don't forget about Silence Of The Lambs; after all, it's unsure whether certain modern "serial thrillers" would even exist if it wasn't for Demme's movie in the first place.

[baby doll]

How are we defining "modern" serial killer thrillers? What historical shift occurred in the early '90s that makes The Silence of the Lambs "modern" and Manhunter a "classic" serial killer movie (along with M, The Leopard Man, Peeping Tom, and Psycho)? After all, a lot of the films being cited here as "modern" are already pretty old (Demme's film is now thirty years old), suggesting that the only reason for making a distinction between classic and modern is to tacitly acknowledge that the films in the latter category aren't as good as those in the former (and for all its genuine virtues, Se7en strikes me as considerably less impressive than the films by Lang, Tourneur, Powell, and Hitchcock), and that it's unfair to even compare them. In other words, the distinction here between modern and classic functions to disguise a type of affirmative action for latter day filmmakers who were unfortunate enough to begin their careers after the collapse of the old studio system that nurtured Lang, Hitchcock, Powell, and Tourneur, and after its genres had been largely exhausted.

[megladon8]

Anyone seen Archenemy yet?

[megladon8]

Anyone seen Archenemy yet?

It was really good.

Like, really REALLY good.

[StanleyK]

Between 2013-2016 or thereabouts, I stopped watching movies and thus stopped participating in Match Cut. When I came back, I noticed a lot of users I remembered had gone, and more still have stopped posting in the past five years. I came across some of these users as I went through some of my older posts and wondered what their final contribution to MC had been.



lovejuice (24-05-2012): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?3999-Dark-Shadows-(Tim-Burton)&p=421341#post421341)

A pretty bad movie, but as an ex-Burton fanboy, I can't bring myself to hate it. The movie feels like Burton's honest attempt to return to his earlier, darker, weirder days -- before he became "Hot Topic" Tim Burton. Imo, there is almost an attempt to alienate the audiences, to show us who he really is, and his vision of the modern Gothic before that's got distorted by the Twilight crowd.



soitgoes... (11-03-2013): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?14-28-Film-Discussion-Threads-Later/page2527&p=470189&viewfull=1#post470189)

It's pretty fucking good.



B-side (06-09-2013): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5009-Riddick-(David-Twohy)&p=493352&viewfull=1#post493352)

Saw this. First 15-20 minutes or so was pretty cool, with Riddick wandering and surviving in this vast and gorgeous desolate alien landscape with a dog companion. The color palette is dominated by brown, and yet it pops. Once the bounty hunters show up, things go downhill a bit, then get even worse when Riddick joins them. There's a really poor attempt at an emotional core dealing with Johns and his son that seemed to have been slapped together and thrown in just to make sure people hadn't become tired of the grunting of anonymous henchmen. I don't get the homophobic argument at all. I get why people didn't like the depiction of the lone significant female character, though. I won't say it's misogynistic because that's kind of a facile character judgment of the filmmaker, but it's one that is contradictory in its portrayal and fails to support her individuality despite initially pushing a sort of hard-nosed female soldier arc. There are basically only two or three kinda likeable characters in the film, and she's one of them, and considering there are about a dozen featured characters, the end result in terms of character's earning sympathy or depth is little to none. The lack of sympathy isn't an issue at all, and the depth isn't a problem inherently, but this is a character-heavy film, and only Riddick and the silly Latino leading bounty hunter really stand out. Riddick is meant to have a semblance of empathy about him, yet he has little trouble objectifying the lone female there in a pretty grotesque manner. In this, he is equated with the aforementioned Latino who is shown to have been sexually abusive to a woman he held captive for bounty before pursuing Riddick as well as the female officer. Thus, there is a correlation that speaks to their characters that involves misogyny in the diegetic world. Now, the way her "relationship" with Riddick is pursued in the narrative is quite bad. There's no trajectory, nor a "forbidden fruit"-type sexual conquest, which could've been made into something. There's only a dogged individualism, then an immediate capitulation out of nowhere. I'll add that I more or less forgot the film after about an hour or two. I'm forcing myself to remember right now in order to write this, but I don't see it remaining in my head beyond a few quick glimpses of the alien moon over the desert landscape.



Philosophe_rouge (15-09-2013): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5036-My-Best-Performance-Ingrid-Bergman&p=494167&viewfull=1#post494167)

Notorious.

