28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[D_Davis]

It totally fits. It's a popular modern mythology used as an analogy in a film that is a stew of modern genre tropes, conventions, and ideals; a film that runs from chop sockey to kung fu pian, from Easter to Western, and from Chamabara to Yakuza.

It's like, totally part of the milieu's zeitgeist and stuff.

[Spinal]

Bruce Lee would fit. Clint Eastwood would fit. Superman does not fit. It doesn't have anything to do with the film we are watching.

[Rowland]

Bruce Lee would fit. Clint Eastwood would fit. Superman does not fit. It doesn't have anything to do with the film we are watching.But as you know, he loves comic books! Don't you see?!



Yeah, I'm not a fan of that monologue either. Cutting it out would have benefited that sequence, especially since it already drags a bit.

[MadMan]

Bill: As you know, l'm quite keen on comic books. Especially the ones about superheroes. I find the whole mythology surrounding superheroes fascinating. Take my favorite superhero, Superman. Not a great comic book. Not particularly well-drawn. But the mythology... The mythology is not only great, it's unique. Now, a staple of the superhero mythology is, there's the superhero and there's the alter ego. Batman is actually Bruce Wayne, Spider-Man is actually Peter Parker. When that character wakes up in the morning, he's Peter Parker. He has to put on a costume to become Spider-Man. And it is in that characteristic Superman stands alone. Superman didn't become Superman. Superman was born Superman. When Superman wakes up in the morning, he's Superman. His alter ego is Clark Kent. His outfit with the big red "S", that's the blanket he was wrapped in as a baby when the Kents found him. Those are his clothes. What Kent wears - the glasses, the business suit - that's the costume. That's the costume Superman wears to blend in with us. Clark Kent is how Superman views us. And what are the characteristics of Clark Kent. He's weak... he's unsure of himself... he's a coward. Clark Kent is Superman's critique on the whole human race. Sorta like Beatrix Kiddo and Mrs. Tommy Plimpton.
The Bride: Aso. The point Emerges.
Bill: You would've worn the costume of Arlene Plimpton. But you were born Beatrix Kiddo. And every morning when you woke up, you'd still be Beatrix Kiddo. Oh, you can take the needle out.
The Bride: Are you calling me a superhero?
Bill: I'm calling you a killer. A natural born killer. You always have been, and you always will be. Moving to El Paso, working in a used record store, goin' to the movies with Tommy, clipping coupons. That's you, trying to disguise yourself as a worker bee That's you tryin' to blend in with the hive. But you're not a worker bee. You're a renegade killer bee. And no matter how much beer you drank or barbecue you ate or how fat your ass got, nothing in the world would ever change that.

Spoilered due to its immense length.

I don't know how much more blunt and obvious that entire scene can be. If anything my only beef with it is that QT goes way too far to explain the whole spiel and its context within the film.

[Rowland]

I don't know how much more blunt and obvious that entire scene can be. They're not arguing over whether or not it makes sense literally, but rather if it makes sense to namedrop comic book heroes within the context of the movie's established universe.

[MadMan]

They're not arguing over whether or not it makes sense literally, but rather if it makes sense to namedrop comic book heroes within the context of the movie's established universe.Ah. That actually is an interesting debate, and I don't really know if it has a correct answer. Such is opinion I suppose.

[Winston*]

Why would you say "not particularly well drawn" about a comic book that must've been drawn by hundreds of artists? Surely some of them must've been drawn particularly well. I doubt your Superman fandom, Bill.

[Mysterious Dude]

I'm sure he meant to specify just the Superman comics from the days when he would have read them.

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/action-comics/197-1.jpg

[Teh Sausage]

I watched Pickup on South Street last night. For an 80 minute movie, it felt quite long and slow. Perhaps it was because I saw Shock Corridor (my first Fuller film) a few weeks ago, and I was expecting something similarly energetic and delirious. Overall, it felt like a normal noir movie but with exceptionally good directing. I have to say I was engaged more by the form than by the content. I could tell I was watching a classic, but I didn't quite connect with it...perhaps I should watch it again sometime later, and since I'll then know what to expect, perhaps I'll like it more. Should I watch The Naked Kiss next? I'd like to see something else that's very Shock Corridor-ish.

[soitgoes...]

I reckon the last 20 minutes or so of Eight Diagram Pole Fighter contains some of the best fight sequences that I've seen laid down on film.

[balmakboor]

Kill Bill has so many disparate elements flying around -- it's far from just a martial arts film -- that saying a speech about Superman doesn't fit just doesn't make sense.

I'll admit that the speech is clearly Tarantino putting his voice into a character's mouth creating a metaphor for the mythology he's created with the super-"heroes" in Kill Bill. But so what? Literature, film, drama, etc. have long been filled with such authorial devices plus it certainly isn't obvious and awkward in the way the authorial intrusions are in Redacted or Diary of the Dead (two films I otherwise like).

I've never thought much about Superman and it made me see his mythology in a new light, it made me see Kill Bill in a new light. I also thought it was well integrated into the scene filling what would've been dead space while the true serum took effect.

[Mysterious Dude]

The other problem I have with the speech is that there's no way for the audience to know if there is any truth to it, because we never really see "Arlene Plimpton." We barely even meet her husband. Do we ever see what her life was life with him? How are we supposed to know if that's not the real Beatrix Kiddo? At least with Superman, we can see Clark Kent fairly often, and judge for ourselves.

[D_Davis]

I reckon the last 20 minutes or so of Eight Diagram Pole Fighter contains some of the best fight sequences that I've seen laid down on film.

You aren't the only one.

The last 20 minutes here are often considered the best the genre has to offer.

Too bad the rest of the film is only so so, and too bad about Alexander Fu Sheng.

[D_Davis]

The speech has more to do with the family relationship. Children often think of their parents as super heroes, and in this context, during the particular scene in which it is spoken, it totally works.

[balmakboor]

The other problem I have with the speech is that there's no way for the audience to know if there is any truth to it, because we never really see "Arlene Plimpton." We barely even meet her husband. Do we ever see what her life was life with him? How are we supposed to know if that's not the real Beatrix Kiddo? At least with Superman, we can see Clark Kent fairly often, and judge for ourselves.

I agree with you there. All we get is a scene of Beatrix Kiddo talking to Bill about the "Clark Kent" life she wanted to have and some more dialog later about how such a life simply wouldn't be in her nature. And these bits of dialog feel very much a part of Tarantino's universe. The record store fantasy is a revision of True Romance and the latter is a riff on Natural Born Killers. It would've been nice though to actually see a scene of Arlene Plimpton and her fiance making a go of it outside of the Beatrix Kiddo universe. Maybe if Tarantino is reading this and taking notes he'll quickly shoot something to include in The Whole Bloody Affair.

It was one of Ford's mistakes in The Searchers to not include a scene between Scar and Debbie. I thought Scorsese did a wonderful job of correcting this mistake by including a very tender scene between Sport and Iris.

[balmakboor]

Children often think of their parents as super heroes...

You nailed a crucial aspect of the speech right there. Have you ever read the wonderful pieces by Mark Conard on the Kill Bill movies? They touch on this same idea.

[D_Davis]

You nailed a crucial aspect of the speech right there. Have you ever read the wonderful pieces by Mark Conard on the Kill Bill movies? They touch on this same idea.

No I haven't. Link?

[balmakboor]

No I haven't. Link?

http://metaphilm.com/philm.php?id=200_0_2_0

http://metaphilm.com/philm.php?id=310_0_2_0_M

[balmakboor]

After a repeat viewing of Tati's Trafic, I can safely say that film-for-film Tati is my favorite director. And certainly no other director's films reward as many re-watches as his. Trafic is very similar to Playtime except it has a more relaxed and pastoral feel to it. Mixing the ideas of Playtime with a road movie through the countryside was genius.

[D_Davis]

http://metaphilm.com/philm.php?id=200_0_2_0

http://metaphilm.com/philm.php?id=310_0_2_0_M

I've only read part of this, but it is interesting.

I have an essay by QT in which he talks about his worship of women. He was raised by a single mom, and his mother had a female roommate who also helped out. This is one thing that spurred on his attraction to blacksploitation cinema - strong female characters who kick a lot of ass. He idolized his mom and his mother's roommate, and in them he saw an example of positive feminism and beauty.

It's a really good essay.

[balmakboor]

I've only read part of this, but it is interesting.

I have an essay by QT in which he talks about his worship of women. He was raised by a single mom, and his mother had a female roommate who also helped out. This is one thing that spurred on his attraction to blacksploitation cinema - strong female characters who kick a lot of ass. He idolized his mom and his mother's roommate, and in them he saw an example of positive feminism and beauty.

It's a really good essay.

Do you have a link to this essay?

[D_Davis]

Do you have a link to this essay?

No. It's in a book I have, and I can't remember the name of it right now.

I'll see if I can scan it - it's pretty short - and post it as a pdf.

[Idioteque Stalker]

So thanks to iosos for his recommendation of The Stranger, for I otherwise probably wouldn't have gotten to it for a long time, if ever, based on its reputation (or should I say non-reputation?). It was super entertaining, with great performances from the two male leads and a pretty damn good disintegration from the female. More than competently directed by Welles, but the film is too limited by its subject matter and self-imposed genre restrictions for me to consider it one of his best.

[Wryan]

So thanks to iosos for his recommendation of The Stranger, for I otherwise probably wouldn't have gotten to it for a long time, if ever, based on its reputation (or should I say non-reputation?). It was super entertaining, with great performances from the two male leads and a pretty damn good disintegration from the female. More than competently directed by Welles, but the film is too limited by its subject matter and self-imposed genre restrictions for me to consider it one of his best.

Love that film. So much fun to watch. The dinner table reveal is great, perfect timing.

[Grouchy]

About the Superman speech, two things:

In current DC comics lore (that is, from 1987 until now) it has always been established that, although Superman cares about his Kryptonian heritage, he was raised on Earth and regards this planet as his home. He genuinely feels a part of human culture even if his biology tells otherwise. Of course, a good answer to this is that the comics Bill read were from the '60s and '70s, when Superman put on an act of Clark Kent being clumsy and kind of a wimp. I doubt all this stuff was on QT's mind, though.

It halts the movie with an unnecessarily long speech at a point where it would clearly benefit from speeding the action. That speech I've always felt was perfect as a deleted scene on the DVD. A lot shorter and more entertaining scenes were cut from Pulp Fiction (like the video cam interrogation between Mia/Vincent) for this exact reason.

I'm not a fan of the speech, but I'm not ashamed in the least for LOVING Kill Bill. Both parts, actually.

[dreamdead]

Edmond Pang’s Beyond Our Ken is marvelous in its construction, carefully modulating from subtle revenge tragedy to a broad female-bonding film and back again, but one which forces a reappraisal of character motivations by the time the double and triple cross ending rolls around. Ching and Shirley, women who conspire to bring down the morally suspect Ken, give the film a noiresque touch of the macabre in their dedication to teaching Ken a lesson and, as such, it’s best appreciated as a psychological drama, one which is underscored by the continual shift into a subjective camera lens (beautifully shot by Charlie Lam) which embraces the film’s voyeuristic origins. The film’s cultural commentary, as it does possess more depth than would be expected, is found in the framing and composition, which alludes to geographic squalor and decay that’s endured once Ching’s loses her job due to Ken, her ex-boyfriend, posting nude photos of her on the internet. This engagement with technology and the repressive culture that judges these photos, while easily turning a blind eye to the pornographic theatres featured in the film, imbue the film with a level of sophistication that allow it to work beyond the psychological qualities. Great stuff, this.

The only flaw is a nagging and obtrusive musical score that flirts too much with a meta-playfulness of the film’s actions, seen especially when Ching and Shirley work to get back the Ken’s keys after making a second set at a keyshop.

