28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[Qrazy]

Since I have both movies, I'm just wondering whether I should prioritize this over Mind Game because I really want to see 5 Centimeters per Second eventually as well.

It's the weakest out of those three.

[Qrazy]

Okay? Care to enlighten me then?


Because it was trite and cloying.

[MacGuffin]

Because it was trite and cloying.

Yeah, that too.

[baby doll]

I'm slowly realizing that Dustin Hoffman might be my favorite actor, dead or alive.Where do you stand on Ishtar?

[Watashi]

Where do you stand on Ishtar?
I haven't seen it and it's unavailable off Netflix.

[Rowland]

we're seeing a family composed of fleshed out characters who care about one another being mercilessly slaughtered.

Fleshed out characters? I don't recall learning a thing about them as people. We only get the bourgeoisie surface.

Anyway, I think Alex Jackson's review (http://cc.usu.edu/~alexjack/viddiedreviews/funnygames.html) of the movie is interesting, in its interpretation of Haneke's intentions, how he fails at accomplishing these, and how the movie succeeds for him in spite of this.

[Sycophant]

Um, Netflix sent me a fullscreen copy of Boyz N the Hood. What the fuck.

[trotchky]

Frownland makes a good companion piece to Damon Packard's Reflections of Evil: both depict modern urban Hells steeped in profound psychological unrest; particularly, perpetual anxiety and paranoia, evoked largely by an oppressive use of sound; the former, however, contains a protagonist who epitomizes all the fucked up things in his world, whereas the latter is a victim of them; both, however, could not exist outside of our culture. Both very good movies in their own rights.

[MacGuffin]

Frownland makes a good companion piece to Damon Packard's Reflections of Evil: both depict modern urban Hells steeped in profound psychological unrest; particularly, perpetual anxiety and paranoia, evoked largely by an oppressive use of sound; the former, however, contains a protagonist who epitomizes all the fucked up things in his world, whereas the latter is a victim of them; both, however, could not exist outside of our culture. Both very good movies in their own rights.

Most excellent. I guess I'll have to see it! :)

[trotchky]

Most excellent. I guess I'll have to see it! :)

Yeah, it's actually a lot better than I was expecting it to be. It has a greater sense of purpose - I thought it would be a (admittedly fun) freakshow, but it's a lot more than that. Also, very, very funny.

Also, I feel the need to compare this to Juno, which I saw last night, but I'm not sure what there is to say. I guess the divide between a movie that essentially makes the audience uncomfortable from beginning to end, and a movie that goes out of its way to make sure the audience is never uncomfortable, is pretty self-evident.

[Melville]

Maybe, but I think it's as much if not more a film commenting on slashers and horror films than on psychological thrillers... and people who watch and enjoy the killings in such films. But in Funny Games the killings aren't funny or remotely enjoyable because we're not seeing vapid victims dying gruesomely, we're seeing a family composed of fleshed out characters who care about one another being mercilessly slaughtered.
Yeah, I was really thinking of slasher movies of the serial killer variety when I said "psychological thriller"... poor choice of words on my part. But I think that in a lot of cases, murder scenes don't make the audience cheer on the killing, but rather they thrill the audience by increasing the illusion that the danger is real—that the remaining characters (at least one of whom they probably hope will escape) are in real trouble now. There is definitely the other aspect of people cheering on great "kills" in a horror movie. But Funny Games doesn't really have any scenes of tremendous violence, so I don't think it says as much about our enjoyment of slasher murder scenes as it does about our anticipation of them. What it does say about the former ("you were waiting for some baroque, fetishized murders of stock characters? Well, you're not gonna get them; here are some objectively presented, horrifying murders of realistic people instead. Suck on that.") still doesn't confuse one's anticipation of viewing a murder with one's desire to actually commit murder.


Taken from voyeur angle which I agree is focal to the film, I would still argue the film starts and ends with faulty premises because it assumes/concludes that this voyeurism is a perverse trait rather than a natural one. Emotional strain can be enjoyable when it's controlled and I see nothing inherently perverse about that. For instance, such as when a friend frightens us but then we realize it was a friend, so we don't have to worry about being harmed and we can laugh it off or when a thriller film character is brought to the brink of death but then survives at the last second. In my opinion it is the stretching and then the release of our anxiety that we enjoy. This often occurs in the film itself when the hero gets away and even in the films where the hero doesn't get away it still occurs when the lights come on and we are made to realize that it was all just a movie.
That might be true, but I think the film succeeds in making us question the nature of our reaction.


Fleshed out characters? I don't recall learning a thing about them as people. We only get the bourgeoisie surface.
The characters aren't fleshed out, but they are presented as real people rather than simply cannon fodder.


Anyway, I think Alex Jackson's review (http://cc.usu.edu/~alexjack/viddiedreviews/funnygames.html) of the movie is interesting, in its interpretation of Haneke's intentions, how he fails at accomplishing these, and how the movie succeeds for him in spite of this.
I mostly agree with the first half of that review, but the second half certainly doesn't describe my experience of the film. First off, it doesn't make much sense to me that the camera provides the killers' perspective. The camera provides Haneke's perspective, and thereby my perspective; it is the perspective that Haneke forces me to take along with him. When the villain turns and winks at us, he acknowledges that we're watching him. And if we're watching him then we clearly can't have the same perspective as him. Furthermore, I don't see how the wink would make me root for the villain. It makes me acknowledge that I know the dog is dead, that I'm engrossed in the villain's games and implicitly culpable for them. But that distances me from the villain, rather than drawing me toward him, since I don't want to accept my culpability as an accessory to his crime. When the camera lingers on the horrifying aftermath of the son's murder, it doesn't make me bored or eager for the villains' exciting return; it makes me ponder the weight of what has occurred, hoping specifically that the villains do not return. And the last few paragraphs of the review, which suggest that the murders are some sort of wish fulfillment for the family, seem to have almost no relation to anything in the film.

I can see why some people would root for the villains in this movie, what with their smirking nonchalance and seeming omnipotence, and I agree that the film won't accomplish Haneke's intended purpose of converting such people. But if you're already a member of the choir, then the song sounds pretty good.

[ledfloyd]

welp. not 24 hours after the thread has closed my top ten has changed. In the Shadow of the Moon is nothing short of breathtaking. The best documentary of the year.

[Rowland]

I mostly agree with the first half of that review, but the second half certainly doesn't describe my experience of the film. First off, it doesn't make much sense to me that the camera provides the killers' perspective. The camera provides Haneke's perspective, and thereby my perspective; it is the perspective that Haneke forces me to take along with him. When the villain turns and winks at us, he acknowledges that we're watching him. And if we're watching him then we clearly can't have the same perspective as him. Furthermore, I don't see how the wink would make me root for the villain. It makes me acknowledge that I know the dog is dead, that I'm engrossed in the villain's games and implicitly culpable for them. But that distances me from the villain, rather than drawing me toward him, since I don't want to accept my culpability as an accessory to his crime. When the camera lingers on the horrifying aftermath of the son's murder, it doesn't make me bored or eager for the villains' exciting return; it makes me ponder the weight of what has occurred, hoping specifically that the villains do not return. And the last few paragraphs of the review, which suggest that the murders are some sort of wish fulfillment for the family, seem to have almost no relation to anything in the film.Yeah, I don't really agree with much of it myself, I just thought it was an interesting different perspective on the movie.

Honestly, I find thinking about the movie too much kind of insufferable. There can be such a thing as too much genre deconstruction, especially when it's so misanthropic, humorless, colorless, self-satisfied, and disengaged from reality. Lots of people seem to find the movie inspiring, enlightening, or edifying, which is cool, but for me... just, blech. It's more of a contraption than a movie.

[origami_mustache]

Full 97 minute Sigur Rós film Heima is being shared on youtube in pretty good quality and not broken into segments:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lr4s7KeCbV8

[MacGuffin]

Full 97 minute Sigur Rós film Heima is being shared on youtube in pretty good quality and not broken into segments:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lr4s7KeCbV8

Personally, if I were to watch this, I'd want to watch it on a bigger screen than the one on my laptop.

[D_Davis]

Full 97 minute Sigur Rós film Heima is being shared on youtube in pretty good quality and not broken into segments:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lr4s7KeCbV8

Very cool.

I watched part of this last weekend, good stuff.

[origami_mustache]

Personally, if I were to watch this, I'd want to watch it on a bigger screen than the one on my laptop.

I agree...but it's here...not sure if it's available to rent yet...wish I saw it at AFI Fest when I had the chance.

[Sven]

I think I prefer Mind Game to The Places Promised in Our Early Days, but only by a small margin. The more I think of the latter, the more ebullient and beautiful I recall it as. It was certainly unique, whereas Mind Game was kind of a revelation, though perhaps not to the order that Sycophant and Davis would have you expect. It's quite wonderful, but you probably shouldn't ever go into a movie expecting a life changing revelation.

[Watashi]

Man, In Bruges was a pretty cool flick. It's one of those films I would love to write review for if you know... I didn't suck at writing reviews.

[Sven]

Man, In Bruges was a pretty cool flick. It's one of those films I would love to write review for if you know... I didn't suck at writing reviews.

I've always liked your reviews.

[Watashi]

I've always liked your reviews.
So did I. I just wish I had fewer distractions.

[Spinal]

Black Snake Moan was a really weird experience in that there would be a scene that I would love, then a scene that I would hate, then a scene that I would love, then a scene that I would hate, then a couple scenes that I couldn't decide if I loved or hated. One thing I know for certain is that Ricci was very good in this. I'm sure if I thought about it too much, I would probably like the film less, but it was all right. Loved the scene where Ricci is lying on her side listening to Jackson play guitar with the storm in the background.

[Melville]

Lots of people seem to find the movie inspiring, enlightening, or edifying, which is cool, but for me... just, blech. It's more of a contraption than a movie.
I wouldn't call it inspiring, enlightening, or edifying, but I think it's a pretty interesting contraption and a well made thriller. I can easily understand people being put off by its transparent agenda, though.

[ledfloyd]

Black Snake Moan was a really weird experience in that there would be a scene that I would love, then a scene that I would hate, then a scene that I would love, then a scene that I would hate, then a couple scenes that I couldn't decide if I loved or hated. One thing I know for certain is that Ricci was very good in this. I'm sure if I thought about it too much, I would probably like the film less, but it was all right. Loved the scene where Ricci is lying on her side listening to Jackson play guitar with the storm in the background.
easily the best scene in the film i think. i thought jackson and ricci were both fantastic throughout. as much as i love it, there's no doubt it's a flawed film. but i'm willing to overlook the flaws.

[megladon8]

The Science of Sleep was very "meh".

Gael Garcia Bernal played the character well, but it just wasn't someone I connected with personally - which is especially odd, considering how close I felt to the actual events he was experiencing.