Pleased people are choosing Gaslight though, probably my second choice. I don't think it's a great film necessarily, but in retrospect it was a sexually formative film for me. I don't know why, but it was always so exciting for me as a teenager. Makes more sense now, but ya.

Also, makes me feel sad I haven't seen more Rosselini.



balmakboor (15-07-2014): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1904-Post-your-top-100-in-here/page14&p=519149&viewfull=1#post519149[/url)

I was glad to see so many good old names still here--most definitely including yours.



Bosco B Thug (18-12-2014): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5740-Knight-of-Cups-(Terrence-Malick)&p=531617&viewfull=1#post531617)

What's with veteran filmmakers being so addled by the film business environment that they are compelled to make Hollywood satires?

Aka everyone go watch Cronenberg's Maps to the Stars in about a month or so (or obtain it alternatively). It's much more in Croney's wheelhouse than Malick's (I've seen it, it's weird and Cronenbergy). But "Cups" does look beautiful.



eternity (15-03-2015): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5842-Chappie-(Neill-Blomkamp)&p=535630&viewfull=1#post535630)

33% actually good, if not great
33% unbearably terrible
33% so bad it's good, particularly in the third act

After not being crazy for District 9 and hating Elysium, this is the first Neill Blomkamp movie that made me excited about him as a filmmaker. Somebody please stop him from directing movie stars, though. Matt Damon was bad in Elysium, but Hugh Jackman is next-level, hide-under-your-seat terrible in this. Yo-Landi meanwhile is asked to carry almost all the maudlin schmaltzy crap in this movie on her shoulders and she almost pulls it off. I'm actually impressed - asking Die Antwoord to carry a wide-release sci-fi film turned out about as well as it ever could have. Blomkamp borrows a lot from their aesthetic (and Harmony Korine's too) and it works.

Hugh Jackman's khaki shorts, though.



Rowland (06-05-2015): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5900-Avengers-Age-of-Ultron-(Joss-Whedon)/page5&p=539196&viewfull=1#post539196)

Anyone note how fugly this movie is? It's a desaturated teal-and-orange fest, with entire sequences comprised of no more than minor variations of the two color tones. Combine this with an increasingly standardized reliance on CGI to only halfway-convincingly animate entire shots and I often felt like I was watching an Xbox 360 cut scene.



Boner M (10-05-2015): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5910-MC-Consensus-Best-of-the-Decade-So-Far/page2&p=539488&viewfull=1#post539488)

There are fish in the Russian Leviathan too, you sillies.

1. The Tree of Life
2. Journey to the West (Tsai Ming-Liang)
3. Oslo, August 31st
4. The Turin Horse
5. Holy Motors
6. Le Quattro Volte
7. Margaret
8. Like Someone in Love
9. Leviathan ('12)
10. The Master



EyesWideOpen (23-08-2015): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?50-Video-Games-Discuss-Them/page1016&p=545074&viewfull=1#post545074)

The base game is the same between the two it's just the PS4 versions contains all the DLC and the Gat out of Hell expansion.



Derek (27-05-2016): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?12-Discuss-the-Musics-Thread/page123&p=556509&viewfull=1#post556509)

haven't heard any of those except for Chance and Esperanza, which were both pretty good, and Bowie's, which I love. I have ANOHNI and Mitski, but I'll look into the rest.

So far this year, there's really nothing that's blown me away but a lot of decent/good albums. It's mostly usual suspects for me (looking forward to checking out the new Autechre too), so hoping for some nice surprises in the back half of the year.

In rough order of preference w/the top 4 standing out a bit more than the rest.

Bowie - Blackstar
Radiohead - AMSP
Parquet Courts - Human Performance
Car Seat Headrest - Teens of Denial

Matmos - Ultimate Care II
The Field - The Follower
Kendrick Lamar - untitled unmastered.
Tim Hecker - Love Streams
Andy Stott - Too Many Voices
Porches - Pool
PJ Harvey - The Hope Six Demolition Project
And Also the Trees - Born Into the Waves
Beyoncé - Lemonade
Fire! - She Sleeps, She Sleeps
Explosions in the Sky - The Wilderness
Kanye West - The Life of Pablo



Raiders (25-07-2016): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?6342-High-Rise-(Ben-Wheatley-2016)&p=558759&viewfull=1#post558759)

If you're telling me this is better looking than the exquisite (and so damn underrated) Field in England, then I am really eager to see this.