[Bosco B Thug]

Bernard 'Candyman' Rose's Beethoven flick, anyone? Immortal Beloved is a fine piece of filmmaking, and it has moments of really brilliant filmmaking, but it's kind of diffused by being surrounded and padded by a rather "ordinary" and unemphatic sense of plotting. Does that mean anything? It's hard to explain why you feel some films are just more "extra-ordinary" than others, and why some are just less do to an "ordinariness" or conventionality in its storytelling. Just the sense I get from the film is it's restrictively straightforward and maybe "mechanical" in its plotting, instead of being organic and resonant. It's kind of exactly how I'm feeling toward The Dark Knight (one of that film's saving graces is the motif of moments where the sound is muted and all you hear is the electrical drone of the score).

Robert Altman's "teen comedy" O.C. and Stiggs is a weird combo of "crazy teen" hijinks and the usual Altman brand of chaotic, "All isn't right with the world, huh?" unease. It's pretty great, though, I thought. More ornery, take-no-mercy, world restless anarchy in the vein of MASH. It kind of runs out of steam by the big climax... kind of like Popeye.

[Sven]

Bernard 'Candyman' Rose's Beethoven flick, anyone? Immortal Beloved is a fine piece of filmmaking, and it has moments of really brilliant filmmaking, but it's kind of diffused by being surrounded and padded by a rather "ordinary" and unemphatic sense of plotting. Does that mean anything? It's hard to explain why you feel some films are just more "extra-ordinary" than others, and why some are just less do to an "ordinariness" or conventionality in its storytelling. Just the sense I get from the film is it's restrictively straightforward and maybe "mechanical" in its plotting, instead of being organic and resonant. It's kind of exactly how I'm feeling toward The Dark Knight (one of that film's saving graces is the motif of moments where the sound is muted and all you hear is the electrical drone of the score).

I don't remember much other than fantastic uses of Beethoven's music, some naked chicks, and a few instances of lovely imagery. What you say sounds right.


Robert Altman's "teen comedy" O.C. and Stiggs is a weird combo of "crazy teen" hijinks and the usual Altman brand of chaotic, "All isn't right with the world, huh?" unease. It's pretty great, though, I thought. More ornery, take-no-mercy, world restless anarchy in the vein of MASH. Hooray!


It kind of runs out of steam by the big climax... kind of like Popeye.

Boo!

Seriously, though, OC & Stiggs is one of my favorites (and Altman was delighted when I told him so). Love the scene with the dance, love its handle of race with Van Peebles, love its parody of war films with Hopper, love its lampoon of National Lampoon. Can you believe it's considered one of his worst? Mind-boggling.

[Sven]

So thanks to iosos for his recommendation of The Stranger, for I otherwise probably wouldn't have gotten to it for a long time, if ever, based on its reputation (or should I say non-reputation?). It was super entertaining, with great performances from the two male leads and a pretty damn good disintegration from the female. More than competently directed by Welles, but the film is too limited by its subject matter and self-imposed genre restrictions for me to consider it one of his best.

You're most very welcome! Always glad to hear of people taking up a film on my recommendation, whether they like it or not.

[MadMan]

Part of me wants to declare American Psycho a brilliant film. Instead I'll simply settle for calling it a near great satire, although I'm not sure if it can be considered a horror film or not. I sort of feel disturbed at how much a film about an insane pretty boy into murder caught and engaged my attention so much. I noticed on tonight's second viewing of the film that the humor was more noticeable and some of the dark jokes were actually funny. Oh and its still one of Christian Bale's best performances ever as well-he really nails the part in an awesome fashion. I still want to read the book, and I also think that the film's murders are really all in Bateman's head. He's simply going utterly insane, and he's only day dreaming that he's killing all those people. Plus I think the whole scene involving Reagan and how Reagan was able to pull off a perfect cover was really a reflection of how Bateman was able to mask his homicidal tendencies.

[Bosco B Thug]

I don't remember much other than fantastic uses of Beethoven's music, some naked chicks, and a few instances of lovely imagery. What you say sounds right. The Beethoven women were very fetching, with almost alarming ceaselessness. Don't remember much full-blown nakedness for some reason, but I'll gladly remember it that way now! Johanna ter Steege is quite the rewarding acquired taste.


Seriously, though, OC & Stiggs is one of my favorites (and Altman was delighted when I told him so). Love the scene with the dance, love its handle of race with Van Peebles, love its parody of war films with Hopper, love its lampoon of National Lampoon. Can you believe it's considered one of his worst? Mind-boggling. I could see it being alienating - Altman most cartoonish tendencies are at the forefront, and I could see people seeing it as just random irreverence - but yeah, whatev, the film's still exemplary.

[Ezee E]

Vote in that villain poll people. The results are pretty interesting, but I have some ambitious plans on how to reveal the results.

[origami_mustache]

http://www.filmswelike.com/media/incident/gunpoint.jpg

The Incident At Loch Ness was an incredibly entertaining, hilarious, and extremely well executed mockumentary. I am really surprised i haven't heard more about this film...is this a frowned upon genre or do people just not like it much?

[Spinal]

The Incident At Loch Ness was an incredibly entertaining, hilarious, and extremely well executed mockumentary. I am really surprised i haven't heard more about this film...is this a frowned upon genre or do people just not like it much?

Outside of Herzog's performance, I just don't think the film is very well executed. The performers are not able to get close enough to truth for the comedy to register.

[Winston*]

Decided I'd go see a movie this afternoon that I knew absolutely nothing about, since I've been slacking on the film festival front. Saw this Malaysian film The Elephant and the Sea. Didn't really get it; something about loss and human contact or something...whatever. Anyway, If someone could seek out this movie and get it for me it would be much appreciated

[origami_mustache]

Outside of Herzog's performance, I just don't think the film is very well executed. The performers are not able to get close enough to truth for the comedy to register.

I thought the first 40 minutes or so seemed pretty legit, but I think the comedy registers better as things become more absurd. The premise is pretty clever, they set up jokes for later callbacks much in the same way Curb Your Enthusiasm does, and parodying Herzog's repuatation and mystique makes for great comic results, not to mention he is one of the most fascinating people to watch period.

[Duncan]

I thought Incident at Loch Ness was great up until it tried to switch to horror. From then on it sucked.

[Ezee E]

http://www.filmswelike.com/media/incident/gunpoint.jpg

The Incident At Loch Ness was an incredibly entertaining, hilarious, and extremely well executed mockumentary. I am really surprised i haven't heard more about this film...is this a frowned upon genre or do people just not like it much?
loved everything about it.

[balmakboor]

I started watching Satantango last night and after about 10 minutes all I could think was how it's a great example of stretching a 30 minute movie to nine hours. I was wondering how one goes about writing a screenplay for something like this.

FADE IN:

EXT. FARM - GLOOMY DAY
Some cows walk about. No people anywhere.

INT. FARMHOUSE - GLOOMY DAY
A guy paces back and forth, occasionally pausing to look out a window.



There you go. That's the script for the first 10 minutes. (Ok, there was a bit of narration in there too.) At that rate, the whole script for the nine hours would be like 10 pages. Sounds like my kind of script to write.

(Note: I did think those ten minutes were quite beautiful to look at.)

[Raiders]

My favorite script to write would have been for Michael Snow's Wavelength.

[Yxklyx]

I started watching Satantango last night and after about 10 minutes all I could think was how it's a great example of stretching a 30 minute movie to nine hours. I was wondering how one goes about writing a screenplay for something like this.

FADE IN:

EXT. FARM - GLOOMY DAY
Some cows walk about. No people anywhere.

INT. FARMHOUSE - GLOOMY DAY
A guy paces back and forth, occasionally pausing to look out a window.



There you go. That's the script for the first 10 minutes. (Ok, there was a bit of narration in there too.) At that rate, the whole script for the nine hours would be like 10 pages. Sounds like my kind of script to write.

(Note: I did think those ten minutes were quite beautiful to look at.)

Actually, I think it's only 7 1/2 hours. I had no issues with the pacing in parts I-III. It's kind of like one of those environmental DVDs with beaches and stuff...;)

Unfortunately, discs 2 and 3 aren't looking to arrive from Netflix anytime soon so I'm having to put off the rest of the movie until next week at the earliest. I guess I could ride over to Facets and rent them at $5 a pop - not sure if their worth it though.

Does the movie get more interesting as it progresses? I mean the first three parts are fine but at this rate I can't see me rating it more than an 8/10. It's good but not compelling.

[Boner M]

Any thoughts on Red Road, Raiders? Also, your Muriel score makes me wanna see it again, now.

[Sycophant]

My itinerary for today:

2:45 Get Smart
5:00 Hellboy II
9:40 Meet Dave

[Stay Puft]

Yeah, I thought Incident at Loch Ness started out entertaining enough, and then just fizzled. Some of the supplements on the DVD are pretty funny, though.

Spinal, love the rating for The Young One. I've been slowly working my way through Bunuel, and The Young One was probably the best surprise so far (maybe because it was part of a two-film set and Gran Casino was tedious). Not at all like the movie I would picture given my understanding of Bunuel's reputation, and my favorite of his so far (L'Age d'Or), but just a great piece of drama. Bernie Hamilton gives a fantastic performance.

[koji]

Yeah, I thought Incident at Loch Ness started out entertaining enough, and then just fizzled. Some of the supplements on the DVD are pretty funny, though.


Yes, the DVD supplements are hilarious. And there are Easter Eggs.

The faux commentary starts with Penn and Herzog. Herzog gets pissed and leaves. Then Penn's wife, and then a guy recording it. The Easter Eggs reveal a real commentary with Herzog and Penn. And there is more.

[origami_mustache]

Some of the supplements on the DVD are pretty funny, though.


Yeah, I want to watch the extras still.

[Benny Profane]

Werckmeister Harmonies is putting me to sleep. Pretty damn boring stuff. I'm about an hour in.

[Raiders]

Yeah, I imagine Tarr is going to go over about the same as Bresson around here.

[balmakboor]

Part of me wants to declare American Psycho a brilliant film. Instead I'll simply settle for calling it a near great satire, although I'm not sure if it can be considered a horror film or not. I sort of feel disturbed at how much a film about an insane pretty boy into murder caught and engaged my attention so much. I noticed on tonight's second viewing of the film that the humor was more noticeable and some of the dark jokes were actually funny. Oh and its still one of Christian Bale's best performances ever as well-he really nails the part in an awesome fashion. I still want to read the book, and I also think that the film's murders are really all in Bateman's head. He's simply going utterly insane, and he's only day dreaming that he's killing all those people. Plus I think the whole scene involving Reagan and how Reagan was able to pull off a perfect cover was really a reflection of how Bateman was able to mask his homicidal tendencies.

I need to re-watch American Psycho. I had a bad experience when I saw it in the theater and have subliminally held it against the film ever since. Some "dad" in the theater brought his two young kids, complete with blankies and stuffed animals, to the theater and let them roam about during the show. As blood splattered about on the screen, all I could think about was the therapy those kids will need some day.

[Benny Profane]

"I'll be hard on you. I'll be hard on you"

Turning it off before I kill myself. What a waste.

[Sven]

Raiders, I know we've been butting heads lately, but I'd just like to say that no amount of Cloverfields, Dark Knights, or Speed Racers should come between what should be a very strong, insoluble bond between those that consider The Bride of Frankenstein a beau ideal of cinema.

I watched this a few days ago for the first time and fell to my knees in love and admiration for its sense of humor, style, and horror. Its direction and music, so beautiful, so haunting. It's a strange combination of laughs and chills that speaks perfectly to me, and I love its addition to the Frankenstein mythos. Karloff's performance becomes more layered, and I love his delivery in the final moments of the movie... I nearly cried.

[Philosophe_rouge]

Les Bicyclettes de Belsize (1969) is an all too adorable musical short about young love. It has some beautiful moments, and captures that kind of blind ecstasy that comes with that "love at first sight" feeling. Though I wasn't overtly fond of the music itself, it is a good example of why I love musicals... it's like an outward expression of the soul. A musical soliloquy of sorts. Just a bit of fun.

[soitgoes...]