It's very much "imagination captured on film", but it's just not the type of imagination I found very interesting. The first few fantasies were neat, but the novelty wore off quickly.

[Qrazy]

Yeah, I was really thinking of slasher movies of the serial killer variety when I said "psychological thriller"... poor choice of words on my part. But I think that in a lot of cases, murder scenes don't make the audience cheer on the killing, but rather they thrill the audience by increasing the illusion that the danger is real—that the remaining characters (at least one of whom they probably hope will escape) are in real trouble now. There is definitely the other aspect of people cheering on great "kills" in a horror movie. But Funny Games doesn't really have any scenes of tremendous violence, so I don't think it says as much about our enjoyment of slasher murder scenes as it does about our anticipation of them. What it does say about the former ("you were waiting for some baroque, fetishized murders of stock characters? Well, you're not gonna get them; here are some objectively presented, horrifying murders of realistic people instead. Suck on that.") still doesn't confuse one's anticipation of viewing a murder with one's desire to actually commit murder.

Ok, not confuse but I still feel he's viewing voyeurism from a presupposed inherently negative light.



That might be true, but I think the film succeeds in making us question the nature of our reaction.

This is true, it does succeed in making us question but by the end of my reflections I found that I rejected it's conclusions or what I take to be it's conclusions.



The characters aren't fleshed out, but they are presented as real people rather than simply cannon fodder.

Yes, this is what I meant.

[soitgoes...]

welp. not 24 hours after the thread has closed my top ten has changed. In the Shadow of the Moon is nothing short of breathtaking. The best documentary of the year. The best Imdb 2007 film, that I've seen thus far. My only gripe, if you can call it that, is that it lacked Neil Armstrong. Having him involved would have made it a smidge better.

[Russ]

The Circus (Chaplin, 1928) ***1/2
Awesome, monkey boy. You're 2/3 of the way through.

[soitgoes...]

Man, I'm trying to watch To's The Mission, but the DVD transfer is unbearably bad. The translations are way off and they are on the screen for a split second. Not to mention the image looks like shit. Oh well.
Yeah it's terrible. One of the worst I've see. I watched only 10 minutes before I gave up. Only recently did I download it to get a chance to see it properly.

[Yxklyx]

Yeah it's terrible. One of the worst I've see. I watched only 10 minutes before I gave up. Only recently did I download it to get a chance to see it properly.

Hmm, I didn't have a problem with my The Mission DVD from Netflix.

[dreamdead]

Finally knocked out Antonioni's L'Avventura. Marvelously cold filmmaking, and intriguing in its study of how little one's disappearance affects a larger community, as romance and desire continue unabated. While some of that, of course, is a critique of bourgeois ethics, I think the repurcussions of this extend beyond that. It's equally interesting in its gender politics, especially in how the finale signals a transformative movement away from desire for Claudia even if Sandro remains impotent in his static repetitions of longing.

[Sycophant]

Man. I know my copy of The Mission isn't that great (I believe it's the original Mei Ah release), but popping it in real quick, it certainly isn't unwatchably bad. Maybe my standards are just lower, but is there really a worse disc out there?

Either way, it needs some serious attention from somebody somewhere.

[D_Davis]

Man. I know my copy of The Mission isn't that great (I believe it's the original Mei Ah release), but popping it in real quick, it certainly isn't unwatchably bad. Maybe my standards are just lower, but is there really a worse disc out there?

Either way, it needs some serious attention from somebody somewhere.

There's only one DVD of this, and it is really bad. It's the Mei Ah release. It has burnt in images of the opening credits throughout the film, the contrast is terrible, and the whole thing is really washed out. The sound is pretty bad too. It's a really bad DVD. It's not totally unwatchable, but a film this good deserves much better. It definitely looks better on a smaller TV, it looks like crap projected on my screen.

[ledfloyd]

The best Imdb 2007 film, that I've seen thus far. My only gripe, if you can call it that, is that it lacked Neil Armstrong. Having him involved would have made it a smidge better.
i thought that as well. but in retrospect, i think it was kind of nice that it gave the other guys time to shine. i especially enjoyed hearing mike collins. i dunno if neal would've made it better. hearing his thoughts as he stepped onto the moon would've been cool. i just thought it was cool to hear from the guys you don't usually hear from. jim lovell and buzz aldrin are the only real "names" in the film.

[Grouchy]

Torrente 2: Mission in Marbella is more Segura goodness, with an endless line of cameos and enough mean-spiritidness and ugliness to scare off Trey and Matt for South Park. I read New Line Cinema bought the rights to the Torrente character, but there's no way a movie in this same vein can be made in US soil - its Spain setting is also essential to the comedy. Of course, this sequel is less tight than the original, which makes me unsure about the quality of the third one, but it's still a whole lot of fun. If you can trak down this insane trilogy over there, please do it. You'll probably regret it.

[Grouchy]

Incidentally, I want to write my review for No Country for Old Men, but I wanna use that awesome Japanese poster that someone posted a while back on this thread before we started with the Ghana posters, yet I can't find it on the thread or anywhere else. Can some kind soul direct me to it?

[trotchky]

Incidentally, I want to write my review for No Country for Old Men, but I wanna use that awesome Japanese poster that someone posted a while back on this thread before we started with the Ghana posters, yet I can't find it on the thread or anywhere else. Can some kind soul direct me to it?

http://match-cut.org/showpost.php?p=42655&postcount=8354

[Grouchy]

Thanks a bunch.

[ledfloyd]

Juno was an entry in today's NY Times crossword. :|

[lovejuice]

I'm slowly realizing that Dustin Hoffman might be my favorite actor, dead or alive.

not many people can inspire my "favorite"-ness after i kick the bucket. you must really like him.

[Sven]

I totally love this trend of interesting filmmakers coming out with their greatest works:

Coens with No Country
Anderson with Darjeeling
Chow with CJ7

I cannot wax rhapsodic enough about how joyous and moving this new Stephen Chow film is.

[Stay Puft]

Chow with CJ7

I cannot wax rhapsodic enough about how joyous and moving this new Stephen Chow film is.

:eek:

I can't wait to see this!

[MacGuffin]

I totally love this trend of interesting filmmakers coming out with their greatest works:

Anderson with Darjeeling


:crazy:

[Watashi]

The preview for CJ7 looked really, really stupid.

[Rowland]

I cannot wax rhapsodic enough about how joyous and moving this new Stephen Chow film is.That was predictable. :P

I'm still approaching it with trepidation, but I'd love to see my concerns proven unjustified.

[Sven]

The preview for CJ7 looked really, really stupid.

It is anything but. It's silly, surely, but it's Chow's most accomplished storytelling, as well as his most purely emotional. It's optimistic and genuine (the pain in this movie, whether it be disciplinary spankings or a horrifying accident, is practically tactile). It also has probably has the most expressive use of CGI I've ever seen.

[Rowland]

I felt that most of the joy and emotion in his previous two movies stemmed from his formal verve and imagination. This scenario doesn't seem like it'd play to these strengths as well as those did.

[Sven]

I felt that most of the joy and emotion in his previous two movies stemmed from his formal verve and imagination. This scenario doesn't seem like it'd play to these strengths as well as those did.
Well, compared to Kung Fu Hustle, not many scenarios would be capable of playing at that level. That, and Shaolin Soccer, are both creations designed for maximum kinetics and surreality. But what those films lack, a real emotional resonance, CJ7 makes up for in abundance. And all of this is not to say that it is not an imaginative film. On the contrary.

Oh, and I had no idea that the little boy, Dicky, was played by a little girl (and she's an excellent actress). Supposedly, a couple of the other little boys at Dicky's school are played by girls as well. This is a very interesting thing that Chow is doing. I will have to think about it.

[Ezee E]

Heh, I have now seen all three remakes of Body Snatchers. I guess I should see the original at some point.

[ledfloyd]

I totally love this trend of interesting filmmakers coming out with their greatest works:

Coens with No Country
Anderson with Darjeeling
Chow with CJ7

I cannot wax rhapsodic enough about how joyous and moving this new Stephen Chow film is.

i agree with the first two and love chow. i must see this.

[Grouchy]

Heh, I have now seen all three remakes of Body Snatchers. I guess I should see the original at some point.
I only lack seeing the Abel Ferrara one. The original is great, and my favorite is the '70s version.

The Invasion is shitty beyond belief. How could something that awful have been made, switching directors and all?

[transmogrifier]

I totally love this trend of interesting filmmakers coming out with their greatest works:

Coens with No Country
Anderson with Darjeeling
Chow with CJ7

I cannot wax rhapsodic enough about how joyous and moving this new Stephen Chow film is.

Very wrong.
Slightly wrong.
Probably right, seeing as the other two Chow films I have seen were deeply stupid and dull.

[Qrazy]

The Throwdown (To) was pretty damn good. The first hour and ten minutes far out strips the last twenty, which get slightly bogged down in melodramatic sentamentalism, but despite this those last minutes are still purposeful and thematically reflect well on what has come earlier in the film.

It's also by far the funniest film I've seen from To.

[D_Davis]

The Throwdown (To) was pretty damn good. The first hour and ten minutes far out strips the last twenty, which get slightly bogged down in melodramatic sentamentalism, but despite this those last minutes are still purposeful and thematically reflect well on what has come earlier in the film.

It's also by far the funniest film I've seen from To.

It's a good movie. It really exemplifies To's ability to take a simple idea and follow it through and make something great out of it. To is also quite good at humor, some of his romantic comedies are excellent.

[Rowland]

Juno (2007) 40:pritch:

[Bosco B Thug]

I re-watched Tobe Hooper's glorious The Mangler to wash the awful taste MoH: The Damned Thing put in my mouth. Such a retarded movie. :) But I love it so, due to Ted Levine and the Hooper touch.

[transmogrifier]

:pritch:

I'm not the type of person to dislike a comedy because it tries to be hip; after all, there are plenty of people out there dedicated to exactly the same thing, and it could be intriguing in its own way.

However, I am the type of person to dislike a comedy that isn't funny.

[Boner M]

I caught the recent Cesar award-winner Secret of the Grain at the French film festival yesterday. I was trying to fight off sleep (unsuccessfully) for the first half hour, not because the film was boring but because I was tired, but apart from that it was extremely engaging. Full of life and energy all round, while giving insight into a milieu rarely seen in film (immigrant Arab family on the outskirts of France), and the ensemble cast is extraordinary. Especially the actress who plays the young daughter, who is a new cinematic crush of mine. Had no idea that it was a 'food movie' going in (ala Babette's Feast, Big Night etc.), and would probably not have seen it had I known that. Dunno why, it's just a genre that's never sounded appealing to me. Comparisons to Renoir, Cassavetes and Pialat - which were what sold me - are apt. My rating would be a little higher had I been more awake for the first half-hour; the characters were inevitably slightly less absorbing, although I can't fault the film for that.