Kurosawa Fan (07-01-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5573-Video-Essays-Every-Frame-a-Painting/page7&p=584795&viewfull=1#post584795)

For the record, he addressed Wonder Woman in a post on his Patreon page.

He passed away from cancer. May he rest in peace.



Izzy Black (29-01-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?7044-Phantom-Thread-(Paul-Thomas-Anderson)/page3&p=586418&viewfull=1#post586418)

A few observations on the film -

I take Phantom Thread to be a film ultimately about seduction, manipulation, and exploitation. In this sense, it's a companion piece of sorts with The Master. You can see elements of these themes throughout PTA's career, but The Master is its closest kin, I think. It's also properly of piece with the films I consider among his mature era beginning in '07 (and so after what I would call his "film school" era of his earlier films).

The film revolves around games and formal structures. PTA's obsession with procedure and process is at a maximum here, and the concept of a manipulative game for PTA is explored with considerable depth in this film. For PTA, games are devices for power and control. A game is a way of streamlining and manufacturing intimacy between two subjects: "the master" and "the pupil".

Consider Freddie's interrogation scene (his "processing") in The Master. It's a series of questions designed to target the most personal aspects of Freddie's life, mining him for his fears and insecurities. We have a kind of machine-like structure with a set of rules that help facilitate Freddie's participation and his confessions, and then there's a promise, a promise of becoming part of some larger "Cause". We might call this game "religion" (I emphasize here the deliberate scare quotes). There are numerous other examples of such games throughout the film.

Now consider the rigid rules and game-like pretenses of Reynolds' interactions with Alma. We see it first with the seduction and flirtation in the opening scene. It starts as a food game. Talk about food is a device (or diversion) to facilitate further intimacy and interaction. Then we move to Reynold's home. Here the game is "fashion". Consider how Reynolds' dressing Alma in elegant clothing, measuring her dimensions, and stitching in various areas on the most intimate parts of her body is a form of immediate intimacy between strangers not ordinarily reached outside the structure of such a game.

The game in each case, of course, is inherently artificial. It is constantly disrupted by impersonal devices, and any intimacy exchanged in the game can never substitute for genuine emotional connections and bonds. So the victim in the game is always kept at a certain emotional distance or objective remove. This has the effect of (1) keeping the victim unsatisfied, transfixed by the allure of the "master" and (2) keeping the victim in a certain state of emotional pain and vulnerability. This makes them easier to control and exploit for the purposes of the "master's" own ends. This is further enabled by the fact that, as we see in the beginning of each film, the victims appear aimless and lonely. They seem to be relatively naïve individuals who appear to be in some sense lost and in search of something. This makes them more easily seduced by the allure of the beauty, status, and structure that is offered to them. Most of all, however, it makes them more easily seduced by the false promise of genuine emotional connection and intimacy. Both films, in different ways, explore how the subjects in the game attempt to assert their agency against those who would manipulate them.



D_Davis (02-03-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?50-Video-Games-Discuss-Them/page1101&p=588290&viewfull=1#post588290)

I love the WiiU. It has some of the best games I've ever played. A console's success is only determined by how many games I enjoy playing on it.

Also, Duke, I'm done with you.

You can fuck right off.

So fucking sick of your goddamned shit, with the way you constantly target Meg and myself.

Fuck off and die.

I won't be back to this forum until you're removed as admin so I can add you back to my ignore list. Someone let me know when that happens.

thanks.



Sycophant (08-04-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?7101-Isle-of-Dogs-(Wes-Anderson)/page2&p=589865&viewfull=1#post589865)

I watched Gran Torino on TV subtitled in Japan once and it's amazing what effect scrubbing out most of the protagonist's most offensive language can have.



monolith94 (14-07-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1849&p=592876&viewfull=1#post592876)

I use facebook to remind myself of what people look like.



Winston* (06-12-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1859&p=597419&viewfull=1#post597419)

Every Christmas song sucks except for fairytale of New York and the New Zealand version of 12 Days of Xmas my students wrote.



number8 (23-12-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?7367-Cannot-Post-Reply&p=598226&viewfull=1#post598226)

It was actually the webhost! There was an automatic php upgrade to the server last night that seems to be incompatible with this forum’s version of vbulletin. I just had to go and revert it.