I watched El Sur last night. Great movie. Better than Spirit of the Beehive. It's only misstep, and perhaps others who have seen it felt the same way, the film is shown from the daughters POV, yet there were two instances where we breakaway and follow the father. I know that it's Erice's way of explaining the father's actions, actions she can't ever know about. The fact that the film is narrated by the daughter, and pretty much every other scene shows her in some capacity, made those two scenes just feel off. Outside of those two quibbles, the film was just about perfect.

[Ezee E]

Bresson is leagues better than Tarr.

[soitgoes...]

10 minutes into Yoshishige Yoshida's Coup D'Etat, and I have to say his is the most unique take on framing I've ever seen. The majority of faces are pushed to the edges and corners of the screen. Sometimes half blocked, sometimes distorted. Very interesting.

[origami_mustache]

just checked out Netflix history...it was pretty interesting to see what I was renting almost 3 and 4 years ago..and actually less embarassing than I expected:

post small sampling if any other netflixers care to share

9/04
Mystery Science Theater 3000: Santa Claus Conquers the Martians
Mystery Science Theater 3000: Boggy Creek II: And the Legend Continues
Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter ... and Spring
Storytelling
Tape
Happiness
Mystery Science Theater 3000: Timechasers
The Station Agent
The Last Samurai
Shaolin Soccer

9/05
I Am Cuba
Vive L'Amour
Oldboy
Seven Samurai
Ran
Weekend
32 Short Films About Glenn Gould
Curb Your Enthusiasm: Season 4
Undertow
Band of Outsiders

[MadMan]

I need to re-watch American Psycho. I had a bad experience when I saw it in the theater and have subliminally held it against the film ever since. Some "dad" in the theater brought his two young kids, complete with blankies and stuffed animals, to the theater and let them roam about during the show. As blood splattered about on the screen, all I could think about was the therapy those kids will need some day.Wow. That really sucks. And heh yeah those kids are going to hate their dad when they realize years down the road that the nightmares they've had for much of their child hood resulted from him dragging them to a film where the hero is ultra insane and sadistic towards women, the homeless, etc.

Wow no listening of weekend viewings? Huh. Well anyways I highly doubt I'll get anything in movie wise until August starts.

[MacGuffin]

Yeah, I imagine Tarr is going to go over about the same as Bresson around here.

I'm 1 for 2 for Tarr, and about 1 for 3 for Bresson, so I'm curious to see where Sátántangó will put me.

[origami_mustache]

I'm 1 for 2 for Tarr, and about 1 for 3 for Bresson, so I'm curious to see where Sátántangó will put me.

Which Tarr and Bresson's did you dislike?

[MacGuffin]

Which Tarr and Bresson's did you dislike?

I was more mixed on Damnation as well as Pickpocket and L'Argent.

[Yxklyx]

A couple of mediocre films for me.

Scarecrow (1973, Jerry Schatzberg) has both Al Pacino and Gene Hackman - every scene has one or the other or both - but I've seen most of this story before told better. Some pacing issues as well. Acting was fine of course - just that there was little story to hold it all together.

Lady of Burlesque (1943, William Wellman) is an odd little film. It seems to have been deliberately made to look like a film from 1933 - perhaps there was a nostaligia movement for pre-code films in the 40s. It comes off as a poor B movie from 1933 all right. The only reason to see it is to drool over Stanwyck.

[Derek]

I was more mixed on Damnation as well as Pickpocket and L'Argent.

Then you're probably not in good shape with either filmmaker, although L'Argent is not only a film that's next to impossible to understand in a single viewing, but that benefits from seeing as many of his previous films as possible. In many ways it is a perfection of his late period form, but the ambition and boldness includes side effects like dense elliptical passages that, because of the almost complete lack of causality in the film, which are incredibly tough to tie together until you're familiar with the entire narrative. It went from being a film I merely liked the first time to one of the greatest of all films a few times later.

[MacGuffin]

Then you're probably not in good shape with either filmmaker, although L'Argent is not only a film that's next to impossible to understand in a single viewing, but that benefits from seeing as many of his previous films as possible. In many ways it is a perfection of his late period form, but the ambition and boldness includes side effects like dense elliptical passages that, because of the almost complete lack of causality in the film, which are incredibly tough to tie together until you're familiar with the entire narrative. It went from being a film I merely liked the first time to one of the greatest of all films a few times later.

I'd like to see all of them again. As for Tarr, why do you say that?

[Stay Puft]

post small sampling if any other netflixers care to share

No Netflix for this Canadian, but about 3 years ago I was a member of the now defunct rent-a-dvd.ca.

My rental history was something like this:

1. Once Upon A Time In America
2. Breathless
3. Sanshiro Sugata
4. The Changeling
5. The Mirror
6. Solaris
7. Fitzcarraldo
8. The Blob
9. M
10. The Most Beautiful
11. Bob Le Flambeur
12. Cube 2: Hypercube
13. The Serpent's Egg
14. Branded To Kill
15. Faust
16. The Abominable Dr. Phibes
17. Dr. Phibes Rises Again
18. Fahrenheit 451
19. Un Flic
20. Cannibal! The Musical
21. Le Corbeau (aka The Raven)
22. Vampire Hunter D
23. Dreams (aka Akira Kurosawa's Dreams)
24. The Lower Depths
25. Stray Dog
26. Hard Boiled
27. The Steamroller and the Violin
28. A Story Of Floating Weeds
29. The Leopard Disc 1: Original Italian Version
30. The Lower Depths
31. La Dolce Vita
32. Amon Saga
33. Floating Weeds
34. Grave Of The Fireflies
35. Ratcatcher
36. I Vitelloni
37. Fallen Angels

[Sycophant]

My itinerary for today:

2:45 Get Smart
5:00 Hellboy II
9:40 Meet DaveAdded a 7:00 Hancock to the mix. Get Smart was easily the best of the day's viewings as everything else was meh to sucky. Conversely, Get Smart could very well end up on my year-end best list.

[Qrazy]

You're most very welcome! Always glad to hear of people taking up a film on my recommendation, whether they like it or not.

On that note I watched Gremlins 2 a few days ago (long story short I have been on my dad's case for roughly a decade to rent this film after we watched the first one together, but I finally caved and watched it alone). I quite enjoyed it, particularly the talking Gremlin. I have The Cars that Ate Paris as well, will watch soon.

[Qrazy]

Bresson is leagues better than Tarr.

Not especially.

I personally prefer Tarr, both his tone/aesthetic, thoughts and filmography, but they're both masters of the medium.

[Qrazy]

A couple of mediocre films for me.

Scarecrow (1973, Jerry Schatzberg) has both Al Pacino and Gene Hackman - every scene has one or the other or both - but I've seen most of this story before told better. Some pacing issues as well. Acting was fine of course - just that there was little story to hold it all together.


Well I agree that the general filmmaking isn't top tier, but well, it's a character study, a film where everything is about the performances. Like Schatzberg's Panic in Needle Park before it, that's really all it's about (all though more formally competent than PiNP) and on that level it succeeds wonderfully. I consider it somewhat of an understatement to say the performances are fine. I found them to be rather exceptional.

[Qrazy]

Although L'Argent is not only a film that's next to impossible to understand in a single viewing.

Hrm... in what sense? I don't remember finding it all that convoluted or complex (narratively). Do you mean the relationship between the form and content? If so I'm still not sure if I agree but I can see more where you're coming from.

[Scar]

On that note I watched Gremlins 2 a few days ago (long story short I have been on my dad's case for roughly a decade to rent this film after we watched the first one together, but I finally caved and watched it alone). I quite enjoyed it, particularly the talking Gremlin. I have The Cars that Ate Paris as well, will watch soon.

Well, it's rather brutal here. Right now we are advising all our clients to put everything they've got into canned food and shotguns.

Love them Gremlins.

[Sven]

On that note I watched Gremlins 2 a few days ago (long story short I have been on my dad's case for roughly a decade to rent this film after we watched the first one together, but I finally caved and watched it alone). I quite enjoyed it, particularly the talking Gremlin. I have The Cars that Ate Paris as well, will watch soon.

Awesome!

[origami_mustache]

I love Gremlins as well. The DP for both of the films has been critiquing our rough cut thesis screenings and he gives very blunt and excellent advice.

[D_Davis]

I always feel like the odd man out when it comes to the Gremlins. I really can't stand either film. About a year ago the wife and I tried to watch the first film and we turned it off about half way through.

The "can't eat after midnight" thing has always bugged me, even as a kid. Usually I don't get all nerdia-pitpickia when it comes to this kind of crap - especially seeing as how I like martial arts films in which an invincible armor technique involves the master sucking his testicles into his body, often accompanied by the sound of a slide-whistle - but this Gremlins rule infuriates me. It's always after midnight. When can they start eating? Why not make the rule say "They can't eat between the hours of midnight and 6 a.m." or something?

Plus all that soft focus in the first film is annoying. Is it a horror-comedy or a Barbara Walters interview?

I don't know, they always felt like mediocre episodes of Tales from the Darkside to me.

[Raiders]

The "can't eat after midnight" thing has always bugged me, even as a kid. Usually I don't get all nerdia-pitpickia when it comes to this kind of crap - especially seeing as how I like martial arts films in which an invincible armor technique involves the master sucking his testicles into his body, often accompanied by the sound of a slide-whistle - but this Gremlins rule infuriates me. It's always after midnight. When can they start eating? Why not make the rule say "They can't eat between the hours of midnight and 6 a.m." or something?

I have always thought that was kind of the point; the inevitability that something will go wrong. Plus, this is a fairy-tale kind of rule, not really meant to be taken literally. Remember Cinderella?

[Spinal]

The "can't eat after midnight" thing has always bugged me, even as a kid. Usually I don't get all nerdia-pitpickia when it comes to this kind of crap - especially seeing as how I like martial arts films in which an invincible armor technique involves the master sucking his testicles into his body, often accompanied by the sound of a slide-whistle - but this Gremlins rule infuriates me. It's always after midnight. When can they start eating? Why not make the rule say "They can't eat between the hours of midnight and 6 a.m." or something?


Also, isn't it suggested that they come from the Far East? If you are in Asia, are you not supposed to feed them after 4pm? Or are they sensitive to shifts in time zones?

[Spinal]

Remember Cinderella?

Well, yeah, but that was a specific time assigned by a magical authority figure. Not a biological phenomenon.

[Raiders]

I really don't understand people who look at a film like Gremlins logically.

[Scar]

Remember Cinderella?

We were really drunk....

[D_Davis]

I really don't understand people who look at a film like Gremlins logically.

I call this Pan's Labyrinth syndrome.

If a film is engaging to me on some level, I can overlook just about anything - plot holes and logic be damned. However, once a film fails to engage me, or hold my interest, I start to stare only its cracks and perceived faults. As soon as this happens these perceived faults are all I can see. They become glaring errors. There isn't much - anything? - I like about Gremlins, and so the rules start to bug me and then the whole thing just falls apart for me.

I don't dislike the film because of its lack of logic, I only notice its lack of logic because I don't like the film.

[Spinal]

I really don't understand people who look at a film like Gremlins logically.

I don't know. All we're doing is asking the first question that would pop into the mind of anyone placed in that situation. I don't think it spoils the film. But I also think that it is odd that they never bother to address what seems to be such an obvious murkiness to the rules.

[D_Davis]

I have always thought that was kind of the point; the inevitability that something will go wrong. Plus, this is a fairy-tale kind of rule, not really meant to be taken literally. Remember Cinderella?

But how did the store owner keep Gizmo all cute and cuddly? If something will go wrong, shouldn't it have gone wrong a long time ago? And if they only reproduce by getting wet, and one of the rules is "don't get them wet," and since Gizmo exists, thus proving that at some point one of them got wet, then shouldn't there be...oh never mind. It's a stupid movie.

[D_Davis]

I don't know. All we're doing is asking the first question that would pop into the mind of anyone placed in that situation. I don't think it spoils the film. But I also think that it is odd that they never bother to address what seems to be such an obvious murkiness to the rules.

Right - it could have been so easily fixed.

"Don't feed them after midnight [editor's note - ..."or before 6.a.m, Central time"]."