Then there's Hot Rod, which might as well be the quintessential 'SNL skit unsuccessfully padded out to feature length'. A few good laughs, much dead material, although there's a certain ramshackle charm to the entire film that keeps it from being painful. Still not very good.

[Rowland]

Then there's Hot Rod, which might as well be the quintessential 'SNL skit unsuccessfully padded out to feature length'. A few good laughs, much dead material, although there's a certain ramshackle charm to the entire film that keeps it from being painful. Still not very good.Yeah, this pretty much mirrors my response. I gave it two stars, which was probably too generous, but at least half a star was devoted to the kick-ass 80's throwback soundtrack. Too bad the rest of the 80's satire was witless and played out, except for the dancing Asian guy, who was a hilariously scathing caricature send-up.

[megladon8]

The fact that Burt Reynolds made it onto Premiere's list of "100 Sexiest Film Stars of All Time", and Cary Grant appears absolutely nowhere, makes me want to burn things.

[Rowland]

makes me want to burn things.Really? A Premiere list inspires that much passion in you? :P

[megladon8]

Really? A Premiere list inspires that much passion in you? :P


Yep...not as much as that original I Am Legend ending, and it's dolphin-related effects :)

[Rowland]

Since moving last weekend, I've only watched two movies. Well, I did watch Gerry two and a half times, but still, something about that dreadful experience has extinguished my desire to watch movies. I'm going to try to rekindle my interest this week, including a few visits to the theaters, since we're almost a third of the way through March and I've only seen two '08 releases so far this year.

[MadMan]

During Spring Break I will be catching up on Oscar nominees. And probably going to see 10,000 B.C. in theaters.

[Philosophe_rouge]

During Spring Break I will be catching up on Oscar nominees. And probably going to see 10,000 B.C. in theaters.
My spring break is still over a week away. This is madness. Sounds good about the Oscar stuff though, I've been meaning to round of 2007 myself. Not sure about 10,000 B.C. though

[megladon8]

Wow, I've spoken to two people in the last 5 days who thought the first Psycho was the weakest entry in the series.

:crazy:

[Grouchy]

Wow, I've spoken to two people in the last 5 days who thought the first Psycho was the weakest entry in the series.

:crazy:
I don't even think of it as a series.

[Wryan]

I'm not the type of person to dislike a comedy because it tries to be hip; after all, there are plenty of people out there dedicated to exactly the same thing, and it could be intriguing in its own way.

However, I am the type of person to dislike a comedy that isn't funny.

I laughed aplenty.

[MadMan]

My spring break is still over a week away. This is madness. Sounds good about the Oscar stuff though, I've been meaning to round of 2007 myself. Not sure about 10,000 B.C. thoughMy Spring Break is next week. But yeah I think the Oscar stuff will (hopefully) be good. I think 10,000 will be great cheesy fun. Just like The Patriot.

[Spinal]

Wow, I've spoken to two people in the last 5 days who thought the first Psycho was the weakest entry in the series.

:crazy:

Maybe the second person was really the first person in disguise.

[megladon8]

Maybe the second person was really the first person in disguise.


I'm beginning to think so.

there couldn't possibly be two poeple in the world who think this.

[transmogrifier]

Wow, I've spoken to two people in the last 5 days who thought the first Psycho was the weakest entry in the series.

:crazy:


If by "series" they mean "films in Alfred Hitchcock's filmography that transmogrifier has seen so far", then they are right on the money.

[transmogrifier]

I laughed aplenty.

Maybe you stole my share. That's just rude.

[origami_mustache]

Julien Donkey-Boy (Harmony Korine, 1999)


http://us.movies1.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/independent_pictures/julien_donkey_boy/_group_photos/chloe_sevigny3.jpg



Harmony Korine based this film and the character of Julien on his schizophrenic uncle. His intent was to avoid the simplicity and sentimentality that coincide with the portrayal of most mentally ill characters in mainstream cinema. Korine opts to delve into the disturbing world and fragmented imagination of an ill teenager and his insane family using the medium to help communicate a haunting depiction of reality that some people have to face. The film employs the techniques of the Dogme 95 manifesto including digital video format, natural lighting, hand-held camera work, realistic characters and settings, etc.; but Korine sets himself apart from the other Dogme films, that I've seen at least, by adopting his own aesthetics, using in camera adjustments such as shutter speed and aperture tinkering as well as high gain lending a very grainy look to the film. To some the look might seem unappealing, but I found it to be an excellent choice, especially given the tone and subject of the film. The cinematography is impressive throughout as the film presents several interesting compositions, my favorite of which being a dutch shot of the distant silhouette of Werner Herzog (Julian's father) wearing a gas mask and dancing to opera music framed between the candles of a beautiful chandelier in the foreground. Korine also uses editing to capture Julien's schizophrenic mindset and presents much of the narrative through a series of vignettes, sometimes employing frantic jump cuts and other times using a montage of still images as the sound continues in real time.

The film presents the characters as being out of touch with reality, and almost inside their own bubble, that we as viewers are not permitted to leave for the duration. However their is still a very humanistic quality to the presentation. In one touching scene Julien's pregnant sister played by Chloë Sevigny talks with him on the phone, pretending to be his deceased mother and comforting him; telling him the voices he hears are friendly and that she is watching him. Werner Herzog's antics are the most ridiculous and actually quite hilarious as he insults his children by calling them cowards, dilettantes, and sluts, chugs cough syrup from a slipper, offers his son $10 to wear his mother's dress and dance, and so on. Julien's brother Chris is another interesting character. Although he is seemingly the most "normal", his unsettling obsession with becoming a wrestler and rigorous training regiment appears just as insane as any of the other character's actions, especially when he begins wrestling a plastic trashcan. Another hilarious scene unfolds when Julien and Chris indulge in a wrestling match as the rest of the family watches and cheers them on.

Throughout the film a religious motif is prevalent as the family uses prayer and church hymns in different ways. In one scene the family appears to be the only Caucasians at an otherwise all black congregation. I'm not exactly sure if Korine means to deface religion or just acknowledge it's utility as a crutch by juxtaposing such iconography with the lower class, the less fortunate, and even insane and freak-like characters. My only minor complaint about the film is that it too often introduces random odd characters such as a black albino man, an armless man who does card tricks and plays drums, and a man who performs cigarette tricks. During these moments I felt the film begins to resemble a freak show of sorts, rather than offering something of value to the piece as a whole, but when it sticks to the examination of the family, the film really works.

[MacGuffin]

Julien Donkey-Boy (Harmony Korine, 1999)

Good review, man.

I think the characters Korine puts in the movie you mention are there precisely because he knew people would think of the movie as a "freak show" (as you had put it) if he did. They are sort of like a continuation of the many characters from Gummo and I think he is less interested in exploiting them so much as he is using them to evoke the question from people: "Why do I find these people that much different from Julien and his family?"

[Wryan]

Maybe you stole my share. That's just rude.

I'll buy you a parakeet.

[origami_mustache]

Good review, man.

I think the characters Korine puts in the movie you mention are there precisely because he knew people would think of the movie as a "freak show" (as you had put it) if he did. They are sort of like a continuation of the many characters from Gummo and I think he is less interested in exploiting them so much as he is using them to evoke the question from people: "Why do I find these people that much different from Julien and his family?"

OK, I can accept that.

It's disappointing with all of the fantastic shots I can think of from this film, that I couldn't find a good screen shot.

[Duncan]

Re: Gerry
Which one dies? I forget, which, in a way, is probably to the film's credit.

[Qrazy]

During these moments I felt the film begins to resemble a freak show of sorts, rather than offering something of value to the piece as a whole, but when it sticks to the examination of the family, the film really works.

Nah, it's pretty much garbage on every possible level.

[Qrazy]

Re: Gerry
Which one dies? I forget, which, in a way, is probably to the film's credit.

Casey Affleck and I don't think your forgetting really has anything to do with the film. ;)

[MacGuffin]

Nah, it's pretty much garbage on every possible level.

Negative rep.

[Rowland]

Re: Gerry
Which one dies? I forget, which, in a way, is probably to the film's credit.Affleck, who is the weaker of the two.

[Sven]

Kristen, on Twitter, on CJ7: Action, heart, the entire comedic spectrum, gender-blind casting and expert deployment of Boney M. What more do you need?

[Rowland]

expert deployment of Boney M. I don't get it.

[Sven]

I don't get it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boney_M

[Rowland]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boney_MAhhh. I thought it was some obscure in-joke relating to our dear Boner M.

[Sven]

Ahhh. I thought it was some obscure in-joke relating to our dear Boner M.

No. Alas. But that did connection did cross my mind.

[Sycophant]

It is anything but. It's silly, surely, but it's Chow's most accomplished storytelling, as well as his most purely emotional. It's optimistic and genuine (the pain in this movie, whether it be disciplinary spankings or a horrifying accident, is practically tactile). It also has probably has the most expressive use of CGI I've ever seen.I'm so jealous, I could fly out to New York and punch you. Though it would be far more practical and fun to fly out to New York and offer to watch it with you again.

[Sven]

I'm so jealous, I could fly out to New York and punch you. Though it would be far more practical and fun to fly out to New York and offer to watch it with you again.

Is there any word on when it'll come your way?

[Sycophant]

Is there any word on when it'll come your way?
Nope. Which is unspeakably cruel.

[Duncan]

What makes a Billy Wilder movie a Billy Wilder movie?
Well?

[MacGuffin]

Does anybody else like this music video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsSx5NA6sXw

[Qrazy]

Negative rep.

You know only real assholes actually give out negative rep, most just say it jokingly.

[MacGuffin]

You know only real assholes actually give out negative rep, most just say it jokingly.

That's nice. I know I'm not the only one who's tired of your shtick.

By the way, I'm the complete opposite of an asshole.

[Qrazy]

That's nice. I know I'm not the only one who's tired of your shtick.

By the way, I'm the complete opposite of an asshole.

Nah, you're pretty textbook.

[origami_mustache]

Nah, it's pretty much garbage on every possible level.

expand please...or stop wasting forum space.

[Rowland]

http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/7963/everlastwomenstraininggbh7.jpg

[Qrazy]

expand please...or stop wasting forum space.

The statement of an opinion is not a waste of forum space. A mind numbing twenty page argument about the film which boils down to fundamental ideological and aesthetic differences probably would be. I expressed my dislike of a film, while you are expressing your dislike of a post. There's a difference. If you people can't separate yourselves from the films you watch, that's not my problem. I see Raiders and tons of others posting sentence or two responses expressing their disdain for certain films. It's not as if there isn't a precedent. You Korine fanboys just need to chill.

[Philosophe_rouge]

http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/7963/everlastwomenstraininggbh7.jpg
I want these so bad

[Philosophe_rouge]

For national woman's month I've decided to watch at least a few films helmed by women. So far I've rented Cleo 5 a 7 and Dance, Girl, Dance. I also plan on seeing, if possible, Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles. Any other suggestions that aren't Sofia Coppola?