Spinal (07-05-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?7381-Game-of-Thrones-(The-Final-Season-8-)/page11&p=604248&viewfull=1#post604248)

Hey, Irish. I can now say without hesitation that you're a fucking dick. I mean, this is news to no one, but thanks for giving me no guilt about saying it.



Mara (17-11-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1889&p=611472&viewfull=1#post611472)

Hey friends-- it took me ages to remember my old login but I had to come over and say how sad I am about KF. He truly was one of the greats. Kind, funny, smart, and compassionate. I loved talking to him about film, but I also just loved talking to him. This is a terrible loss.



Watashi (17-11-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1889&p=611478&viewfull=1#post611478)

I still can't believe it. Even though this forum has drifted away from my memory, I will always remember the countless discussions I had with Mike when the Film Discussion Thread first began. I've known him longer than most people I interact with in real life. So very sorry for everyone he knew and touched.

Seeing pictures of him on his very last day on Facebook is heartbreaking.



Sven (17-11-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1889&p=611500&viewfull=1#post611500)

Wow. Hey friends. It's been some time, and it is strange and unfortunate that the impulse to check in just flared up over the last few days.

I'm so sorry to hear of this. There was much correspondence between us over the years, including a crucial conversation I had with him Mike a few years back regarding a friend that was having a hard time with rehab. His input was fantastic, and helped settle a lot of unresolved things. Goddamn, this is such a nightmare. Jacques, I haven't followed closely how things are developing, but I'm assuming I can PayPal you an amount that you can relay to the Beeckmans...

Man. He was one of the best.



Melville (17-11-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1889&p=611488&viewfull=1#post611488)

I just happened to check in here today after longer than I can remember. This is really fucking sad. I'm glad I saw it in time to chip in.



origami_mustache (23-05-2020): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?14-28-Film-Discussion-Threads-Later/page2775&p=620993&viewfull=1#post620993)

I just watched White Chicks for the first time.



Dead & Messed Up (12-09-2020): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?14-28-Film-Discussion-Threads-Later/page2797&p=626508&viewfull=1#post626508)

How awkward it sounds. Bane's response "for you" is a plausible follow to "It would be extremely painful..." but immediately follows "You're a big guy," which makes it sound like he's diminishing how big he is. "You're a big guy" / "For you." By the time I processed what Bane was actually following up on, the scene had moved on.



Qrazy (25-08-2020): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?2600-The-Race-to-Finish-Someone-Else-s-Arbitrary-Best-of-List/page23&p=625565&viewfull=1#post625565)

Yeah.

Not sure if this is the appropriate thread, or if the post itself is appropriate. But I thought someone else might like to reminisce.

[megladon8]

Thanks for that.

I miss all of them. Every single one.

[Dukefrukem]

Between 2013-2016 or thereabouts, I stopped watching movies and thus stopped participating in Match Cut. When I came back, I noticed a lot of users I remembered had gone, and more still have stopped posting in the past five years. I came across some of these users as I went through some of my older posts and wondered what their final contribution to MC had been.



lovejuice (24-05-2012): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?3999-Dark-Shadows-(Tim-Burton)&p=421341#post421341)




soitgoes... (11-03-2013): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?14-28-Film-Discussion-Threads-Later/page2527&p=470189&viewfull=1#post470189)




B-side (06-09-2013): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5009-Riddick-(David-Twohy)&p=493352&viewfull=1#post493352)




Philosophe_rouge (15-09-2013): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5036-My-Best-Performance-Ingrid-Bergman&p=494167&viewfull=1#post494167)




balmakboor (15-07-2014): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1904-Post-your-top-100-in-here/page14&p=519149&viewfull=1#post519149[/url)




Bosco B Thug (18-12-2014): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5740-Knight-of-Cups-(Terrence-Malick)&p=531617&viewfull=1#post531617)




eternity (15-03-2015): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5842-Chappie-(Neill-Blomkamp)&p=535630&viewfull=1#post535630)




Rowland (06-05-2015): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5900-Avengers-Age-of-Ultron-(Joss-Whedon)/page5&p=539196&viewfull=1#post539196)




Boner M (10-05-2015): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5910-MC-Consensus-Best-of-the-Decade-So-Far/page2&p=539488&viewfull=1#post539488)




EyesWideOpen (23-08-2015): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?50-Video-Games-Discuss-Them/page1016&p=545074&viewfull=1#post545074)




Derek (27-05-2016): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?12-Discuss-the-Musics-Thread/page123&p=556509&viewfull=1#post556509)




Raiders (25-07-2016): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?6342-High-Rise-(Ben-Wheatley-2016)&p=558759&viewfull=1#post558759)




Kurosawa Fan (07-01-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5573-Video-Essays-Every-Frame-a-Painting/page7&p=584795&viewfull=1#post584795)


He passed away from cancer. May he rest in peace.