[Spinal]

And yet, I have no problem with Little Shop of Horrors. :)

[D_Davis]

And yet, I have no problem with Little Shop of Horrors. :)

Yeah, neither do I, because the film engages me.

[D_Davis]

And Armageddon!

:lol:

A film made with anti-logic.

[Sven]

I like that the second film lampoons the logic of the Gremlin rules.

[D_Davis]

I like that the second film lampoons the logic of the Gremlin rules.

Does it? I don't remember.

Maybe I should watch the second film again - it's been ages.

[Sven]

Does it? I don't remember.

Maybe I should watch the second film again - it's been ages.

Yeah, there's a scene where the people in the security room are drilling Galligan's character with "What happens when he eats before midnight, but there's a seed stuck in his teeth?" kind of questions. It's pretty funny.

[Scar]

But how did the store owner keep Gizmo all cute and cuddly? If something will go wrong, shouldn't it have gone wrong a long time ago? And if they only reproduce by getting wet, and one of the rules is "don't get them wet," and since Gizmo exists, thus proving that at some point one of them got wet, then shouldn't there be...oh never mind. It's a stupid movie.

I read the script and book adaption of the first movie, and it talks about how Gizmo is an Old Mogwai, who is old and wise, while any mogwais that are spawned are young bucks, young and crazy, looking to get into trouble.

Gizmo just happened to live long enough to become older and wiser.

[D_Davis]

I read the script and book adaption of the first movie, and it talks about how Gizmo is an Old Mogwai, who is old and wise, while any mogwais that are spawned are young bucks, young and crazy, looking to get into trouble.

Gizmo just happened to live long enough to become older and wiser.

Scar: Keeper of the Gizmo Lore

[D_Davis]

Yeah, there's a scene where the people in the security room are drilling Galligan's character with "What happens when he eats before midnight, but there's a seed stuck in his teeth?" kind of questions. It's pretty funny.

Okay, that is pretty funny.

[Qrazy]

I always feel like the odd man out when it comes to the Gremlins. I really can't stand either film. About a year ago the wife and I tried to watch the first film and we turned it off about half way through.

The "can't eat after midnight" thing has always bugged me, even as a kid. Usually I don't get all nerdia-pitpickia when it comes to this kind of crap - especially seeing as how I like martial arts films in which an invincible armor technique involves the master sucking his testicles into his body, often accompanied by the sound of a slide-whistle - but this Gremlins rule infuriates me. It's always after midnight. When can they start eating? Why not make the rule say "They can't eat between the hours of midnight and 6 a.m." or something?

Plus all that soft focus in the first film is annoying. Is it a horror-comedy or a Barbara Walters interview?

I don't know, they always felt like mediocre episodes of Tales from the Darkside to me.

Well they make fun of the rule in the second film, but yeah as a world building venture Gremlins doesn't bring much to the table... as a Looney Tunes-esque experience I find it quite enjoyable.

[Qrazy]

I don't know. All we're doing is asking the first question that would pop into the mind of anyone placed in that situation. I don't think it spoils the film. But I also think that it is odd that they never bother to address what seems to be such an obvious murkiness to the rules.

They do. They address and dismiss it out of hand haha.

[Qrazy]

But how did the store owner keep Gizmo all cute and cuddly? If something will go wrong, shouldn't it have gone wrong a long time ago? And if they only reproduce by getting wet, and one of the rules is "don't get them wet," and since Gizmo exists, thus proving that at some point one of them got wet, then shouldn't there be...oh never mind. It's a stupid movie.

Well finish that thought because as it stands it's not really a valid complaint. Clearly things had gone wrong a long time ago or they wouldn't have the rules in the first place. Gizmo may be a spawn of another and was either the rare mogwai to be born not mischievous or was taught by the old man not to be mischievous. Either way the rules are simply a platform for the theme of responsibility in general and particularly responsibility with pet care. Let's filter the film through some Lynchian dream logic.

[Scar]

Let's filter the film through some Lynchian dream logic.

Please no.

[Qrazy]

Right - it could have been so easily fixed.

"Don't feed them after midnight [editor's note - ..."or before 6.a.m, Central time"]."

I think it's an unspoken rule that it's midnight to sun up but yeah it probably would have been easier to avoid all of these issues entirely and have it be sun down to sun up but the filmmakers probably felt that was a bit too early and again the larger theme is of more importance i.e. when would/should a kid be in bed by at the latest (and not playing with their animals)... around midnight.

[Qrazy]

Please no.

All I'm saying is that it's a zany nightmare world where real world logic takes less prominence. The after midnight complaint and similar issues doesn't follow real world logic but the film remains internally consistent with it's application of the rule and it's not as if Gremlins exist in real life either.

[Qrazy]

Okay, that is pretty funny.

And then a Gremlin jumps out of the guy's console and rips his throat out.

[Scar]

All I'm saying is that it's a zany nightmare world where real world logic takes less prominence. The after midnight complaint and similar issues doesn't follow real world logic but the film remains consistent with the rule and it's not as if Gremlins exist in real life either.

I understand that. It was more of a half-joking statement, since I'm, how shall we say, not the biggest Lynch fan out there.

[Scar]

And then a Gremlin jumps out of the guy's console and rips his throat out.

Brings a tear to your eye. Oh, that movie is grand.

"Why won't you commit?"

[Duncan]

Anyone using VLC media player know how to get subtitle files to sync up? I tried watching the second half of Celine and Julie Go Boating last night but there's only one .srt file for the two movie files. It works fine for the first half, but when I open the second half it thinks the movie has started over.

[Qrazy]

I understand that. It was more of a half-joking statement, since I'm, how shall we say, not the biggest Lynch fan out there.

Fair, I'm not that big a fan either. I find him to be about 50/50 where half the time I'll find his work poignant, effective and engaging and the other half I'll find it to be insipid or at least deeply flawed and irritating. I've never found him all that visually/cinematically interesting (to whoever is going to call me on this please don't because I've had the conversation so many times in the past, for now just take it as a statement of my own intuitive aesthetic reaction rather than an open critique) but his atmosphere and sound design keeps me coming back.

[Qrazy]

Brings a tear to your eye. Oh, that movie is grand.

"Why won't you commit?"

"I wanna talk a little bit about what's going on in this room because I believe there are some fierce meeting ramifications for the future."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpckODBA6no

[Qrazy]

Anyone using VLC media player know how to get subtitle files to sync up? I tried watching the second half of Celine and Julie Go Boating last night but there's only one .srt file for the two movie files. It works fine for the first half, but when I open the second half it thinks the movie has started over.

The only way I know is to adjust them by pressing H or J or whatever to move them forward or back... unfortunately this is nearly impossible when you have to adjust for half a movie. I think you can go into the settings when you first load them up and guesstimate the basic time you want them to start and then adjust manually but I would instead recommend googling the subtitles and you should be able to find a 2 CD subtitle version out there.

[Qrazy]

I also love that the talking Gremlin was played by Tony Randall aka Rock Hunter.

[D_Davis]

Anyone using VLC media player know how to get subtitle files to sync up? I tried watching the second half of Celine and Julie Go Boating last night but there's only one .srt file for the two movie files. It works fine for the first half, but when I open the second half it thinks the movie has started over.

Have you viewed the .srt file to see how it is arranged?

Can you use a sub-editing program to split the .srt file into 2 parts?

[D_Davis]

Gizmo may be a spawn of another and was either the rare mogwai to be born not mischievous or was taught by the old man not to be mischievous. Either way the rules are simply a platform for the theme of responsibility in general and particularly responsibility with pet care. Let's filter the film through some Lynchian dream logic.

Gizmo was the spawn of a Mogwai Immaculate Conception.

"And lo! The Holy Mogwai descended onto Gizmandy and saideth 'Lo! I bring you tidings of great joy, for tonighteth thou shalt spawn a new Mogwai without thy aid of water, and by thine holy decree youest shalt callest him Gizmo'"

"And Gizmandy cried out, 'Why oh lord, should ye chooseth me? I am not worthy of such a deed."

"And the Holy Mogwai spoketh to Gizmandy saying 'the God Modwai moves in mysterious ways' as he ascended into the heavens."

Amen.

[Spinal]

Didn't realize until now that Gremlins was written by Chris Columbus. That explains a lot.

[Spinal]

Spinal, love the rating for The Young One. I've been slowly working my way through Bunuel, and The Young One was probably the best surprise so far (maybe because it was part of a two-film set and Gran Casino was tedious). Not at all like the movie I would picture given my understanding of Bunuel's reputation, and my favorite of his so far (L'Age d'Or), but just a great piece of drama. Bernie Hamilton gives a fantastic performance.

Yeah, Bunuel is far, far more than a surrealist. He is amazingly versatile and the results are almost always stellar. The Young One seemed very progressive to me for the time, not only in the way it approached racism, but also sexuality. Like you suggested, it's a pretty straightforward drama, but it's also tense, thought-provoking stuff. Both leads were great. I was reminded of The Tempest at times.

[Qrazy]

Gizmo was the spawn of a Mogwai Immaculate Conception.

"And lo! The Holy Mogwai descended onto Gizmandy and saideth 'Lo! I bring you tidings of great joy, for tonighteth thou shalt spawn a new Mogwai without thy aid of water, and by thine holy decree youest shalt callest him Gizmo'"

"And Gizmandy cried out, 'Why oh lord, should ye chooseth me? I am not worthy of such a deed."

"And the Holy Mogwai spoketh to Gizmandy saying 'the God Modwai moves in mysterious ways' as he ascended into the heavens."

Amen.

On a semi-related note did the band Mogwai take their namesake from the film?

[Qrazy]

Yeah, Bunuel is far, far more than a surrealist. He is amazingly versatile and the results are almost always stellar. The Young One seemed very progressive to me for the time, not only in the way it approached racism, but also sexuality. Like you suggested, it's a pretty straightforward drama, but it's also tense, thought-provoking stuff. Both leads were great. I was reminded of The Tempest at times.

Yeah I honestly think it's one of the better films about racism... I'd put it in the top dozen or so for sure.

[soitgoes...]

I've tried twice to see The Young One, and was thrown a curve ball twice by Netflix. Because of the mis-labeling of the CDs by Lions Gate, I received Gran Casino both times. Once before I knew about the mis-labeling, and once a week or so later when I tried to outsmart Netflix by choosing Gran Casino, but they had fixed the problem. Quite the disappointment.

[D_Davis]

On a semi-related note did the band Mogwai take their namesake from the film?

Yes.

[Ezee E]

Weekend!

Don't Look Now
The Last Winter

[soitgoes...]

Weekend:
Duel of Fists
A Touch of Zen
Five Deadly Venoms
Legend of the Mountain
Some movie with white people

Somewhere Daniel Davis is shedding a tear.

[Ezee E]

Weekend:
Duel of Fists
A Touch of Zen
Five Deadly Venoms
Legend of the Mountain
Some movie with white people

Somewhere Daniel Davis is shedding a tear.
Not because of the white people, but because it's taken you so long to see those movies.

[Philosophe_rouge]

Weekend
Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown
Sullivan's Travels

[Sycophant]

Weekend:
Step Brothers
X-Files: I Want to Believe
Bully
Dave Chappelle's Block Party
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

[origami_mustache]

Weekend:
Death In Venice
Step Brothers
The Children Are Watching Us

maybe...
Mafioso
Porcile

[Raiders]

Weekend:

The X-Files: I Want to Believe (in two hours!)
CSNY: Deja Vu

I got nothing else right now. Maybe will make it down to DC to see Encounters at the End of the World.

[Sycophant]

Edmond Pang’s Beyond Our Ken is marvelous in its construction, carefully modulating from subtle revenge tragedy to a broad female-bonding film and back again, but one which forces a reappraisal of character motivations by the time the double and triple cross ending rolls around. I'm glad you watched it and am even gladder that you're glad you watched it. Hopefully, you'll check out some of Pang's other work down the road. Men Suddenly in Black is particularly delightful.

I hear you on the music, though. I don't really have much to add beyond that, except that I hope more people will give this and Pang's other films a shot.