[MacGuffin]

The statement of an opinion is not a waste of forum space. A mind numbing twenty page argument about the film which boils down to fundamental ideological and aesthetic differences probably would be. I expressed my dislike of a film, while you are expressing your dislike of a post. There's a difference. If you people can't separate yourselves from the films you watch, that's not my problem. I see Raiders and tons of others posting sentence or two responses expressing their disdain for certain films. It's not as if there isn't a precedent. You Korine fanboys just need to chill.

What is the point if people just stated their opinions all the time? This forum wouldn't have a reason to exist. Your statement has no more use than a simple number rating, and I don't see why you thought that post would serve any purpose without supporting information.

[MacGuffin]

For national woman's month I've decided to watch at least a few films helmed by women. So far I've rented Cleo 5 a 7 and Dance, Girl, Dance. I also plan on seeing, if possible, Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles. Any other suggestions that aren't Sofia Coppola?

Claire Denis?

[Philosophe_rouge]

Claire Denis?
Any film in particular? I don't have enough time in my life to watch everything. Good suggestion though, she'd slipped my mind

[MacGuffin]

Any film in particular? I don't have enough time in my life to watch everything. Good suggestion though, she'd slipped my mind

The Intruder. It's probably the best spiritual epic I've ever seen. The changing of seasons serve as a symbolic spiritual backdrop for the main character, who goes through his spiritual journey looking for a heart transplant, and his son.

[origami_mustache]

The statement of an opinion is not a waste of forum space. A mind numbing twenty page argument about the film which boils down to fundamental ideological and aesthetic differences probably would be. I expressed my dislike of a film, while you are expressing your dislike of a post. There's a difference. If you people can't separate yourselves from the films you watch, that's not my problem. I see Raiders and tons of others posting sentence or two responses expressing their disdain for certain films. It's not as if there isn't a precedent. You Korine fanboys just need to chill.

I don't care that you dislike the film, but I do have a problem with the continuing barrage of concise "opinions" delivered with condescension and stated as if they are fact rather than giving reasons as to why.

[Rowland]

For national woman's month I've decided to watch at least a few films helmed by women. So far I've rented Cleo 5 a 7 and Dance, Girl, Dance. I also plan on seeing, if possible, Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles. Any other suggestions that aren't Sofia Coppola?Something by Jane Campion?

[Spinal]

Welcome to another edition of Maybe I'm Smoking Crack, But ...

Maybe I'm smoking crack, but Goya's Ghosts was utterly fantastic. I have no idea why this was treated so poorly upon its release. I found it to be a captivating and moving look at a tumultuous time in history and the way individuals can be crushed by the changing whims of authority. It is not a biopic of Goya, but rather the painter is used to examine the limits of artistic influence over the power of kings and cardinals. Goya's paintings depict the cruelties of the time; however, they are not enough to alter them. Eventually, he must made a decision whether to place himself in harm's way to change a life or be content to record history with his brush. Forman and his co-writer Jean-Claude Carrière successfully juggle big ideas while keeping the characters grounded and three-dimensional. Stellar performances by Bardem, Portman and Skarsgård.

Warning: the author of this post may or may not be smoking crack.

[Philosophe_rouge]

The Intruder. It's probably the best spiritual epic I've ever seen. The changing of seasons serve as a symbolic spiritual backdrop for the main character, who goes through his spiritual journey looking for a heart transplant, and his son.
Sounds cheerful, I think I'll dig it


Something by Jane Campion?
I've been meaning to see the Piano for years. Yes, greatness

[ledfloyd]

For national woman's month I've decided to watch at least a few films helmed by women. So far I've rented Cleo 5 a 7 and Dance, Girl, Dance. I also plan on seeing, if possible, Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles. Any other suggestions that aren't Sofia Coppola?

i love akerman

i recommend maya deren, american psycho assuming you haven't seen it, miranda july's film, harlan county USA, boys don't cry, the ballad of jack and rose, triumph of the will is worth seeing for historical reasons, hardly how you'd want to celebrate women's contribution to directing though.

that's just off the top of my head. claire denis and julie taymor get alot of rep around here but i haven't seen anything by either of them.

[MacGuffin]

Welcome to another edition of Maybe I'm Smoking Crack, But ...

Maybe I'm smoking crack, but Goya's Ghosts was utterly fantastic. I have no idea why this was treated so poorly upon its release. I found it to be a captivating and moving look at a tumultuous time in history and way individuals can be crushed by the changing whims of authority. It is not a biopic of Goya, but rather the painter is used to examine the limits of artistic influence over the power of kings and cardinals. Goya's paintings depict the cruelties of the time; however, they are not enough to alter them. Eventually, he must made a decision whether to place himself in harm's way to change a life or be content to record history with his brush. Forman and his co-writer Jean-Claude Carrière successfully juggle big ideas while keeping the characters grounded and three-dimensional. Stellar performances by Bardem, Portman and Skarsgård.

Warning: the author of this post may or may not be smoking crack.

http://aycu21.webshots.com/image/46940/2001644380196640167_rs.jpg

[Philosophe_rouge]

i love akerman

i recommend maya deren, american psycho assuming you haven't seen it, miranda july's film, harlan county USA, boys don't cry, the ballad of jack and rose, triumph of the will is worth seeing for historical reasons, hardly how you'd want to celebrate women's contribution to directing though.

that's just off the top of my head. claire denis and julie taymor get alot of rep around here but i haven't seen anything by either of them.

I've seen American Psycho, which I quite like, but don't really love. I've seen all of Taymore except Titus.. I think. Most likely. I had no idea the rest were even directed by women (except Triumph, which I have seen... dissapointed strangely enough). I do want to make a point of seeing Olympia though, seems far more accessible propaganda. I may pick up Harlan soon, I'm always trying to see docs.

[Spinal]

Any other suggestions that aren't Sofia Coppola?

Boys Don't Cry
Fat Girl
Friday Night
Titus
Me and You and Everyone We Know
Orlando

[Philosophe_rouge]

Welcome to another edition of Maybe I'm Smoking Crack, But ...

Maybe I'm smoking crack, but Goya's Ghosts was utterly fantastic. I have no idea why this was treated so poorly upon its release. I found it to be a captivating and moving look at a tumultuous time in history and way individuals can be crushed by the changing whims of authority. It is not a biopic of Goya, but rather the painter is used to examine the limits of artistic influence over the power of kings and cardinals. Goya's paintings depict the cruelties of the time; however, they are not enough to alter them. Eventually, he must made a decision whether to place himself in harm's way to change a life or be content to record history with his brush. Forman and his co-writer Jean-Claude Carrière successfully juggle big ideas while keeping the characters grounded and three-dimensional. Stellar performances by Bardem, Portman and Skarsgård.

Warning: the author of this post may or may not be smoking crack.
I wanted to see this when it came out, but because of the somewhat innaccesible location and the bad reviews I decided not too. I'm checking it out fo sho now.

[trotchky]

Why not Sofia Coppola? She's one of the best directors in Hollywood, and she made the best American film of the decade.

[origami_mustache]

Any other suggestions that aren't Sofia Coppola?

Shirley Clark if you can get any of her work (The Cool World, The Connection) or Lynne Ramsay's Ratcatcher.

[Rowland]

Why not Sofia Coppola? She's one of the best directors in Hollywood, and she made the best American film of the decade.Because she has already seen all of Coppola's movies.

[MacGuffin]

Why not Sofia Coppola? She's one of the best directors in Hollywood, and she made the best American film of the decade.

The more I think about it, the more I think I shouldn't have second guessed myself when we last talked about this one. I think you may be right. The Jesus and Mary Chain montage at the end is sheerly beautiful, brilliant cinematic nostalgia.

[Qrazy]

What is the point if people just stated their opinions all the time? This forum wouldn't have a reason to exist. Your statement has no more use than a simple number rating, and I don't see why you thought that post would serve any purpose without supporting information.

Sure it would. It would tell me who agrees with my tastes and I could then reasonably see the films they like and avoid the films they dislike and vice versa with people who's taste I don't agree with. In fact recommendations are by and large the reason I use any forum. Assuming certain reasonable a priori's in relation to relativism, a great deal of the content on any forum boils down to statements of opinion. There's usually a few more adjectives, some historical (usually fairly arbitrary) references and vague mentions of transcendent beauty, but by and large when someone likes a film it's because it strikes a thematic and/or aesthetic cord.

I simply prefer to parse out what I feel is a waste of space and present my opinion verbatim. When and if I feel the film merits further discussion, I proceed to do so.

[MacGuffin]

Because she has already seen all of Coppola's movies.

Well, come on now, Lost in Translation isn't something you watch just once. I remember there was a month a year or two ago where I watched it just about once every week. :)

[trotchky]

The more I think about it, the more I think I shouldn't have second guessed myself when we last talked about this one. I think you may be right. The Jesus and Mary Chain montage at the end is sheerly beautiful, brilliant cinematic nostalgia.

Yes indeed. I watched it again a few weeks ago and, surprisingly, it held up for me. It's just about the most tonally perfect film I've seen this decade.

[Qrazy]

For national woman's month I've decided to watch at least a few films helmed by women. So far I've rented Cleo 5 a 7 and Dance, Girl, Dance. I also plan on seeing, if possible, Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles. Any other suggestions that aren't Sofia Coppola?

Cleo from 5 to 7 is awesome, also check out Varda's Vagabond. It's not as good but it's alright. I have Jeanne Dielman but haven't watched it yet.

Daisies is great and also look out for Meshes of an Afternoon.

[Spinal]

Daisies is great and also look out for Meshes of an Afternoon.

Seconded. Can't believe I forgot these.

[MacGuffin]

Sure it would. It would tell me who agrees with my tastes and I could then reasonably see the films they like and avoid the films they dislike and vice versa with people who's taste I don't agree with.

But that's just one movie. And is it really necessary to do it nearly every post? Also, can't this be done with reviews instead; thus reserving discussion for here?


In fact recommendations are by and large the reason I use any forum. Assuming certain reasonable a priori's in relation to relativism, a great deal of the content on any forum boils down to statements of opinion. There's usually a few more adjectives, some historical (usually fairly arbitrary) references and vague mentions of transcendent beauty, but by and large when someone likes a film it's because it strikes a thematic and/or aesthetic cord.

I think the whole joys of the website are discussing the movies with people who appreciate movies as much as I do. Granted, I'm also using it to learn how to articulate myself better (when I get a little older, and choose my occupation, I want to write I think), but still, you can post your opinion, and also expand on it. Otherwise, it just comes off as lazy, and disrespectful to the people who enjoy the movies in question, such as me or origami_moustache, who were, in fact, discussing it.