Izzy Black (29-01-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?7044-Phantom-Thread-(Paul-Thomas-Anderson)/page3&p=586418&viewfull=1#post586418)




D_Davis (02-03-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?50-Video-Games-Discuss-Them/page1101&p=588290&viewfull=1#post588290)




Sycophant (08-04-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?7101-Isle-of-Dogs-(Wes-Anderson)/page2&p=589865&viewfull=1#post589865)




monolith94 (14-07-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1849&p=592876&viewfull=1#post592876)




Winston* (06-12-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1859&p=597419&viewfull=1#post597419)




number8 (23-12-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?7367-Cannot-Post-Reply&p=598226&viewfull=1#post598226)




Spinal (07-05-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?7381-Game-of-Thrones-(The-Final-Season-8-)/page11&p=604248&viewfull=1#post604248)




Mara (17-11-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1889&p=611472&viewfull=1#post611472)




Watashi (17-11-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1889&p=611478&viewfull=1#post611478)




Sven (17-11-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1889&p=611500&viewfull=1#post611500)




Melville (17-11-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1889&p=611488&viewfull=1#post611488)




origami_mustache (23-05-2020): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?14-28-Film-Discussion-Threads-Later/page2775&p=620993&viewfull=1#post620993)




Dead & Messed Up (12-09-2020): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?14-28-Film-Discussion-Threads-Later/page2797&p=626508&viewfull=1#post626508)




Qrazy (25-08-2020): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?2600-The-Race-to-Finish-Someone-Else-s-Arbitrary-Best-of-List/page23&p=625565&viewfull=1#post625565)


Not sure if this is the appropriate thread, or if the post itself is appropriate. But I thought someone else might like to reminisce.

I wonder why number8 stopped posting. It's his website after all.

[Ezee E]

Duke should change his name and see how long it takes for d_davis to notice.

[megladon8]

Duke should change his name and see how long it takes for d_davis to notice.

I don't think he comes around here anymore.

He has a YouTube channel and some other stuff going on.

[Stay Puft]

origami_mustache went out in style lol

[Dukefrukem]

If people really wanted d_davis to stick around I would have been dropped as admin immediately. No one said a peep.

[Skitch]

If people really wanted d_davis to stick around I would have been dropped as admin immediately. No one said a peep.

I don't get involved in PvP

[StuSmallz]

Between 2013-2016 or thereabouts, I stopped watching movies and thus stopped participating in Match Cut. When I came back, I noticed a lot of users I remembered had gone, and more still have stopped posting in the past five years. I came across some of these users as I went through some of my older posts and wondered what their final contribution to MC had been.



lovejuice (24-05-2012): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?3999-Dark-Shadows-(Tim-Burton)&p=421341#post421341)




soitgoes... (11-03-2013): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?14-28-Film-Discussion-Threads-Later/page2527&p=470189&viewfull=1#post470189)




B-side (06-09-2013): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5009-Riddick-(David-Twohy)&p=493352&viewfull=1#post493352)




Philosophe_rouge (15-09-2013): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5036-My-Best-Performance-Ingrid-Bergman&p=494167&viewfull=1#post494167)




balmakboor (15-07-2014): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1904-Post-your-top-100-in-here/page14&p=519149&viewfull=1#post519149[/url)




Bosco B Thug (18-12-2014): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5740-Knight-of-Cups-(Terrence-Malick)&p=531617&viewfull=1#post531617)




eternity (15-03-2015): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5842-Chappie-(Neill-Blomkamp)&p=535630&viewfull=1#post535630)




Rowland (06-05-2015): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5900-Avengers-Age-of-Ultron-(Joss-Whedon)/page5&p=539196&viewfull=1#post539196)




Boner M (10-05-2015): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5910-MC-Consensus-Best-of-the-Decade-So-Far/page2&p=539488&viewfull=1#post539488)




EyesWideOpen (23-08-2015): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?50-Video-Games-Discuss-Them/page1016&p=545074&viewfull=1#post545074)




Derek (27-05-2016): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?12-Discuss-the-Musics-Thread/page123&p=556509&viewfull=1#post556509)




Raiders (25-07-2016): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?6342-High-Rise-(Ben-Wheatley-2016)&p=558759&viewfull=1#post558759)




Kurosawa Fan (07-01-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5573-Video-Essays-Every-Frame-a-Painting/page7&p=584795&viewfull=1#post584795)


He passed away from cancer. May he rest in peace.