[Qrazy]

Weekend:
Death In Venice

Don't do it.

Porcile and The Children are Watching Us are interesting.

[Spinal]

I have I am Cuba and Mai Zetterling's Loving Couples out from Netflix. Might also see the Batman movie.

[Robby P]

I'm not quite sure what to make of Bad Lieutenant. Feels like second-hand Scorsese to me. Catholic guilt!!!

On the other hand, Blood Simple was quite marvelous. Those Coens are alright.

[dreamdead]

Caught up with Hitchcock's Lifeboat to see if it should place in the 1944 consensus thread. Structurally it's strong stuff, and though it feels as though characters switch internal motivation a bit too quickly to be entirely accepted (wtf... Connie and Kovac's kiss?), the biggest issue for me here is the problematic ideology that the film contains. While I understand that it was produced during the wartime effort and thus is finally antagonistic toward Germans/Nazis (and the film more or less thinks of the two as one by film's end), I cannot help but feel the propaganda here isn't supported by the film itself.

The Americans all cast hateful blame on the Nazi Willy for Sparks' death, yet they slept idly by while he called for help. Though Willy is directly responsible for pushing Sparks into the waters to drown, none of the crew listens and becomes cognizant to Sparks crying out for help, instead sleeping through it. When they later turn on Willy, none of them even notes their inability to aid him, and this thus makes their aspersions problematic to my eyes. Similarly, the treatment of the German Nazi they rescue in the final moments, when the most philosophical of the crew casts outright hatred toward the German people, comes off as too propagandistic and solidifies this as a film that morally aligns itself with Saboteur a bit too much, which (shockingly enough) weakens the overall effect of the film.

[dreamdead]

I figure I'll get to Night and Fog, Laura, and Lee's Oasis...

[MacGuffin]

I figure I'll get to Night and Fog, Laura, and Lee's Oasis...

You should probably watch the first one last.

[dreamdead]

I'm glad you watched it and am even gladder that you're glad you watched it. Hopefully, you'll check out some of Pang's other work down the road. Men Suddenly in Black is particularly delightful.

I hear you on the music, though. I don't really have much to add beyond that, except that I hope more people will give this and Pang's other films a shot.

Yeah, I especially loved how Beyond Our Ken played with the construct of time as an incredibly subjective experience as it relates to Ching and Shirley's back stories. Pang trains us to intuitively accept the flashback sequences as being divorced from subjectivity and instead to see them as objective, but the stuttering, bouncing camera keeps alluding to subjectivity in its framing and design. So when this pays off narratively, the film transcends its surprise ending conceits and becomes a thoughtful examination of how we view and mediate our perception of time in films. The more I think about this one, the more fondly I grow toward it...

[Qrazy]

Caught up with Hitchcock's Lifeboat to see if it should place in the 1944 consensus thread. Structurally it's strong stuff, and though it feels as though characters switch internal motivation a bit too quickly to be entirely accepted (wtf... Connie and Kovac's kiss?), the biggest issue for me here is the problematic ideology that the film contains. While I understand that it was produced during the wartime effort and thus is finally antagonistic toward Germans/Nazis (and the film more or less thinks of the two as one by film's end), I cannot help but feel the propaganda here isn't supported by the film itself.

The Americans all cast hateful blame on the Nazi Willy for Sparks' death, yet they slept idly by while he called for help. Though Willy is directly responsible for pushing Sparks into the waters to drown, none of the crew listens and becomes cognizant to Sparks crying out for help, instead sleeping through it. When they later turn on Willy, none of them even notes their inability to aid him, and this thus makes their aspersions problematic to my eyes. Similarly, the treatment of the German Nazi they rescue in the final moments, when the most philosophical of the crew casts outright hatred toward the German people, comes off as too propagandistic and solidifies this as a film that morally aligns itself with Saboteur a bit too much, weakening the overall effect of the film.

Yeah Hitchcock is not well known for his psychological or moral subtlety. I find I get the most out of his films from a purely formalistic stance.

[megladon8]

Transylvania 6-5000 was pretty awful.

Geena Davis was hot in it, though.

[Gerbier]

I watched The Color of Pomegranates again today. One of the most beautiful films I've ever seen, the KINO transfer doesn't do it justice.

[Kurious Jorge v3.1]

I watched The Color of Pomegranates again today. One of the most beautiful films I've ever seen, the KINO transfer doesn't do it justice.

Very excited to see this in 35mm next month. They will also be playing an early film of his, Ukranian Rhapsody, which I'll probably check out as well.

[Mysterious Dude]

I've noticed something about Hitchcock. I'm not convinced he was ever ahead of his time, but he always managed to, at least, stay with the times. Other auteurs like Buñuel, Fellini, Kubrick and Lynch seemed to abandon the evolving conventions of cinema as they got older and found their own style, but Hitchcock always remained with it. Frenzy is a Hitchcock film through and through, but it's also a film made with all the conventions of early seventies filmmaking. Whereas a film like Roma seems quite removed from its own time. Or Eyes Wide Shut. Maybe it's just because Hitchcock's career lasted for so long, but I've just noticed that he always seemed to be comfortable adapting to the conventions of the times.

[Qrazy]

I've noticed something about Hitchcock. I'm not convinced he was ever ahead of his time, but he always managed to, at least, stay with the times. Other auteurs like Buñuel, Fellini, Kubrick and Lynch seemed to abandon the evolving conventions of cinema as they got older and found their own style, but Hitchcock always remained with it. Frenzy is a Hitchcock film through and through, but it's also a film made with all the conventions of early seventies filmmaking. Whereas a film like Roma seems quite removed from its own time. Or Eyes Wide Shut. Maybe it's just because Hitchcock's career lasted for so long, but I've just noticed that he always seemed to be comfortable adapting to the conventions of the times.

Hrm in what sense are you defining conventions? I find noticeable aesthetic shifts in all three of those three filmmakers films.

[Mysterious Dude]

Hrm in what sense are you defining conventions? I find noticeable aesthetic shifts in all three of those three filmmakers films.
Well, I think Fellini and Kubrick started off relatively conventionally in the fifties. La Strada and The Killing (good movies) both are derived from specific styles (neorealism and film noir) that pre-date their respective directors' careers. But later in their careers, they drifted away from any conventions that I know of. 2001 is a science fiction film, but is quite unlike any science fiction film that had preceded it. While Kubrick and Fellini, for at least part of their respective careers, either actively defied conventions or simply ignored them, Hitchcock consistently embraced them throughout his career.

[Raiders]

Caught up with Hitchcock's Lifeboat to see if it should place in the 1944 consensus thread. Structurally it's strong stuff, and though it feels as though characters switch internal motivation a bit too quickly to be entirely accepted (wtf... Connie and Kovac's kiss?), the biggest issue for me here is the problematic ideology that the film contains. While I understand that it was produced during the wartime effort and thus is finally antagonistic toward Germans/Nazis (and the film more or less thinks of the two as one by film's end), I cannot help but feel the propaganda here isn't supported by the film itself.

The Americans all cast hateful blame on the Nazi Willy for Sparks' death, yet they slept idly by while he called for help. Though Willy is directly responsible for pushing Sparks into the waters to drown, none of the crew listens and becomes cognizant to Sparks crying out for help, instead sleeping through it. When they later turn on Willy, none of them even notes their inability to aid him, and this thus makes their aspersions problematic to my eyes. Similarly, the treatment of the German Nazi they rescue in the final moments, when the most philosophical of the crew casts outright hatred toward the German people, comes off as too propagandistic and solidifies this as a film that morally aligns itself with Saboteur a bit too much, which (shockingly enough) weakens the overall effect of the film.

I don't know. To me, Hitchcock is scoffing at both extremes here (that of fascism and that of capitalism) and Rittenhouse's final act is a bit of blurring as his hatred and "superiority" align him with the fascists. If there is any hero in this film, it is Connie, and maybe Joe, as Hitchcock realizes the ultimate goodness may only be found above.

[Yxklyx]

I've noticed something about Hitchcock. I'm not convinced he was ever ahead of his time, but he always managed to, at least, stay with the times. Other auteurs like Buñuel, Fellini, Kubrick and Lynch seemed to abandon the evolving conventions of cinema as they got older and found their own style, but Hitchcock always remained with it. Frenzy is a Hitchcock film through and through, but it's also a film made with all the conventions of early seventies filmmaking. Whereas a film like Roma seems quite removed from its own time. Or Eyes Wide Shut. Maybe it's just because Hitchcock's career lasted for so long, but I've just noticed that he always seemed to be comfortable adapting to the conventions of the times.

I totally agree! Hitchcock was more in tune with the audience and was really making movies for them. The other directors you mention are more self-centered and introspective. Hitchcock was an extrovert compared to them.

[Gerbier]

Very excited to see this in 35mm next month. They will also be playing an early film of his, Ukranian Rhapsody, which I'll probably check out as well.

Didn't Parajandov disown all the films he made prior to Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors? I think it would be interesting to see Ukranian Rhapsody, if you go tell me how you liked it.

[Ezee E]

I don't know. When I see a Hitchcock movie, even with something smaller scale like Lifeboat, I still think it's Hitchcock.

I am about to get into a few more of his films though, we'll see about those.

[chrisnu]

Looks like the X-Files reviews have been bad. I'll be seeing it on Monday anyway. I'm most concerned about the script. I have no confidence in Chris Carter and Frank Spotnitz's storytelling abilities, considering how the series ended, and that they wrote most of those episodes. That's all you have to go by.

[Raiders]

Looks like the X-Files reviews have been bad. I'll be seeing it on Monday anyway. I'm most concerned about the script. I have no confidence in Chris Carter and Frank Spotnitz's storytelling abilities, considering how the series ended, and that they wrote most of those episodes. That's all you have to go by.

It was pretty good, I thought. The beginning and end emulate the religious/science dichotomy the series was built upon. I especially thought they did some great things with Scully and the film, as was the series, is really her story. There is an early shot that has her working in a Catholic hospital, standing directly under a crucifix on the wall; and a shot at the end with a risky and religiously-strenuous procedure being done and three nuns standing outside the glass, looking in. I think that Carter and Spotnitz still understand the two central characters very well. The actual narrative is rather disposable, though I think that pared down, this could have made one of the best episodes of the series. And while that means as a film it is somewhat lacking, it is also among the highest compliments I can give.

[Yxklyx]

Weekend:

Citizen Dog
Moolaadé
Cows

[Kurious Jorge v3.1]

weekend:

The Spiral Staircase (just watched...meh.)
The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
French Can Can
The Big Combo
The Dark Knight
Nostalghia
Gervaise

[Boner M]

W/e (last stretch of my NYC rampage)

Late Bloomer
Man on Wire
A bunch of avant-garde shorts.

[D_Davis]

Weekend:
Duel of Fists
A Touch of Zen
Five Deadly Venoms
Legend of the Mountain
Some movie with white people

Somewhere Daniel Davis is shedding a tear.

1. Good
2. One of the best
3. Awesome
4. Pretty cool
5. What?

[soitgoes...]

5. What?Armageddon...

No, not really. ;)

[Qrazy]

Didn't Parajandov disown all the films he made prior to Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors? I think it would be interesting to see Ukranian Rhapsody, if you go tell me how you liked it.

I personally have little to no patience for The Color of Pomegranates but I loved Shadows.

[Qrazy]

Well, I think Fellini and Kubrick started off relatively conventionally in the fifties. La Strada and The Killing (good movies) both are derived from specific styles (neorealism and film noir) that pre-date their respective directors' careers. But later in their careers, they drifted away from any conventions that I know of. 2001 is a science fiction film, but is quite unlike any science fiction film that had preceded it. While Kubrick and Fellini, for at least part of their respective careers, either actively defied conventions or simply ignored them, Hitchcock consistently embraced them throughout his career.

Well I still am not sure what you mean by conventions... film topics? narrative tendencies? Aesthetically I find all three films to be products of their eras, I can tell which decade each film is from.

[Qrazy]

W/E Nicholson binge!