[MacGuffin]

Yes indeed. I watched it again a few weeks ago and, surprisingly, it held up for me. It's just about the most tonally perfect film I've seen this decade.

Maybe I'll watch it tomorrow.

[Spinal]

I wanted to see this when it came out, but because of the somewhat innaccesible location and the bad reviews I decided not too. I'm checking it out fo sho now.

Looking forward to getting your take. I'm going to Metacritic now to discover why I'm wrong. :)

[Qrazy]

I don't care that you dislike the film, but I do have a problem with the continuing barrage of concise "opinions" delivered with condescension and stated as if they are fact rather than giving reasons as to why.

I just don't see it as condescending. I think it's an ugly film aesthetically, emotionally and thematically. I despise it.

[Wryan]

Yeah Titus was a great suggestion. How I love that film.

Lina Wertmuller? The Seduction of Mimi is juicy.

[MacGuffin]

Sorry, Spinal. I suppose I failed with the picture comment earlier. I meant it to symbolize the fact that your rating for Goya's Ghosts seemed to have come out of left field, since for me, it was since totally overlooked, as I had heard nothing but mediocre things.

[MacGuffin]

I just don't see it as condescending. I think it's an ugly film aesthetically, emotionally and thematically. I despise it.

I think it is beautiful in the same way we might find stock footage as beautiful and revealing artifacts of the past. The details in the imagery seem to appear automatically offering room for emotional investment if you can accept the challenge of some particularly difficult subject matter.

[Derek]

Something by Jane Campion?

Good call. Go with A Girl's Own Story if you can get your hands on it. If not, try Sweetie. You might also wanna try Lina Wurtmuller's Swept Away, something by Breillat and for something lighter, Clueless.

[origami_mustache]

I just don't see it as condescending. I think it's an ugly film aesthetically, emotionally and thematically. I despise it.

Fair enough. I suppose it's easy to misinterpret given your matter of fact responses. Anyways I think the ugliness is kind of the point.

[Wryan]

Good call. Go with A Girl's Own Story if you can get your hands on it. If not, try Sweetie. You might also wanna try Lina Wurtmuller's Swept Away, something by Breillat and for something lighter, Clueless.

Gonna have to be a whole lot lighter than Clueless to counter Breillat.

Does Vincente Minnelli count as a woman?

[Wryan]

Whale Rider.

[Wryan]

Fast Times at Ridgemont High

[Spinal]

Sorry, Spinal. I suppose I failed with the picture comment earlier. I meant it to symbolize the fact that your rating for Goya's Ghosts seemed to have come out of left field, since for me, it was since totally overlooked, as I had heard nothing but mediocre things.

No, I got what you were saying. I was really surprised too, since I had let the negative buzz keep me from seeing the film in the cinema. But that is my honest reaction to the experience of the film. It hits upon some of my pet themes, so maybe that helps. Read a few negative reviews and they aren't making me budge. Most are picking on Portman's performance, which I think is unfair, and the way the film is divided into two very different parts, which is like ... totally the point of the film.

[Qrazy]

But that's just one movie. And is it really necessary to do it nearly every post? Also, can't this be done with reviews instead; thus reserving discussion for here?



I think the whole joys of the website are discussing the movies with people who appreciate movies as much as I do. Granted, I'm also using it to learn how to articulate myself better (when I get a little older, and choose my occupation, I want to write I think), but still, you can post your opinion, and also expand on it. Otherwise, it just comes off as lazy, and disrespectful to the people who enjoy the movies in question, such as me or origami_moustache, who were, in fact, discussing it.

I have neither the time nor the interest in writing full reviews for the films I see. I try to burn through at least one a day and if I have time for a review I'd rather watch another film instead. I'm not saying film discussion can't be great, particularly for me when it revolves around discussions of the art devoid of value judgments (i.e. the thematic relevance of an editing choice, etc). But when we're making value judgments about the films, which is both necessary and valuable, so that we know what we should seek out, I prefer to do it succinctly.

I don't see why it's disrespectful to say concisely when I dislike a film but it's fine and no one seems to care when I or someone else concisely says they love a film. Is dislike inherently disrespectful? Why aren't people required to flesh out their opinions when they love a film? Does this only apply to divisive films or films that most people like? What about films that are widely despised? If I had said the same thing about Alone in the Dark would you have cared? Is it OK for someone to say they love a widely despised film without backing up their claim?

[MacGuffin]

No, I got what you were saying. I was really surprised too, since I had let the negative buzz keep me from seeing the film in the cinema. But that is my honest reaction to the experience of the film. It hits upon some of my pet themes, so maybe that helps. Read a few negative reviews and they aren't making me budge. Most are picking on Portman's performance, which I think is unfair, and the way the film is divided into two very different parts, which is like ... totally the point of the film.

And four stars is your best possible rating, right? Anyways, the most recent movie where I seemed to have the same reaction as you did to this was with The Weather Man. I'm curious to see what others have to say regarding this sort of scenario.

[Wryan]

Monsoon Wedding

[Derek]

Oh yes, and Pascale Ferran's Lady Chatterley from last year.

[Qrazy]

I think it is beautiful in the same way we might find stock footage as beautiful and revealing artifacts of the past. The details in the imagery seem to appear automatically offering room for emotional investment if you can accept the challenge of some particularly difficult subject matter.

There were two moments that gave me some formal excitement in the film... when the boy is training on the stairway, I quite liked the rapid cuts there, and when the sister was ice skating vis the Aronofsky-cam.

[Wryan]

Ratcatcher

[Wryan]

Ummm....Triumph of the Will

[Wryan]

Thirteen Conversations About One Thing

[MacGuffin]

I have neither the time nor the interest in writing full reviews for the films I see. I try to burn through at least one a day and if I have time for a review I'd rather watch another film instead. I'm not saying film discussion can't be great, particularly for me when it revolves around discussions of the art devoid of value judgments (i.e. the thematic relevance of an editing choice, etc). But when we're making value judgments about the films, which is both necessary and valuable, so that we know what we should seek out, I prefer to do it succinctly.

I don't see why it's disrespectful to say concisely when I dislike a film but it's fine and no one seems to care when I or someone else concisely says they love a film. Is dislike inherently disrespectful? Why aren't people required to flesh out their opinions when they love a film? Does this only apply to divisive films or films that most people like? What about films that are widely despised? If I had said the same thing about Alone in the Dark would you have cared? Is it OK for someone to say they love a widely despised film without backing up their claim?

Oh, I'd feel the same way if you said you loved the movie. I want to know why. I just don't see what the logic is in posting a one sentence response in what is clearly called a "Discussion Thread". Save it for the signature, or better yet, get a Twitter account instead.

[MacGuffin]

Oh yes, and Pascale Ferran's Lady Chatterley from last year.

Okay, I'm going to watch this, damn it.

[MacGuffin]

There were two moments that gave me some formal excitement in the film... when the boy is training on the stairway, I quite liked the rapid cuts there, and when the sister was ice skating vis the Aronofsky-cam.

What do you mean by Aronofsky cam?

[Qrazy]

Fair enough. I suppose it's easy to misinterpret given your matter of fact responses. Anyways I think the ugliness is kind of the point.

Given the amount of time I spend trying to clarify and defend the fact that I did not mean offense, and why I did what I did, I probably just ought to just flesh out my statements in the first place. If people are continually offended as they seem to be, I really ought to just conform to the social norm, water down my vitriol and flesh things out a bit more. As to why I don't, I guess I'm just stubborn and the style has become habitual, but I really still should I suppose, so I will try to expand more cogently upon my vitriolic posts.

---

Yeah, I agree it's the point but I don't feel that it transcends it's basic ugliness the way you and it's supporters generally seem to.

[Derek]

Gonna have to be a whole lot lighter than Clueless to counter Breillat.

Does Vincente Minnelli count as a woman?

Good point. If Minnelli counts as a woman, than I've gotta throw Sirk's name into the mix too.

EDIT: And Wryan, I'm pretty sure there's not a one film suggestion per post limit. :)

[Qrazy]

What do you mean by Aronofsky cam?

The tracking shots where the person's head remains fixed in the frame... he used them a great deal in Requiem.

I don't know what the official terminology for such shots are.

[MacGuffin]

The tracking shots where the person's head remains fixed in the frame... he used them a great deal in Requiem.

I don't know what the official terminology for such shots are.

I'm not sure what's it called either, but then again, I'm still not sure what you mean because I don't like Aronofsky.

[Spinal]

I'm not sure what's it called either, but then again, I'm still not sure what you mean because I don't like Aronofsky.

Doesn't Scorsese use that (or something very similar) in Mean Streets?

[MacGuffin]

Doesn't Scorsese use that (or something very similar) in Mean Streets?

Again, I can't really be sure. It's been over a year since I've seen Julien Donkey-Boy, any Aronofsky movie, or Mean Streets for that matter.

[Qrazy]

Oh, I'd feel the same way if you said you loved the movie. I want to know why. I just don't see what the logic is in posting a one sentence response in what is clearly called a "Discussion Thread". Save it for the signature, or better yet, get a Twitter account instead.

I don't agree. I usually find people are relatively receptive of posts which mirror their artistic affections and only rarely ask for elucidation.

'I loved this movie.'
'Me too.'
'That's awesome!'

Granted such an exchange can last for 5-6 posts, but that's what it often boils down to.

---

I just explained my logic.

[Spinal]

Doesn't Scorsese use that (or something very similar) in Mean Streets?

Found it! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCHJAEuSyVo)

[Qrazy]

I'm not sure what's it called either, but then again, I'm still not sure what you mean because I don't like Aronofsky.

Oh shit, oh my god, expand your thoughts man!

[Qrazy]

Found it! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCHJAEuSyVo/)

Link doesn't work and although I've seen the film I don't remember those shots and I'm quite interested to see it.

[Spinal]

Link doesn't work and although I've seen the film I don't remember those shots and I'm quite interested to see it.

Fixed!

[MacGuffin]

Oh shit, oh my god, expand your thoughts man!

There's a difference between saying I don't like something that isn't even the topic of conversation and calling something garbage when someone just wrote a review of clear strenuous preparation on it.

[Wryan]

Good point. If Minnelli counts as a woman, than I've gotta throw Sirk's name into the mix too.

EDIT: And Wryan, I'm pretty sure there's not a one film suggestion per post limit. :)

I kept thinking more and coming back to the thread! :)

[Sycophant]

That reminds me of my giant, gaping Scorsese deficiency. God, I really need to fix that.

Also, I need to see if I can mod Firefox to censor out all YouTube comments by default. They get me all depressed.

[origami_mustache]

Given the amount of time I spend trying to clarify and defend the fact that I did not mean offense, and why I did what I did, I probably just ought to just flesh out my statements in the first place. If people are continually offended as they seem to be, I really ought to just conform to the social norm, water down my vitriol and flesh things out a bit more. As to why I don't, I guess I'm just stubborn and the style has become habitual, but I really still should I suppose, so I will try to expand more cogently upon my vitriolic posts.