Izzy Black (29-01-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?7044-Phantom-Thread-(Paul-Thomas-Anderson)/page3&p=586418&viewfull=1#post586418)




D_Davis (02-03-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?50-Video-Games-Discuss-Them/page1101&p=588290&viewfull=1#post588290)




Sycophant (08-04-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?7101-Isle-of-Dogs-(Wes-Anderson)/page2&p=589865&viewfull=1#post589865)




monolith94 (14-07-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1849&p=592876&viewfull=1#post592876)




Winston* (06-12-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1859&p=597419&viewfull=1#post597419)




number8 (23-12-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?7367-Cannot-Post-Reply&p=598226&viewfull=1#post598226)




Spinal (07-05-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?7381-Game-of-Thrones-(The-Final-Season-8-)/page11&p=604248&viewfull=1#post604248)




Mara (17-11-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1889&p=611472&viewfull=1#post611472)




Watashi (17-11-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1889&p=611478&viewfull=1#post611478)




Sven (17-11-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1889&p=611500&viewfull=1#post611500)




Melville (17-11-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1889&p=611488&viewfull=1#post611488)




origami_mustache (23-05-2020): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?14-28-Film-Discussion-Threads-Later/page2775&p=620993&viewfull=1#post620993)




Dead & Messed Up (12-09-2020): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?14-28-Film-Discussion-Threads-Later/page2797&p=626508&viewfull=1#post626508)




Qrazy (25-08-2020): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?2600-The-Race-to-Finish-Someone-Else-s-Arbitrary-Best-of-List/page23&p=625565&viewfull=1#post625565)


Not sure if this is the appropriate thread, or if the post itself is appropriate. But I thought someone else might like to reminisce.Man, seeing some of those names again really takes me back...

https://i.ibb.co/rb2xFDT/wk-Vo-OS476h322v-RIl-XQn-Gv3-Yk4.gif (https://imgbb.com/)

[StuSmallz]

How are we defining "modern" serial killer thrillers? What historical shift occurred in the early '90s that makes The Silence of the Lambs "modern" and Manhunter a "classic" serial killer movie (along with M, The Leopard Man, Peeping Tom, and Psycho)? After all, a lot of the films being cited here as "modern" are already pretty old (Demme's film is now thirty years old), suggesting that the only reason for making a distinction between classic and modern is to tacitly acknowledge that the films in the latter category aren't as good as those in the former (and for all its genuine virtues, Se7en strikes me as considerably less impressive than the films by Lang, Tourneur, Powell, and Hitchcock), and that it's unfair to even compare them. In other words, the distinction here between modern and classic functions to disguise a type of affirmative action for latter day filmmakers who were unfortunate enough to begin their careers after the collapse of the old studio system that nurtured Lang, Hitchcock, Powell, and Tourneur, and after its genres had been largely exhausted.I can't speak for how meg defines it, since I was mostly just following his lead in discussing "modern" serial killer thrillers, but I suppose you could try drawing the line at Silence, given the wave of films in the genre that followed in its wake, after its huge overall success arguably gave those kind of movies something of a boost in popularity. That being said, I do think it would make more sense to draw the line between classic and modern serial killer movies based upon the content they portray, which would put that line much farther back at around 1960, since, while both movies were directed by the same person, there's obviously a significant difference in the level of graphicness of something like Shadow Of A Doubt when compared to Psycho, you know?