Goin' South
The Postman Always Rings Twice (probably watch both films)
The Missouri Breaks
Reds
Witches of Eastwick
Wolf

I couldn't get a hold of it but I'd like to see On A Clear Day You Can See Forever.

[Yum-Yum]

Weekend:
Blonde Ambition
Cries and Whispers
Dorm Daze 2: College @ Sea
M.I.L.F. Money #6



Baghead (Duplass, 2008) 78

All right, Baghead. I must say, this looks pretty good.


A bunch of avant-garde shorts.

The shorts Blixa Bargeld wore at this outdoor music festival I never attended back in the early '90s were pretty avante-garde. They were light blue and had dead Toucans on them.

[Mysterious Dude]

Well I still am not sure what you mean by conventions... film topics? narrative tendencies? Aesthetically I find all three films to be products of their eras, I can tell which decade each film is from.
Let me put it this way. Frenzy has some graphic rape and violence. But audiences had already seen graphic rape and violence in A Clockwork Orange the year before Frenzy. Psycho shows blood in its violence, but audiences had already seen blood two years earlier in Horror of Dracula (and it was actually red). So I don't find that Hitchcock was ever really breaking new ground or pushing boundaries at any point in his career. He was just going with the flow and progressing at the same rate that cinema at large was progressing. Compared to the films of the French New Wave, Psycho seems old, in the lighting, the framing, the acting styles, etc.

[origami_mustache]

Death in Venice (Luchino Visconti, 1971)

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1012/764436937_f229039612.jpg?v=0

Dirk Bogarde delivers an excellent performance as Gustav von Aschenbach in this fairly dull story about a composer vacationing in Venice to escape his stressful life. He becomes infatuated with an adolescent boy who embodies the ideal beauty he has sought after. Visconti utilizes the slow zoom technique throughout the film in virtually every scene. Even though this was the decade most notorious for the zoom technique, Visconti goes overboard, and it's truly a shame because his wide shot compositions are so incredible, but constantly butchered by distracting zooms. I honestly think I could have enjoyed this film much much more if not for the zooming. It is strange to think one element can have such an impact, but it is so overbearing. The zooms were effective at times, particularly for Gustav's POV shot were he is fixing his gaze on the young boy, (my favorite shot is a meandering POV of shot full of zooms, pans and tilts, where Gustav scans the beach patrons), but otherwise the zooms are tedious and tacky. This essay reasonably argues the effectiveness of the zooming, however it didn't change my opinion:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3768/is_199801/ai_n8776729

[Raiders]

Red Road: I'm both frustrated and intrigued by this film. Frustrated in that I was constantly annoyed that the film was so depressingly dark--not in terms of content, but that the filmmakers seemed to think that by avoiding anything resembling a happy or even a normal atmosphere they could underline the film's "dark" and "squalid" motives. I also think the film is rather dubious in its exploitation of the real life Red Road, which by all counts is a slum, but not of the level the film makes out. I don't know, but I'm uneasy with filmmakers taking a real, current location and essentially roughing it up and performing a pretty big injustice to those actually living there. Just because someone is poor doesn't mean they have so little consideration that they pour dog food directly on the floor. But elsewhere, Arnold taps into the paranoia of Britain's modern-day Big Brother complex as well as offers an intriguing cat-and-mouse game. Especially nice is the much talked about sex scene between the cat and the mouse and the way that obsession transforms into pleasure for a brief moment. The resolution is a bit pat and the change of heart seems almost a bit forced. The real issue may be that Arnold has so stressed the obsession and the way the surveillance camera has manifested itself in Jackie and her invasion of the man's life through a lengthy, somewhat overloaded odyssey that the ending just cannot properly wrap up the time that has been invested. Also at play may be that this film is merely the first of a trilogy on these same characters and this way we get more of a clean slate to start with.

In the end, I liked some of the underlying thematics, but the execution was rather wanting.

[monolith94]

Didn't Parajandov disown all the films he made prior to Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors? I think it would be interesting to see Ukranian Rhapsody, if you go tell me how you liked it.
I don't think he did; I remember reading an interview with him where he talks about how Dovzhenko asked to see his student film a second time, which was apparently the first time that had ever happened.

[Grouchy]

Let me put it this way. Frenzy has some graphic rape and violence. But audiences had already seen graphic rape and violence in A Clockwork Orange the year before Frenzy. Psycho shows blood in its violence, but audiences had already seen blood two years earlier in Horror of Dracula (and it was actually red). So I don't find that Hitchcock was ever really breaking new ground or pushing boundaries at any point in his career. He was just going with the flow and progressing at the same rate that cinema at large was progressing. Compared to the films of the French New Wave, Psycho seems old, in the lighting, the framing, the acting styles, etc.
I actually understand what you're saying about Hitch. When you think about it, he always made the best movie he could with the conventions of his time.

[Duncan]

I think that's actually part of the reason Hitchcock has never been a favourite director of mine. A superior craftsman for sure, but certainly not a risk taker.

[Qrazy]

Death in Venice (Luchino Visconti, 1971)

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1012/764436937_f229039612.jpg?v=0

Dirk Bogarde delivers an excellent performance as Gustav von Aschenbach in this fairly dull story about a composer vacationing in Venice to escape his stressful life. He becomes infatuated with an adolescent boy who embodies the ideal beauty he has sought after. Visconti utilizes the slow zoom technique throughout the film in virtually every scene. Even though this was the decade most notorious for the zoom technique, Visconti goes overboard, and it's truly a shame because his wide shot compositions are so incredible, but constantly butchered by distracting zooms. I honestly think I could have enjoyed this film much much more if not for the zooming. It is strange to think one element can have such an impact, but it is so overbearing. The zooms were effective at times, particularly for Gustav's POV shot were he is fixing his gaze on the young boy, (my favorite shot is a meandering POV of shot full of zooms, pans and tilts, where Gustav scans the beach patrons), but otherwise the zooms are tedious and tacky. This essay reasonably argues the effectiveness of the zooming, however it didn't change my opinion:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3768/is_199801/ai_n8776729

My favorite shot is the opening one of the boat, and it's all downhill from there.

[Qrazy]

Let me put it this way. Frenzy has some graphic rape and violence. But audiences had already seen graphic rape and violence in A Clockwork Orange the year before Frenzy. Psycho shows blood in its violence, but audiences had already seen blood two years earlier in Horror of Dracula (and it was actually red). So I don't find that Hitchcock was ever really breaking new ground or pushing boundaries at any point in his career. He was just going with the flow and progressing at the same rate that cinema at large was progressing. Compared to the films of the French New Wave, Psycho seems old, in the lighting, the framing, the acting styles, etc.

Ah alright well in these two points I suppose you're right but he was pushing boundaries as well... killing off and switching protagonists halfway through the film, a film on such a small space as a Lifeboat, his long shots on Rope and single location shots in Rear Window.


So I don't find that Hitchcock was ever really breaking new ground or pushing boundaries at any point in his career. He was just going with the flow and progressing at the same rate that cinema at large was progressing. Compared to the films of the French New Wave, Psycho seems old, in the lighting, the framing, the acting styles, etc.

Hrm can't say I really agree although I see where you're coming from if you're contrasting his films to the new wave... The Hitchcock zoom, POV shots in Spellbound, etc. He was formally inventive.

[dreamdead]

Thoughts on Laura are largely geared toward the cinematography, which is pristine despite the years. Structurally, it's nothing all that different than most noirs, but the reversals and subtle nuances (especially the metallic baseball game that Dana Andrews plays with) keep it fresh enough. The flaw lies in the ending, which, after having established a fine build up to the climax (with the clock) instead ends with a whimper when the villain is revealed. It's wonderful, however, to see Vincent Price in an earlier role, as it seems so distant from the more showy material that I'm used to. Enjoyable, but it never quite reaches anything beyond "very good."

Nicholas Ray's Johnny Guitar is, simply put, immense. Writ thematically with bold strokes about the dangers of mass conformity and group think, the film (though not necessarily with subtle strokes) fashions a tale where the politics of the community are manipulated to endanger any potential outsiders, whether it be encroachment of land, profit, or ideology. Yet the film gains its power because it successfully possesses a dialectic, so that even though Emma Small is a bit heavy on the vitriol, there is nonetheless glimpses of a humanity that's been scared into hatred. Indeed, there feel as though there's latent touches of desire that exist between her and Joan Crawford's Vienna. Certainly the film has enough other flourishes of coded homosexuality in the outfits and attire that Crawford wears that such a reading isn't taking things too far, but the McCarthyist critique is really wear the film has its strengths, as the community finally lets the two agents of ideology duel for the survival of the community. Great stuff, and immediately one of the best responses to McCarthyist thinking. Are there other hidden gems that explore these ideas?

[dreamdead]

I don't know. To me, Hitchcock is scoffing at both extremes here (that of fascism and that of capitalism) and Rittenhouse's final act is a bit of blurring as his hatred and "superiority" align him with the fascists. If there is any hero in this film, it is Connie, and maybe Joe, as Hitchcock realizes the ultimate goodness may only be found above.

Interesting thoughts regarding Lifeboat's privileging of Joe. It's ideas like this that made me question my initial reading, as his character is (largely) devoid of the group think that's subsumed any even-headed portrayal of the Germans in the film. Yet precisely because the film treats Joe as background material for so much of the film, only granting him snatches of humanity until the climax/coda, where he's granted a full interiority, I feel that we're meant to align ourselves with Kovac or Connie more so than Joe. And I'm not even that comfortable with thinking Connie's matured, since her shift also goes from trustworthy to skeptical to any German's goodness (though I grant that her rampant materialism has faded by film's end).

[balmakboor]

Death in Venice (Luchino Visconti, 1971)

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1012/764436937_f229039612.jpg?v=0

Dirk Bogarde delivers an excellent performance as Gustav von Aschenbach in this fairly dull story about a composer vacationing in Venice to escape his stressful life. He becomes infatuated with an adolescent boy who embodies the ideal beauty he has sought after. Visconti utilizes the slow zoom technique throughout the film in virtually every scene. Even though this was the decade most notorious for the zoom technique, Visconti goes overboard, and it's truly a shame because his wide shot compositions are so incredible, but constantly butchered by distracting zooms. I honestly think I could have enjoyed this film much much more if not for the zooming. It is strange to think one element can have such an impact, but it is so overbearing. The zooms were effective at times, particularly for Gustav's POV shot were he is fixing his gaze on the young boy, (my favorite shot is a meandering POV of shot full of zooms, pans and tilts, where Gustav scans the beach patrons), but otherwise the zooms are tedious and tacky. This essay reasonably argues the effectiveness of the zooming, however it didn't change my opinion:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3768/is_199801/ai_n8776729

I've long wanted to bring Fassbinder back from the dead to ask him why he considered this one of his ten favorite films. I haven't seen it myself.

[Qrazy]

I've long wanted to bring Fassbinder back from the dead to ask him why he considered this one of his ten favorite films. I haven't seen it myself.

Because a lot of filmmakers enjoy dogshit cinema.

---

Speaking of dogshit Goin' South wasn't far from that. No actually that's a bit harsh but it was an incredibly bland experience. Nicholson I think largely learned his lesson to stick to acting, direction was not his forte.

[MacGuffin]

I thought Stage Fright was a pretty average Hitchcock movie. There are some interesting ideas, but I don't like how Hitchcock is so immediate towards the beginning, and so I then hardly cared much about what was going on.

[soitgoes...]

King Hu's A Touch of Zen has left me thinking how great it is. This is a film I feel will continue to resonate with me over the next few days, increasing my appreciation of it. Not to slight early Hong Kong/Chinese filmmakers or their industry, but I didn't think a film like this could've or was made. Truly a technical triumph. I stated a few days ago that Eight Diagram Pole Fighter contained the best 20 minutes of fight sequences in a film I've seen, well Hu has put together the some of the best filmmaking over the last 20 or so minutes of his film. Simply stunning. His use of lighting, music cutting in and out when the sun creates lens flares behind badass Abbot Hui Yuan's head, intercutting of nature scenes, the Buddhism imagery, and on and on. One of the best films I've seen this year.