I understand that it takes time and effort to properly flesh out worthwhile responses, but I enjoy reading more in depth posts regardless of whether I'm in agreement with them or not. I enjoy reading your opinions, as I think you articulate your thoughts well. I just feel that it's almost a waste for you not to expand; it benefits both you and everyone at the forum, or at least those interested.

[MacGuffin]

Fixed!

Now I know what you both mean, and yeah, it is similar.

[Winston*]

It's called SnorriCam FYI.

[Rowland]

Mean Streets is one of the few Scorsese movies I still need to see. I'd like to revisit some that I haven't seen in several years as well. *sigh*


Also, I need to see if I can mod Firefox to censor out all YouTube comments by default. They get me all depressed.Just stop scrolling down, you dork. :P

[Sycophant]

Just stop scrolling down, you dork. :PIt's an illness. I can't help it.

[Qrazy]

Found it! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCHJAEuSyVo)

Nice, totally forgot that shot, time for a re-watch. I was lukewarm the first time around, although positive, but I know Eleven thinks it's Scorsese's best so I should give it another run for it's money.

[Spinal]

Nice, totally forgot that shot, time for a re-watch. I was lukewarm the first time around, although positive, but I know Eleven thinks it's Scorsese's best so I should give it another run for it's money.

Yeah, I didn't really care for it all that much either, to be honest.

[MacGuffin]

Yeah, I didn't really care for it all that much either, to be honest.

Me neither. :P

[Sycophant]

Um... I knew someone once who liked Mean Streets a lot.

[Spinal]

Um... I knew someone once who liked Mean Streets a lot.

Did his name rhyme with Fleebert?

[Qrazy]

There's a difference between saying I don't like something that isn't even the topic of conversation and calling something garbage when someone just wrote a review of clear strenuous preparation on it.

I don't know, seems pretty much like the one sentence dismissal of a film or filmmaker, that you have been railing so hard against these last few pages. In fact you've made many posts which consist of your watching a film and then posting a sentence or two on how much you disliked it. Pot. Kettle. Personally I don't think either of us are black in the slightest since as I've been arguing I see nothing wrong with offering a brief value judgment in the first place.

---

And most films critics spend the majority of their careers reviewing garbage, that doesn't make their reviews garbage. But if I feel something is garbage I'd prefer to label it such rather than beat around the bush, but perhaps Origami is right and preemptive extrapolation is the best route. I prefer a point, counter-point, point, counter-point, eventual synthesis or adjournment approach to discussion, but as I admitted a moment ago, social norms and positive emotions don't seem all that receptive of this route, so I will attempt to adjust.

[Qrazy]

I understand that it takes time and effort to properly flesh out worthwhile responses, but I enjoy reading more in depth posts regardless of whether I'm in agreement with them or not. I enjoy reading your opinions, as I think you articulate your thoughts well. I just feel that it's almost a waste for you not to expand; it benefits both you and everyone at the forum, or at least those interested.

Yes, I will try harder to expand from the get-go. The thing is, with many movies, particularly those I have no affection for, I have little to no interest in engaging in lengthy discussion regarding them. Ideally I would simply bite my tongue in relation to such films, but I have such a terrible compulsion to express my hatred. I think many of us suffer from a similar affliction. I just had a nearly identical discussion and argument with Iosis in relation to Tron and perhaps he feels differently, but I don't particularly feel that either of us have changed our stance on the film. We danced around german expressionism for a bit, redefining our terminology and what not but ended up right back where we started. Or perhaps we both learned something about why each of us feels as we do about the film and I'm being needlessly cynical. I don't rule out this possibility, in fact having stated it I am more in favor of it than ever before.

[ledfloyd]

Also, I need to see if I can mod Firefox to censor out all YouTube comments by default. They get me all depressed.
I read YouTube comments when I'm depressed. They make me feel much better about myself.

And this lukewarm reception of Mean Streets is unacceptable.

[transmogrifier]

Mean Streets is maybe Scorsese's best film. Match Cut misses the boat again.

[MadMan]

My Chaplin double bill rocked. I'm tired and its 4 am so I'll throw up something about it later. Also Plan 9 From Outer Space is not even close to being the worst film of all time, although it is pretty bad. In some ways its slightly enjoyable. "Because you humans are stupid.....stupid!" :lol: As for The X From Outer Space it was so damn bad I couldn't even finish it. Not does the monster not show up for about 45 minutes, but it looks really lame. What a damn shame, as the description for this film made it sound like really cheesy trippy fun.

Oh and even though Spring Break begins the minute I get out of class on Friday I'm tempted to stay until Saturday so I can watch this movie with killer rabbits that TCM is showing late on Friday night. It sounds hilariously bad. I find going from Oscar nominated/winning films from the past to cult cinema is somewhat refreshing. I think I'll try and see more silent cinema this month too.

[ledfloyd]

Mean Streets is maybe Scorsese's best film. Match Cut misses the boat again.
repped.

[Scar]

We signed up for Blockbuster online yesterday, and I'm currently filling up the queue with all sorts of goodies:

I'm willing to listen to all kinds of recommendations. I'm a bit behind on my movies. I did just add Grizzly and The Legend of Boggy Creek.....

[Duncan]

Watched The Cook the Thief His Wife & Her Lover last night. I liked it, but I had some problems that I am struggling to articulate. Basically, it comes down to all these damn symbols...

[DavidSeven]

Re: Julien-Donkey Boy

Nah, it's pretty much garbage on every possible level.

Agreed except for Herzog's turn. He's a funny guy.

[DavidSeven]

Mean Streets is maybe Scorsese's best film.

Yeah, it bears repeating.

[Philosophe_rouge]

Why not Sofia Coppola? She's one of the best directors in Hollywood, and she made the best American film of the decade.
Others have answered, but yes I've seen all her films and I'm otherwise quite aware of her work. I do need to revisit Lost in Translation, surprisingly the only film of hers I didn't like upon a first viewing. It was a few years ago though.


Cleo from 5 to 7 is awesome, also check out Varda's Vagabond. It's not as good but it's alright. I have Jeanne Dielman but haven't watched it yet.

Daisies is great and also look out for Meshes of an Afternoon.
Daisies! Someone recommended it to me last year, will fo sho be trying to see that one. Meshes probably too, as it's a short and therefore easier.


Good call. Go with A Girl's Own Story if you can get your hands on it. If not, try Sweetie. You might also wanna try Lina Wurtmuller's Swept Away, something by Breillat and for something lighter, Clueless.
I've seen Swept Away and Clueless. The former I outright disliked, I just though it was uninteresting and heavy handed. I have a soft spot for Clueless though. Thanks for the other recs!


*many films*.
I've seen two of the ones you mentioned, will look out for the rest!


Oh yes, and Pascale Ferran's Lady Chatterley from last year.
I remember almost seeing this in theatres last year, I think I opted for something craptacular. *shame*
]

[megladon8]

I'm actually really low on my Scorsese intake - I've seen his "major" films (Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, The Departed, etc.).

I have Raging Bull on my DVD pile but haven't seen it yet. Just never seem to be in the mood.

Mean Streets looks great.

[Eleven]

Mean Streets is maybe Scorsese's best film. Match Cut misses the boat again.

Indeed. Keitel with the weight of the world, De Niro's sinewy goodness, the kinetic poolhall brawl, the thematically-apt (and just plain bouncy) pop soundtrack, great NY location shooting as well as well-disguised LA scenes, home movies!

[Spinal]

Mean Streets is maybe Scorsese's best film. Match Cut misses the boat again.

Once again there is a film that some people like and some people don't! Bizarro!

[transmogrifier]

Once again there is a film that some people like and some people don't! Bizarro!

Not really. It happens.

That all the ones who are wrong congregate here in large numbers, on the other hand.....

[D_Davis]

For national woman's month I've decided to watch at least a few films helmed by women. So far I've rented Cleo 5 a 7 and Dance, Girl, Dance. I also plan on seeing, if possible, Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles. Any other suggestions that aren't Sofia Coppola?


Maybe...

Anna Hui's The Boat People
Katheryn Bigelow's Strange Days

[Raiders]

Larisa Sheptitko!

Watch The Ascent. If you don't have any online subscriptions for sites like Karagarga, just watch it off YouTube.

[Derek]

There's also Barbara Loden's Wanda which is great.

[MadMan]

TCM tonight is showing Shakesphere adaptations. I plan on watching Orson Welles' adaptation of Macbeth even though I've never read the actual play or seen it performed live.

PS: Apparently the 1968 version of Romeo and Juliet is also being shown. Maybe its because I was just a freshmen but when I saw that film in high school it bored the hell out of me. Something tells me though that I may think the same thing after a second viewing. For now I prefer the 1996 adaption despite it being too frantic at times. "A pretty piece of flesh I am..."

[ledfloyd]

TCM tonight is showing Shakesphere adaptations. I plan on watching Orson Welles' adaptation of Macbeth even though I've never read the actual play or seen it performed live.
thanks for the heads up. i want to see that and olivier's hamlet.


Maybe...

Anna Hui's The Boat People
Katheryn Bigelow's Strange Days
i almost recommended near dark.

[Rowland]

Speaking of Bigelow... Point Break.

[Grouchy]

Yes, I will try harder to expand from the get-go. The thing is, with many movies, particularly those I have no affection for, I have little to no interest in engaging in lengthy discussion regarding them. Ideally I would simply bite my tongue in relation to such films, but I have such a terrible compulsion to express my hatred. I think many of us suffer from a similar affliction. I just had a nearly identical discussion and argument with Iosis in relation to Tron and perhaps he feels differently, but I don't particularly feel that either of us have changed our stance on the film. We danced around german expressionism for a bit, redefining our terminology and what not but ended up right back where we started. Or perhaps we both learned something about why each of us feels as we do about the film and I'm being needlessly cynical. I don't rule out this possibility, in fact having stated it I am more in favor of it than ever before.
Yeah, but the problem is that your opinions are crap.

[Qrazy]

I'm actually really low on my Scorsese intake - I've seen his "major" films (Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, The Departed, etc.).

I have Raging Bull on my DVD pile but haven't seen it yet. Just never seem to be in the mood.

Mean Streets looks great.

Yeah... I would claim that Raging Bull is his major film, his best film and one of the best ever made.

[MadMan]

thanks for the heads up. i want to see that and olivier's hamlet.


i almost recommended near dark.No problemo man. I might see Hamlet but I'm not sure if I'll be in the mood for not. Plus I have a test tomorrow.