[DFA1979]

Between 2013-2016 or thereabouts, I stopped watching movies and thus stopped participating in Match Cut. When I came back, I noticed a lot of users I remembered had gone, and more still have stopped posting in the past five years. I came across some of these users as I went through some of my older posts and wondered what their final contribution to MC had been.



lovejuice (24-05-2012): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?3999-Dark-Shadows-(Tim-Burton)&p=421341#post421341)




soitgoes... (11-03-2013): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?14-28-Film-Discussion-Threads-Later/page2527&p=470189&viewfull=1#post470189)




B-side (06-09-2013): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5009-Riddick-(David-Twohy)&p=493352&viewfull=1#post493352)




Philosophe_rouge (15-09-2013): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5036-My-Best-Performance-Ingrid-Bergman&p=494167&viewfull=1#post494167)




balmakboor (15-07-2014): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1904-Post-your-top-100-in-here/page14&p=519149&viewfull=1#post519149[/url)




Bosco B Thug (18-12-2014): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5740-Knight-of-Cups-(Terrence-Malick)&p=531617&viewfull=1#post531617)




eternity (15-03-2015): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5842-Chappie-(Neill-Blomkamp)&p=535630&viewfull=1#post535630)




Rowland (06-05-2015): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5900-Avengers-Age-of-Ultron-(Joss-Whedon)/page5&p=539196&viewfull=1#post539196)




Boner M (10-05-2015): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5910-MC-Consensus-Best-of-the-Decade-So-Far/page2&p=539488&viewfull=1#post539488)




EyesWideOpen (23-08-2015): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?50-Video-Games-Discuss-Them/page1016&p=545074&viewfull=1#post545074)




Derek (27-05-2016): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?12-Discuss-the-Musics-Thread/page123&p=556509&viewfull=1#post556509)




Raiders (25-07-2016): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?6342-High-Rise-(Ben-Wheatley-2016)&p=558759&viewfull=1#post558759)




Kurosawa Fan (07-01-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?5573-Video-Essays-Every-Frame-a-Painting/page7&p=584795&viewfull=1#post584795)


He passed away from cancer. May he rest in peace.



Izzy Black (29-01-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?7044-Phantom-Thread-(Paul-Thomas-Anderson)/page3&p=586418&viewfull=1#post586418)




D_Davis (02-03-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?50-Video-Games-Discuss-Them/page1101&p=588290&viewfull=1#post588290)




Sycophant (08-04-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?7101-Isle-of-Dogs-(Wes-Anderson)/page2&p=589865&viewfull=1#post589865)




monolith94 (14-07-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1849&p=592876&viewfull=1#post592876)




Winston* (06-12-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1859&p=597419&viewfull=1#post597419)




number8 (23-12-2018): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?7367-Cannot-Post-Reply&p=598226&viewfull=1#post598226)




Spinal (07-05-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?7381-Game-of-Thrones-(The-Final-Season-8-)/page11&p=604248&viewfull=1#post604248)




Mara (17-11-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1889&p=611472&viewfull=1#post611472)




Watashi (17-11-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1889&p=611478&viewfull=1#post611478)




Sven (17-11-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1889&p=611500&viewfull=1#post611500)




Melville (17-11-2019): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?1-Random-Thoughts/page1889&p=611488&viewfull=1#post611488)




origami_mustache (23-05-2020): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?14-28-Film-Discussion-Threads-Later/page2775&p=620993&viewfull=1#post620993)




Dead & Messed Up (12-09-2020): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?14-28-Film-Discussion-Threads-Later/page2797&p=626508&viewfull=1#post626508)




Qrazy (25-08-2020): (http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?2600-The-Race-to-Finish-Someone-Else-s-Arbitrary-Best-of-List/page23&p=625565&viewfull=1#post625565)


Not sure if this is the appropriate thread, or if the post itself is appropriate. But I thought someone else might like to reminisce.Eternity, Mara and rouge follow me on Twitter. I'm also Facebook friends with B-Side, Sven, DaMU and Eternity. Last I checked number8 was on Twitter. Also I thought Winston still posted here. I last saw Izzy on the Corrie no idea where he went when the site was killed off. Wats is on FB but um yeah we are not friends haha.

[StuSmallz]

And speaking of serial killer thrillers...


https://i.ibb.co/RPtD362/original.png (https://ibb.co/vmfj3d1)


Have the lambs stopped

screaming yet?