[soitgoes...]

A quick few lines on The Eagle Has Landed which I watched last night. This film has Michael Caine, Robert Duvall, and Donald Pleasence all playing Germans, (Pleasence plays Himmler!) It has Donald Sutherland playing an Irishman, and yet Treat Williams playing an American soldier pulls off the worst performance in the movie. It might say something about how great the other actors are, but really that's not the case. Williams was awful.

[soitgoes...]

Whoever was in charge of wardrobe on Chang Cheh's Duel of Fists should have been shot. Never has or will this look be considered okay:

http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee171/soitgoes22/ugly.jpg

[origami_mustache]

I accidentally found this interesting blog with a very cool post about trains in cinema that includes some amazing stills from Stalker, The Silence, The Spirit of the Beehive, The Naked City, 2046, George Washington, and tons more.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2243/2506134662_732e06c0c5.jpg?v=0

part 1 (http://theartofmemory.blogspot.com/2007/03/trains-in-cinema-part-1.html)

part 2 (http://theartofmemory.blogspot.com/2007/04/trains-in-cinema-woyzeck.html)

part 3 (http://theartofmemory.blogspot.com/2007/11/trains-in-cinema-part-3.html)

part 4 (http://theartofmemory.blogspot.com/2008/05/trains-in-cinema-part-4.html)

part 5 (http://theartofmemory.blogspot.com/2008/06/univers-du-western-trains-in-cinema.html)

[D_Davis]

King Hu's A Touch of Zen has left me thinking how great it is. This is a film I feel will continue to resonate with me over the next few days, increasing my appreciation of it. Not to slight early Hong Kong/Chinese filmmakers or their industry, but I didn't think a film like this could've or was made. Truly a technical triumph. I stated a few days ago that Eight Diagram Pole Fighter contained the best 20 minutes of fight sequences in a film I've seen, well Hu has put together the some of the best filmmaking over the last 20 or so minutes of his film. Simply stunning. His use of lighting, music cutting in and out when the sun creates lens flares behind badass Abbot Hui Yuan's head, intercutting of nature scenes, the Buddhism imagery, and on and on. One of the best films I've seen this year.

It is a masterpiece.

Have you seen Tsui Hark's The Blade?

You should check it out.

[Teh Sausage]

I watched Border Incident last night. The most fascinating thing about it is it kind of acts as a transition between Anthony Mann's noirs and westerns. While it is a police procedural movie, the barren environment and hats and sombreros instantly remind us of the genre Mann would reside in only a year later. And as night falls, the desolate wastelands are blanketed by John Alton's trademark shadows, delicately imbuing the screen with noirish fatalism and fear. The script has too many weaknesses which stop the film from becoming great, but it's still rather entertaining and is very interesting for Mann/Alton fans.

[Raiders]

I watched Border Incident last night. The most fascinating thing about it is it kind of acts as a transition between Anthony Mann's noirs and westerns. While it is a police procedural movie, the barren environment and hats and sombreros instantly remind us of the genre Mann would reside in only a year later. And as night falls, the desolate wastelands are blanketed by John Alton's trademark shadows, delicately imbuing the screen with noirish fatalism and fear. The script has too many weaknesses which stop the film from becoming great, but it's still rather entertaining and is very interesting for Mann/Alton fans.

I love this film. Probably Mann's best, at least from a directorial standpoint (I would probably place The Tall Target as tops for him). Can't really argue with the script weakness, though it didn't seem any worse than any number of B-movie potboilers, but some of that film is gritty and intense. That tractor scene had me turning my head.

[soitgoes...]

It is a masterpiece.

Have you seen Tsui Hark's The Blade?

You should check it out.No I haven't, but I will.

[origami_mustache]

There is an interesting thread on the Criterion forums where a guy claimed to have discovered a "lost" print of Murnau's 4 Devils and then deactivated his account a few days later after consulting with a legal expert on the matter. It would be cool if it's not a hoax, although I'd say it likely is...anyways it was fun to read.

http://www.criterionforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7040

[D_Davis]

Whoever was in charge of wardrobe on Chang Cheh's Duel of Fists should have been shot. Never has or will this look be considered okay:

http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee171/soitgoes22/ugly.jpg

http://www.genrebusters.com/images/lady2.jpg

[soitgoes...]

http://www.genrebusters.com/images/lady2.jpg
Those people are just plain sexy!!

[Duncan]

Watched Buena Vista Social Club. Nothing stunning, but it's kind film. Celebratory of people and music. I liked it very much.

Also saw The Philadelphia Story. It's a good script and has a lot of star power. Boring direction. I tire very quickly of films from this era with rich stars playing rich people with down to earth problems. They seem so inherently phony. I almost never like them.

[Teh Sausage]

I love this film. Probably Mann's best, at least from a directorial standpoint (I would probably place The Tall Target as tops for him). Can't really argue with the script weakness, though it didn't seem any worse than any number of B-movie potboilers, but some of that film is gritty and intense. That tractor scene had me turning my head.

It's a good sequence, though Jack's friends didn't seem to be helping him much as he was about to get sliced up.:P Stretching the length of a scene can be a good way of increasing suspence, but the way that technique was used here made it feel less believable. It reminded me of that scene in Temple of Doom where Indy was on that conveyor belt that just went on forever...

[Qrazy]

Watched Buena Vista Social Club. Nothing stunning, but it's kind film. Celebratory of people and music. I liked it very much.

Also saw The Philadelphia Story. It's a good script and has a lot of star power. Boring direction. I tire very quickly of films from this era with rich stars playing rich people with down to earth problems. They seem so inherently phony. I almost never like them.

I usually agree with this (hated Matchpoint, Entourage, etc) but it didn't bother me as much with Philadelphia Story, perhaps because I felt the film was dramatic, funny and engaging enough in other ways that I could look past the setting/premise.

[soitgoes...]

I watched Border Incident last night. The most fascinating thing about it is it kind of acts as a transition between Anthony Mann's noirs and westerns. While it is a police procedural movie, the barren environment and hats and sombreros instantly remind us of the genre Mann would reside in only a year later. And as night falls, the desolate wastelands are blanketed by John Alton's trademark shadows, delicately imbuing the screen with noirish fatalism and fear. The script has too many weaknesses which stop the film from becoming great, but it's still rather entertaining and is very interesting for Mann/Alton fans.


I love this film. Probably Mann's best, at least from a directorial standpoint (I would probably place The Tall Target as tops for him). Can't really argue with the script weakness, though it didn't seem any worse than any number of B-movie potboilers, but some of that film is gritty and intense. That tractor scene had me turning my head.
I liked this film too. It does act as kind of a segue to his westerns. The thing most impressive to me is that the movie has a Mexican *gasp* cast as a Mexican for the lead role. I still don't think of it being essential Mann, but after seeing his Stewart western collaborations, it's a good next step I suppose.

[Duncan]

I usually agree with this (hated Matchpoint, Entourage, etc) but it didn't bother me as much with Philadelphia Story, perhaps because I felt the film was dramatic, funny and engaging enough in other ways that I could look past the setting/premise.

Entourage is the worst.

[soitgoes...]

It's a good sequence, though Jack's friends didn't seem to be helping him much as he was about to get sliced up.:P Stretching the length of a scene can be a good way of increasing suspence, but the way that technique was used here made it feel less believable. It reminded me of that scene in Temple of Doom where Indy was on that conveyor belt that just went on forever...
Or the parody of such scenes in the 1st(?) Austin Powers movie.
The slow moving steamroller 100 feet away with the over-drawn "Nnnoooooooo!"
The best part of the entire trilogy. Or dare I say the only enjoyable part in the entire trilogy?!?!

[Melville]

Also saw The Philadelphia Story. It's a good script and has a lot of star power. Boring direction. I tire very quickly of films from this era with rich stars playing rich people with down to earth problems. They seem so inherently phony. I almost never like them.
Have you seen Top Hat? It's about rich stars playing rich people with irrelevant problems, dancing all the while. Great stuff.

[soitgoes...]

Also saw The Philadelphia Story. It's a good script and has a lot of star power. Boring direction. I tire very quickly of films from this era with rich stars playing rich people with down to earth problems. They seem so inherently phony. I almost never like them.I think the The Philadelphia Story's rich people (as well as most 30's films) with "real" problems is more a product of it's times. Folks in the Depression went to see films centered around the rich, not the hoi polloi. Who wanted to pay to escape to see the same people you would see everyday? Of course that doesn't mean that you have to like them 70 years later, but I think it's a pretty rational excuse as to why people in the 30's liked them then.

[Duncan]

Have you seen Top Hat? It's about rich stars playing rich people with irrelevant problems, dancing all the while. Great stuff.

Sounds delightful. I think the problem with The Philadelphia Story and other films of its ilk is that the filmmakers are obliged to make the stars as starry as they can be. They're shot in soft focus, they're wittier than humanly possible, etc. It's very difficult to reconcile that with attempts to equate their problems with your typical audience members. It's formal hypocrisy, even if there's no literary hypocrisy in the script.

[Duncan]

I think the The Philadelphia Story's rich people (as well as most 30's films) with "real" problems is more a product of it's times. Folks in the Depression went to see films centered around the rich, not the hoi polloi. Who wanted to pay to escape to see the same people you would see everyday? Of course that doesn't mean that you have to like them 70 years later, but I think it's a pretty rational excuse as to why people in the 30's liked them then.

Yeah, I know. I just generally don't like them. They rarely take the futile stabs at reaching any fundamental truths, or transcendence, or any of the things my favourite films reach for.

[Melville]

Sounds delightful. I think the problem with The Philadelphia Story and other films of its ilk is that the filmmakers are obliged to make the stars as starry as they can be. They're shot in soft focus, they're wittier than humanly possible, etc. It's very difficult to reconcile that with attempts to equate their problems with your typical audience members. It's formal hypocrisy, even if there's no literary hypocrisy in the script.
Definitely check out Top Hat. It goes all the way in embracing the glitter on its stars.

[Duncan]

Definitely check out Top Hat. It goes all the way in embracing the glitter on its stars.

Will do.

[Ezee E]

Don't Look Now's final sequence: :eek:

Seriously, why haven't I seen this movie discussed at all, or mentioned in any Best Horror movies list?

[MadMan]

Don't Look Now's final sequence: :eek:

Seriously, why haven't I seen this movie discussed at all, or mentioned in any Best Horror movies list?I really, really want to see that film. But I'll probably have to use Netflix to obtain a copy.

[Kurious Jorge v3.1]

Don't Look Now's final sequence: :eek:

Seriously, why haven't I seen this movie discussed at all, or mentioned in any Best Horror movies list?

yes, this is the tops of the horror genre for me.

[megladon8]

The Contract was pretty worthless. How they got both Cusack and Freeman for this is just beyond me.

Some of the worst dialogue I've heard in a long, long time, and a terrible plot.

[balmakboor]

Don't Look Now's final sequence: :eek:

Seriously, why haven't I seen this movie discussed at all, or mentioned in any Best Horror movies list?

Over the years, I actually have seen it appear on Best Horror Movies lists. I should get around to it myself some day. I'm not much of a Roeg fan though.

[Bosco B Thug]

Don't Look Now's final sequence: :eek:

Seriously, why haven't I seen this movie discussed at all, or mentioned in any Best Horror movies list? Nice! The film is a masterpiece.

[origami_mustache]

Nice! The film is a masterpiece.

never even heard of this, but all of the positive responses have me interested.

[MadMan]

Transylvania 6-5000 - 3.5Heh I vaguely remember seeing that film on Comedy Central years ago. I'd say that from memory your rating for it is about correct.

[megladon8]

Heh I vaguely remember seeing that film on Comedy Central years ago. I'd say that from memory your rating for it is about correct.


Yeah, it had a few funny moments towards the beginning, mostly little visual gags.

But it went to shit after about half an hour.

[D_Davis]

Over the years, I actually have seen it appear on Best Horror Movies lists. I should get around to it myself some day. I'm not much of a Roeg fan though.