Point Break is a highly underrated action film. I loved how the robbers used the ex-president masks and strangely enough Keanu is actually pretty good in this film, if only because he really does fit the action hero persona. Plus it has Gary Busey! Acting like he always does of course :lol:

PS: I give the edge to Goodfellas over Raging Bull for Marty's best, but I still haven't seen a good number of his films.

[Stay Puft]

The best part of Point Break is Anthony Kiedis shooting himself in the foot.

[Qrazy]

Yeah, but the problem is that your opinions are crap.

Now this on the other hand is a waste of forum space, as it has nothing to do with film whatsoever.

Don't worry man, you can continue to believe that John Woo is the second coming of Christ, that everyone who dislikes 300 is in denial, and that Rodriguez is a good director. More power to you.

Other than those points we tend to agree on most of our cinematic evaluations, so I'll assume you're only referring to those points and not referring to the majority of your own opinions as crap.

[Grouchy]

Actually, I was just having a laugh at the long one-line dismissals discussion. No harm intended. Sorry, did I step on something?

Besides, everyone knows Takashi Miike is the true Asian Christ back from the grave.

[Ezee E]

Who is this Scorsese person?

[Qrazy]

Actually, I was just having a laugh at the long one-line dismissals discussion. No harm intended. Sorry, did I step on something?

Besides, everyone knows Takashi Miike is the true Asian Christ back from the grave.

Ah k, I thought maybe you were irritated because of our relatively recent disagreements about the above things. I'm as sensitive, perhaps even more so, than many here, but that doesn't keep me from tossing out those one line dismissals, for the lengthy reasons I just extrapolated upon.

Meh Miike's a minor prophet. To, Koreeda, Tsai Ming-Liang, Kim ki-duk, etc are the major prophets. And chalk it up to my Yiddist predilections but the Asian Messiah has yet to return to us.

[Wryan]

Goddamn. Dead Calm is a tight little film. I was astonished how the film keeps the husband and wife apart for so long, forcing them to adapt and survive on their own, with Kidman in particular coming out a fierce and resourceful survivor. Zane is alright.

[Rowland]

Zane is alright.Zane? As in Billy Zane?

I love the Zane-ster. I wonder what he's up to these days... *peruses IMDb*

[MacGuffin]

Slant's review for Funny Games U.S.A., I'm pretty sure, is basically the exact same review for Funny Games, just with the names switched with the replaced actors and actresses.

[Rowland]

Slant's review for Funny Games U.S.A., I'm pretty sure, is basically the exact same review for Funny Games, just with the names switched with the replaced actors and actresses.Yeah, it is. I had a good laugh over it last night. RT has it mistakenly classified as a positive review however, or they at least did as of last night.

[MacGuffin]

Yeah, it is. I had a good laugh over it last night. RT has it mistakenly classified as a positive review however, or they at least did as of last night.

I guess I was unaware that The Gonz was lukewarm on Haneke's movies released before The Piano Teacher, and I think that took me by more of a surprise than the gimmick itself.

[Wryan]

Zane? As in Billy Zane?

8 years before Titanic. 7 before The Phantom.

[eternity]

The Love of Zero is about as good as short experimental films get.

[origami_mustache]

Yes, I will try harder to expand from the get-go. The thing is, with many movies, particularly those I have no affection for, I have little to no interest in engaging in lengthy discussion regarding them. Ideally I would simply bite my tongue in relation to such films, but I have such a terrible compulsion to express my hatred. I think many of us suffer from a similar affliction. I just had a nearly identical discussion and argument with Iosis in relation to Tron and perhaps he feels differently, but I don't particularly feel that either of us have changed our stance on the film. We danced around german expressionism for a bit, redefining our terminology and what not but ended up right back where we started. Or perhaps we both learned something about why each of us feels as we do about the film and I'm being needlessly cynical. I don't rule out this possibility, in fact having stated it I am more in favor of it than ever before.

I like to compare tastes and know what people here like and dislike. I am not naive enough to expect a sway in opinion from either side, but it helps to know what was particularly appealing or objectionable be it aesthetics, narrative, etc., so I can evaluate or justify why I agree or disagree with the opinion.

[MacGuffin]

The Love of Zero is about as good as short experimental films get.

I'm interested in how expansive your knowledge of "short experimental films" is.

[Rowland]

I guess I was unaware that The Gonz was lukewarm on Haneke's movies released before The Piano Teacher, and I think that took me by more of a surprise than the gimmick itself.Gonzalez is lukewarm toward Haneke period. Even the movies of his Ed gave positive scores didn't crack his top 20 for those respective years.

[Rowland]

8 years before Titanic. 7 before The Phantom.6 before Tales From the Crypt Presents: Demon Knight, Billy's magnum opus.

[eternity]

6 before Tales From the Crypt Presents: Demon Knight.5 before The Silence of the Hams.

[Wryan]

The Mark of Zorro with Frank Langella and Ricardo Montalban is pretty good too. Did any of the original Zorro material (did it start in film or lit?) come with the plot element of Zorro's alter-ego pretending to be a swishy fop in order to draw attention away from the possibility of people seeing him as the masked hero? Cause I know that's an element of The Scarlet Pimpernel but I don't recall seeing it much in Zorro mythology.

Anyone know?

EDIT: According to Mr. Wiki, the fop element has always been a part of Zorro from the beginning, although it was likely inspired by TSP, which came first.

[origami_mustache]

The General (Buster Keaton and Clyde Bruckman, 1927)

http://www.brucevanpatter.com/bvp_images/silent_com_images/keat_gen.jpg


Buster Keaton's The General is a textbook example of a well structured comedy with it's reliance on coincidence, serendipity, recursion, and minoration. It is also an excellent example of a chase film, as that is precisely what takes place for the duration. Unfortunately the narrative itself is very shallow and basically stretches a simple concept into 70 minutes of action. The gags become tedious and are often too reliant on slapstick. I've only seen 2 other Keaton features and 2 shorts, however I have seen a lot of clips from his resume, and The General strikes me as a lesser work, despite the reputation. The gags just left more to be desired from me. The train stunts are impressive on a technical level and Keaton's athleticism is always admirable, but overall it failed to translate into genuine hilarity or even arouse excitement for me. My favorite moment is early in the film when Keaton reaches out to shake the girl's hand, while she goes in for a kiss. Although I've seen this joke many times, Keaton's stoic minimalistic expression makes it funnier than any other could hope to achieve.

The civil war setting is an interesting backdrop, however it basically becomes a reunion film; as the confederates are the heroes; yearning for a return to the "good ole days" similar to films like The Littlest Rebel or even Birth of a Nation. This relation, and the imagery of the confederate flags waving in victory disgusts me to some extent and is difficult to overlook, especially given the subjective nature of film criticism.

[Grouchy]

The Mark of Zorro with Frank Langella and Ricardo Montalban is pretty good too. Did any of the original Zorro material (did it start in film or lit?) come with the plot element of Zorro's alter-ego pretending to be a swishy fop in order to draw attention away from the possibility of people seeing him as the masked hero? Cause I know that's an element of The Scarlet Pimpernel but I don't recall seeing it much in Zorro mythology.

Anyone know?
Literature, from the novel The Curse of Capistrano. I think it might've been an element that was always on the material, only they downplayed it for the Guy Pearce TV series, same way they did with Batman pretending to be an arrogant playboy for the Adam West series.

Anyway, saw Ford's 3 Godfathers, which more than likely has inspired Satoshi Kon with his Tokyo Godfathers. It's an amiable western yarn, tragic and comedic in a way only John Ford movies can be. Its story of three bandidos making a promise to a dying woman to take care of their newborn also anticipates many "fish out of water" scripts about tough guys getting in touch with their soft side, down to last year's The Rock vehicle. When John Wayne finds the woman with the baby, Ford skips showing us the woman's pains or the birth scene completely, and instead cuts to Wayne a few seconds later giving a lenghty and very detailed monologue about what he found, which was kinda weird for me. The movie is not one of the best westerns I've seen, but it works on its simplicity. It's an obvious religious parable, with the cowboys as stand-ins for the Three Wise Men in a trip towards redemption for their crimes.

[Watashi]

Early reviews have labeled Horton Hears a Who pure Seussian in its dialogue and flower power message. Even one critic called it an animated masterpiece.

[Sycophant]

Early reviews have labeled Horton Hears a Who pure Suessian in its dialogue and flower power message. Even one critic called it an animated masterpiece.Well, I would love to be proven wrong about it. I'll give it a shot.

[Spinal]

Early reviews have labeled Horton Hears a Who pure Seussian in its dialogue and flower power message.

I don't buy it.

[Spinal]

UnSeussian quotes from the trailer:

The Mayor of Who-ville: Hey, hon, did you ever get the feeling that you were being watched, and that maybe that thing watching you is... ehhh, a giant elephant?
Mayor's Wife: Um, you know, I'm going to have to say, "No". Do you know that feeling?
The Mayor of Who-ville: [laughs nervously] No!

Horton: Just me and the speck, shootin' the breeze. We're a club. We're a group. We can be a secret society. And no one else can join, unless they wear funny hats.

Horton: There are people on this speck. They have a mayor who has 96 daughters and one son named Jojo, who all share a bathroom! Whatever that is...

[Melville]

Goddamn. Dead Calm is a tight little film. I was astonished how the film keeps the husband and wife apart for so long, forcing them to adapt and survive on their own, with Kidman in particular coming out a fierce and resourceful survivor. Zane is alright.
Zane running around like a monkey-man was awesome. And the flare-in-the-mouth ending was even awesomer.

[Winston*]

The flare-in-the-mouth bit's retarded. Dig the rest of the movie though.

[Boner M]

There's a scene in the French coming-of-age/teen-sexuality-confusion drama Water Lilies where the main girl says to her object of affection something along the lines of "being normal is boring", and since the film had covered the bases of nearly every cliche of this art-film subgenre, my instant reaction was "preach it, sister!". A shame, since it's well performed and does an extraordinarily effective job at evoking an Antonioni-esque sense of alienation with its drab, clinical, modernist locations.

[Qrazy]

Full Time Killer (To)... the film was fairly meh but it was interesting to note the parallels with No Country for Old Men.

Namely the disappearing villian trick and the cop's resulting despair.

[Bosco B Thug]

Michael Clayton (Gilroy, 2007) 8
Margot at the Wedding (Baumbach, 2007) 1 Ooh. Short thoughts?

[D_Davis]

Full Time Killer (To)... the film was fairly meh but it was interesting to note the parallels with No Country for Old Men.

Namely the disappearing villian trick and the cop's resulting despair.

I haven't seen No Country, but FTK is my least favorite To film. I used to like it, but I rewatched it a couple of years ago and really hated it. I couldn't even finish it. It has a few decent scenes, but I think it's pretty stupid overall.