When it comes to the kind of movies that typically come to mind when you think of Best Picture winners, what pops up first? Do you think of an emotionally solemn, three hour black-and-white drama about The Holocaust? Or maybe a classy Mafia epic, driven by one man's slow but inevitable fall from moral grace? How about a disturbing, repulsively grimy thriller about an FBI agent's race to catch a serial killer before he slays and skins his next victim? Wait, that last one sounds a bit out of place, doesn't it? Well, if that's the case, then it's an eternal credit to the skill of the artists involved in making Silence Of The Lambs that the film managed to transcend its lurid trappings in the process of becoming a great film, one that not only won an aforementioned Best Picture Oscar, that not only additionally dominated that year's ceremony with its rare haul of all five "top" Oscars (Picture, Director, Actress, Actor, and Screenplay), but has also stood tall in the past thirty years as a truly iconic work of modern film, and one of the most influential Thrillers to ever come out of Hollywood to boot.


Adapted from the novel of the same name by Thomas Harris (who's actually from my hometown of Jackson, Tennessee; woot!), Silence tells the story of Clarice Starling, a young FBI trainee who is tasked with the "interesting errand" of profiling Dr. Hannibal Lecter, a brilliant but utterly sadistic serial killer, in the desperate hope that doing so may lend some psychological insight into the mindset of another killer, "Buffalo Bill", before he can notch up yet another victim. However, when it's unexpectedly discovered that Lecter has a personal connection to Bill deep in his murky past, his relevance to the case suddenly becomes one of upmost importance, with his captors, the politically powerful family of Bill's latest intended victim, and the FBI as a whole all jockeying to position themselves close to the fine (not so young) cannibal, all the while his real subject of interest remains Clarice, and the series of sadistic mind games he repeatedly ensnares her in.


It's the central dynamic that gives the film its drive, with both actors putting on superb, Oscar-worthy (and more importantly, Oscar-winning) performances, with Anthony Hopkins' Lecter making for a one-of-a-kind, highly cultured killer, one who's always acutely aware of his surroundings, seeming like he's in complete control of his situation at all times, even when he's trapped in a glass box, or completely restrained from head-to-toe. He sort of comes off like a giant spider wearing human skin, luring its victims into his web with his particular brand of mind games, as he's immediately able to zero in on his prey's deepest insecurities and fears, abusing his intellectual brilliance in psychiatry for his own sinister means, as he always knows just what to say or do in order to get under other people's skin (in more ways than one, as a shocking mid-film development shows).


On the other hand, while Jodie Foster's Clarice hasn't become quite as big a cultural icon (because who else could've, honestly?), she makes up for it with her overall relatability, serving as an empathetic "everywoman" surrounded by a bunch of freaks, and showcasing a shaky vulnerability in a world full of predatory men throughout (particularly in the scene where she recounts her worst childhood memory, which nearly certainly cinched her that Best Actress Oscar), while also showing a certain resilience and resourcefulness at the same time, whether it be her taking the initiative to open up a long deserted crime scene, boldly taking down a killer single-handedly, or continually being the only character clever enough to decipher the cryptic trail of clues Hannibal leaves behind him everywhere he goes. However, even though that process brings her ever closer to solving the case, it still ends up unlocking her darkest, most personal secrets at the time, leaving her with fresh scars on her psyche, and the question of whether it was all worth it by the film's end.


However, what is not even remotely in question for us is if Silence was worth the time it takes to watch it, since the answer to that is a resounding "YES", as the film simultaneously submerses us in a deep, dark world of serial killers, a world comprised of dank, dungeon-like psychiatric facilities, abandoned storage units that hold nasty surprises within, and grimy, labyrinthine killers' lairs, while also avoiding a potentially trashy, exploitative overall tone at the same time, with the combination of Harris's strong underlying source material (which managed to carry even a hack like Brett Ratner to a solid film with Red Dragon) and Johnathan Demme's classy, intelligent overall direction of the film, as Silence contains the most striking examples of the technique that Demme was best known for, that of having his actors looking directly into the camera, in order to bring a whole new level of intimacy to the film, one that makes us feel as one with the characters, even when we'd really rather not. It's a film that doesn't flinch one bit from peering deep down into the darkness of the human soul, bringing back with it some of the most iconic performances in modern film, an undeniably blurring of the line between "high" & "low" art in cinema, and what has to be admitted as just a great filmmaking in general, regardless of how disturbed it may make one feel personally; if you don't agree, then feel free to go eat your own liver, with some fava beans and a nice Chianti.

Final Score: 9
.

[Yxklyx]

Great review - time for a rewatch!