[Melville]

Yes, I will try harder to expand from the get-go. The thing is, with many movies, particularly those I have no affection for, I have little to no interest in engaging in lengthy discussion regarding them. Ideally I would simply bite my tongue in relation to such films, but I have such a terrible compulsion to express my hatred. I think many of us suffer from a similar affliction. I just had a nearly identical discussion and argument with Iosis in relation to Tron and perhaps he feels differently, but I don't particularly feel that either of us have changed our stance on the film. We danced around german expressionism for a bit, redefining our terminology and what not but ended up right back where we started. Or perhaps we both learned something about why each of us feels as we do about the film and I'm being needlessly cynical. I don't rule out this possibility, in fact having stated it I am more in favor of it than ever before.
Yeah, I think a lot of discussions on here are useful in clarifying my own opinions as well as in understanding alternative stances on a film. Even our short discussion on Funny Games made me see where you were coming from. Furthermore, regarding an earlier post of yours, I don't think nonspecific dismissal or praise of a film really helps me make my viewing choices, since I don't get a very good sense of your taste if I don't know why you are dismissing or praising a particular film.

[MacGuffin]

Ooh. Short thoughts?

I felt a sort of spiritual connection with Michael Clayton that I can't really explain. The scene with the horses was very surreal for me. It was also a very rewarding movie, because the structure is so totally all over the place, and by the magnificent climax it all comes together.

Margot at the Wedding was an extremely disappointing one to me, with the only redeeming value being Jack Black's performance, which only further leads me to believe he's one of the best, most charismatic actors of his generation. Otherwise, it's just bland and felt like it tried to outdo The Squid and the Whale, which I really liked and found quite funny. As that movie focused on examining character interaction as oppose to character study, this one did the same thing but the characters were absolutely revolting, and quite frankly, I didn't care about their interactions with each other because I knew there was nothing profound to get out of it. For the record, I was also quite disappointed by Nicole Kidman's performance, who very well may be the best actress of her generation (although Cate Blanchett and Yaketrina Golubeva give her a run for her money).

[MadMan]

Early reviews have labeled Horton Hears a Who pure Seussian in its dialogue and flower power message. Even one critic called it an animated masterpiece.What the hell? I'm not getting that from the previews. But hey previews have been wrong before.


Goddamn. Dead Calm is a tight little film. I was astonished how the film keeps the husband and wife apart for so long, forcing them to adapt and survive on their own, with Kidman in particular coming out a fierce and resourceful survivor. Zane is alright.That movie doesn't get the love it deserves. I agree that it is a pretty tense, well made film. Sam Neil is pretty good in it as well as Nichole Kidman, and I thought Billy Zane captured a crazed murder pretty well. You gotta love how Kidman kills Zane, what with the flare gun to the face.

I agree with Clipper that Jack Black is indeed very charismatic. I don't know if he's one of the best actors of his generation though.

[Sycophant]

I probably laughed more at Margot at the Wedding than any other comedy from last year outside of Hot Fuzz and Superbad. It's grown in my esteem since my first viewing, which was quite positive, though I felt its pacing was off. I intend to watch it again soon and really look at it more critically.

[megladon8]

Superman Returns (Singer, 2006) 78


I really like you.

[Sycophant]

I really like you.
I really liked the movie. It took decades of Superman mythology, making itself obvious in what it is, asked us to examine what it means to us, blew it up with Jesus and the very concept of heroes, questioned America's need for them, and put it into varying degrees of personal and emotional relevance. I'm not very well versed in Superman (only seen the other movies years ago and a vague, textbook familiarity with some of the character's other incarnations), but I still understood where the film was coming from. If you haven't read it yet, check out Walter Chaw's review (http://filmfreakcentral.net/screenreviews/supermanreturns.htm). I'm not quite as in love with it as he is, but I think it largely aims for and succeeds in the areas he describes.

Also, Spacey and the cannibal pom ruled.

[megladon8]

What did you think of Brandon Routh taking over the role?

I really loved him, and I was very sad to hear that he may not be in the coming movies.

There are spots during the movie where he both looks and sounds almost creepily like Christopher Reeve.

[Dead & Messed Up]

What did you think of Brandon Routh taking over the role?

I really loved him, and I was very sad to hear that he may not be in the coming movies.

There are spots during the movie where he both looks and sounds almost creepily like Christopher Reeve.

Although I didn't care for the picture, I agree very much with this. Brandon Routh needs to be in the next one. His appearance and attitude perfectly captured the spirit of the hero.

[MadMan]

My rating for Superman Returns actually went up after a second viewing. I'm really glad I saw it in theaters back in 2006 though, as I really enjoyed the hell out of it. Kevin Spacy rocked as Luther of course, and I agree that Brandon Routh (Iowa represent! Heh) fit the role to a tee. I imagine he doesn't want to be typecasted, but I think he already is at this point. I say he should embrace it at this point.

[lovejuice]

i call myself a "superman person" as opposed to you-know-what. and i think, there really is a lot to be loved about superman return.

but damn!, aren't there a lot not to be loved as well?

[Rowland]

i call myself a "superman person" as opposed to you-know-what. A superman fish?

[Watashi]

I was thinking of a superman platypus.

[lovejuice]

A superman fish?

:lol: actually my real name means a kinda fish in thai.

[Bosco B Thug]

I felt a sort of spiritual connection with Michael Clayton that I can't really explain. The scene with the horses was very surreal for me. It was also a very rewarding movie, because the structure is so totally all over the place, and by the magnificent climax it all comes together. You should read Dan Sallitt's take (http://www.panix.com/~sallitt/blog/2008/02/michael-clayton-or-why-do-we-even.html) on it, he loved it too and the way he describes it makes me wish it struck me to the same degree.


Margot at the Wedding was an extremely disappointing one to me, with the only redeeming value being Jack Black's performance, which only further leads me to believe he's one of the best, most charismatic actors of his generation. Hmm... really... he was the weakest part of the movie for me, but go figure, I wouldn't put much effort to defend my stance. I was lukewarm to both these film myself. Thanks for the thoughts. Re: Margot, I wouldn't usually criticize a film for having characters that are too unpleasant, but I think a lot of it is the fact that I just didn't buy a lot of the film's dialogue. I enjoy Baumbach's investment in his characters and I think there's something to take from the relationships in the film, but yeah, the film stagnates.

[origami_mustache]

just recieved following from from friend via IM...I found it to be amusing...and there is a film reference at the end...

this discount website, jesus christ these people are just heeb of the week
http://bensbargains.net/
like they'll go to ebay once they find a decent deal
look for coupons with buy it now options
and stack them
so like, 20% off on that drive and some people were going to ebay
buying a $30 off coupon to officemax
and applying it to the order they just took 20% off
like that's both ridic and brilliant
and the insane thing is you can just find that shit immed
http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?from=R40&_trksid=m37&satitle=dell+coupon&category0=
seriously if you ever buy dell again, don't hesitate to check ebay and the discount websites, there's ALWAYS some absurd deal someone has figured out
this is EXACTLY like punch-drunk love

[ledfloyd]

i'm not gonna lie, i don't think it's possible for someone to make a superman film i would like. it's odd cause i'm a much bigger batman fan. however, a perfect batman film is easy for me to conceive. a perfect superman film for me would have to be so all encompassing i'm not sure it could be a coherent film. it would basically have to be grant morrison's all star superman in film version.

[origami_mustache]

I know I've seen people mentioning the remake of Suspiria, but didn't know if it had been mentioned that David Gordon Green is attached to the project, at least that's what I read in a recent interview with him. I think he also mentioned keeping the original score...so no luck with M83 doing the soundtrack. :( haha

[Qrazy]

I haven't seen No Country, but FTK is my least favorite To film. I used to like it, but I rewatched it a couple of years ago and really hated it. I couldn't even finish it. It has a few decent scenes, but I think it's pretty stupid overall.

Yeah it was pretty bad, The Eighth Happiness was a formally weak but quite funny outing though.

[Stay Puft]

Fulltime Killer has some great sequences, but yeah, it becomes increasingly stupid the longer it goes. Can't be my least favorite To, though, because I just finished his new movie, Linger, and that was pretty damn weak.

[Wryan]

The Omega Man is hilarious.

[Qrazy]

The Omega Man is hilarious.

And introducing Charlton Heston as... Jesus!

[balmakboor]

I watched Across the Universe last night with my teenage daughter and one of her friends. They both clearly liked it. They loved the music and thought the guy playing Jude was cute. They thought it was weird.

I didn't hate it. I found the plot to be totally out to lunch (if there was a plot), but it worked as essentially a bunch of music videos for Beatles covers strung together. (Although 130 minutes is about 40 minutes too long for such a thing.) I did really enjoy the numbers for "I Want You" (starting with Uncle Sam posters coming to life) and "Happiness is a Warm Gun" (with the sexy nurses). I also loved the visual effect of combining waves with newspaper pages at the beginning. Ultimately, it felt like an attempt to turn the Beatles song list into a rock opera for an audience that thinks Luhrmann's Romeo + Juliet was good Shakespeare.

I have a question for those more up on things. The film felt really disjointed like there is a much better and very different director's cut out there somewhere. What's the history of this thing? I thought I read way back that it was yanked out of Taymor's hands and drastically recut.

[Raiders]

I watched Across the Universe last night with my teenage daughter and one of her friends. They both clearly liked it. They loved the music and thought the guy playing Jude was cute. They thought it was weird.

I didn't hate it. I found the plot to be totally out to lunch (if there was a plot), but it worked as essentially a bunch of music videos for Beatles covers strung together. (Although 130 minutes is about 40 minutes too long for such a thing.) I did really enjoy the numbers for "I Want You" (starting with Uncle Sam posters coming to life) and "Happiness is a Warm Gun" (with the sexy nurses). I also loved the visual effect of combining waves with newspaper pages at the beginning. Ultimately, it felt like an attempt to turn the Beatles song list into a rock opera for an audience that thinks Luhrmann's Romeo + Juliet was good Shakespeare.

I have a question for those more up on things. The film felt really disjointed like there is a much better and very different director's cut out there somewhere. What's the history of this thing? I thought I read way back that it was yanked out of Taymor's hands and drastically recut.

Sony screened a shortened version, but they eventually went with Taymor's original version. Therefore, the one you saw was her cut and not a studio-butchered release.

[D_Davis]

Fulltime Killer has some great sequences, but yeah, it becomes increasingly stupid the longer it goes. Can't be my least favorite To, though, because I just finished his new movie, Linger, and that was pretty damn weak.


Haven't seen Linger yet - haven't even heard of it! :)

That's the thing with To: any director who makes 2 or 3 films a year is bound to make some stinkers.

I just really like that he is constantly working and doing new things, because I think he learns from even his most troubled failures.

[Raiders]

Hm. I really quite liked Fulltime Killer. Odd.

[Spinal]

Just realized that my current Netflix rentals are The Devil and Sheitan (Satan).

Somewhere in a secretive government office, my file is getting updated. :|