I don't like it. It is very similar to Argento. Some cool style and atmosphere, but I found the narrative to be dull and lifeless. I could hardly remember anything about it after I watched it. It is surreal, but not enough to stand out. It's like a dream that fails to haunt, one that is forgotten at first signs of light. At least with Argento I had some cool songs by Goblin to remember.

[Qrazy]

Entourage is the worst.

Indeed, everything it stands for... absolutely insufferable.

[Qrazy]

I don't like it. It is very similar to Argento. Some cool style and atmosphere, but I found the narrative to be dull and lifeless. I could hardly remember anything about it after I watched it. It is surreal, but not enough to stand out. It's like a dream that fails to haunt, one that is forgotten at first signs of light. At least with Argento I had some cool songs by Goblin to remember.

I'm not a Roeg fan either. The Man Who Fell to Earth is one of the worst films I've ever seen. Bad Timing is a bit better but it's still a pretty worthless story replete with bad acting. Don't Look Now is another step up but his style just really annoys me I can't put my finger on exactly why... Even Walkabout which I consider his best I merely like.

[Ezee E]

never even heard of this, but all of the positive responses have me interested.
It's a strange horror film as you watch it, and it could almost not be horror at all, but more of a David Lynch mystery movie in a way. There's just a lot going on, something that will probably improve the second time I watch it.

The editing and use of background sound stand out to me in particular. You just keep getting that strange feeling that something is going to happen, but the result manages to keep you guessing each time.

Part Argento? Yes. But this was just as Dario got started as well.

This was my first Roeg, I should see more.

[balmakboor]

I'm not a Roeg fan either. The Man Who Fell to Earth is one of the worst films I've ever seen. Bad Timing is a bit better but it's still a pretty worthless story replete with bad acting. Don't Look Now is another step up but his style just really annoys me I can't put my finger on exactly why... Even Walkabout which I consider his best I merely like.

The one Roeg film I do really like is Performance, but I'm sure that has as much to do with Donald Cammell, Mick Jagger, and Jack Nietzsche as anything. Plus one can almost hear Kenneth Anger laughing just off camera.

[D_Davis]

Part Argento? Yes. But this was just as Dario got started as well.


I didn't mean that he was ripping off Argento, just just I had a similar experience with Don't Look Now as I did with most of Argento's films.

[Boner M]

WTF's with the Roeg bashing? Walkabout, Performance and Don't Look Now are all fab, Bad Timing's really interesting despite Art Garfunkel's performance, and The Witches is one of the best children's films ever, despite being completely inappropriate for children. I dunno, I just really like the cut of his jib... he's kinda like a kinkier Resnais. Gotta get on the rest of his work.

[balmakboor]

Doesn't Don't Look Now have like one of the most famous sex scenes ever?

[Ezee E]

I didn't mean that he was ripping off Argento, just just I had a similar experience with Don't Look Now as I did with most of Argento's films.
Ah.

I also like the setting of Venice for most of the movie. Just so many different options that you can have in that case. The scene with them getting lost in the city is spot on.

[Ezee E]

Doesn't Don't Look Now have like one of the most famous sex scenes ever?
Julie Christie at the best I've seen her in... with Donald Sutherland.

It's just a long sex scene with abstract editing involved. One of the lesser parts of the movie actually.

[balmakboor]

WTF's with the Roeg bashing? Walkabout, Performance and Don't Look Now are all fab, Bad Timing's really interesting despite Art Garfunkel's performance, and The Witches is one of the best children's films ever, despite being completely inappropriate for children. I dunno, I just really like the cut of his jib... he's kinda like a kinkier Resnais. Gotta get on the rest of his work.

I agree with you on The Witches.

I saw one of Roeg's films at the SIFF Secret Fest (okay, I just broke my oath and have only a few more minutes to live as a free man) called Castaways. It was Roeg's longer director's cut that has never been shown since -- heck the film itself has hardly ever been shown -- and it really left a lasting impression on me. Easily the best film about anorexia ever made, for one thing.

[MadMan]

I checked Criticker and apparently the only Roeg film I've seen is his adaption of Heart Of Darkness. The film sports Tim Roth and John Malkavich and still manages to be merely decent at best. But then thinking back I didn't really care for the short story by Conrad, either. Although it did spawn two great films in Aguire: The Wrath of God and Apocalypse Now.

PS: Finally 500 posts in this thread. I wonder if I ever posted as much in the other splits. I doubt it.

[Sven]

WTF's with the Roeg bashing? Walkabout, Performance and Don't Look Now are all fab, Bad Timing's really interesting despite Art Garfunkel's performance, and The Witches is one of the best children's films ever, despite being completely inappropriate for children. I dunno, I just really like the cut of his jib... he's kinda like a kinkier Resnais. Gotta get on the rest of his work.

Fo' shizzle.

[Kurious Jorge v3.1]

boner, try Insignificance next...

[Watashi]

Tropic Thunder was hilarious.

I was surprised to see John Toll doing the cinematography, because for a comedy, it is a striking film to look at.

[Derek]

I usually agree with this (hated Matchpoint, Entourage, etc) but it didn't bother me as much with Philadelphia Story, perhaps because I felt the film was dramatic, funny and engaging enough in other ways that I could look past the setting/premise.

I dunno, with classical Hollywood films, it sometimes seems more in-line with the Antonioni method of having rich characters simply so you don't have to concern yourself with their daily problems (job, money, etc.). Obviously Antonioni did this so he could further explore their feelings and emotions whereas classical Hollywood did it to allow for certain freedoms within the narrative, but I think it's reductive to dismiss them as a large clump of films simply because they abandon realism. I'm not suggesting that there's not a number of films about rich people that could be seen as pandering to or even outright mocking the lower/middle class, but I think that's a separate issue altogether.

[Derek]

Bad Timing's really interesting because of Art Garfunkel's performance

Corrected.

[MacGuffin]

Seen Touch of Evil, Citizen Kane, and F for Fake, so which Orson Welles movie should I see next?

[Derek]

Seen Touch of Evil, Citizen Kane, and F for Fake, so which Orson Welles movie should I see next?

The Trial.

Or any other Orson Welles film you can get your hands on.

[MacGuffin]

The Trial.

Or any other Orson Welles film you can get your hands on.

Should I have any prior knowledge of Kafka before I watch it? It'll probably be this or The Lady from Shanghai.

[Qrazy]

I dunno, with classical Hollywood films, it sometimes seems more in-line with the Antonioni method of having rich characters simply so you don't have to concern yourself with their daily problems (job, money, etc.). Obviously Antonioni did this so he could further explore their feelings and emotions whereas classical Hollywood did it to allow for certain freedoms within the narrative, but I think it's reductive to dismiss them as a large clump of films simply because they abandon realism. I'm not suggesting that there's not a number of films about rich people that could be seen as pandering to or even outright mocking the lower/middle class, but I think that's a separate issue altogether.

Realism? That doesn't really have anything to do with it for me. I'm just not interested in watching a bunch of rich assholes whine.

[Qrazy]

Corrected.

Wow that performance was awful... much better in Carnal Knowledge but even there, not great.

[Derek]

Realism? That doesn't really have anything to do with it for me. I'm just not interested in watching a bunch of rich assholes whine.

My point was that they're only rich for the convenience of the filmmakers in many cases. To say Antonioni or, in the case of The Philadelphia Story, Cukor are making films about rich people and subsequently dismiss them because you don't care about the concerns of rich people seems very wrong-minded to me. In other words, the presence of upper class characters is often more of a by-product of artistic demands and desires and shouldn't always be viewed in such a reductive way as "I don't care about rich people."


Wow that performance was awful...

Amazingly, remarkably awful. A terrible performance, yet a fascinating on-screen presence.

[Qrazy]

My point was that they're only rich for the convenience of the filmmakers in many cases. To say Antonioni or, in the case of The Philadelphia Story, Cukor are making films about rich people and subsequently dismiss them because you don't care about the concerns of rich people seems very wrong-minded to me. In other words, the presence of upper class characters is often more of a by-product of artistic demands and desires and shouldn't always be viewed in such a reductive way as "I don't care about rich people."

Or perhaps you are reducing something to something else, a something else which wasn't particularly reductive in the first place. To clarify what it is I don't like, it's watching rich people whine about their problems ad nauseum. I don't mind the presence of rich characters, I dislike it when a film presents me with self-centered, vapid people and expects me to care about their problems. Antonioni skirts the issue because that's not really what he's showing, he's showing how hollow these characters lives truly are.

Films about poor people where everyone has a heart of gold are somewhat less but almost equally obnoxious.

[soitgoes...]

King Hu's Legend of the Mountain is a film that is so focused on looking beautiful, it lacks strong character development and loses touch with what it ultimately is, a ghost story. A disappointment after A Touch of Zen. Then again it would probably be too much to expect greatness two nights in a row. I think I'm going to step away for a bit from Hu, Chang, and friends, and tackle some Murnau next. God, I love all the choices cinema has to offer.

[Ezee E]

Seen Touch of Evil, Citizen Kane, and F for Fake, so which Orson Welles movie should I see next?
Lady from Shanghai.

Avoid the one where he looks like Santa Clause. Mr. Arkadin I believe.

[Teh Sausage]

Should I have any prior knowledge of Kafka before I watch it? It'll probably be this or The Lady from Shanghai.

Not really. The only reason why you should read the original source first is you'll be even more impressed with Welles' adaptation, which impeccably captures the tone and style of the book, while still feeling quite Welles-ish.

Also, The Lady from Shanghai is the weakest Welles film I've seen. Up till the final half hour, it just felt like an average thriller to me. I'd say watch Chimes at Midnight and The Immortal Story after The Trail, and then you would have seen all his major masterpieces.

edit: oh yeah, and The Magnificent Ambersons. Keep forgetting that one.

[Teh Sausage]

People rarely talk about Don't Look Now? Weird. It's always getting in Top 100 lists in all the film and genre magazines, and TV programs...then again, it's a British film, and over here in the UK we like to make a big thing about British films that are at least semi-decent, since they're so rare. Every single time a UK horror film is released, the critics always go, "It's the best horror film since Don't Look Now and The Wicker Man!!":)

[Winston*]

What is the story behind your choice of username, the sausage?

[Teh Sausage]

What is the story behind your choice of username, the sausage?

I am a sausage. I assumed there would be other sausages here, so I decided to let everyone know that I am teh sausage to avoid confusion.

[Melville]

Julie Christie at the best I've seen her in... with Donald Sutherland.

It's just a long sex scene with abstract editing involved. One of the lesser parts of the movie actually.
I thought it was mostly famous for so casually showing affectionate and personal sexuality, rather than just the usual passionate abandon we get from hollywood. That was my response to it, anyway.

[balmakboor]

I thought it was mostly famous for so casually showing affectionate and personal sexuality, rather than just the usual passionate abandon we get from hollywood.

That's the gist of what I've heard too.

[Ezee E]

I thought it was mostly famous for so casually showing affectionate and personal sexuality, rather than just the usual passionate abandon we get from hollywood. That was my response to it, anyway.
Yeah, but there's many other 70's movies that had the same thing.

[Yxklyx]

Yeah, but there's many other 70's movies that had the same thing.

I dunno, I've seen many films from the 70s and the sex scene in Don't Look Now is the only one I can even remember seeing. That and some stuff from a Warhol film.

[Raiders]

I thought it was mostly famous for so casually showing affectionate and personal sexuality, rather than just the usual passionate abandon we get from hollywood. That was my response to it, anyway.

And beyond that, there is the temporal shifts throughout the scene, giving the indication of a family trying to move beyond the tragedy; looking to the future, so to speak. There is an unspoken tenderness to the scene that contrasts brilliantly with all the bickering and confusion throughout most of the film. That scene promises a contentedness and normalcy that unfortunately never quite exists and it is all the more tragic in retrospect. It is perhaps the centerpiece of the film; the couple's attempt to move forward before the spectre of their past begins to drive them apart.

A rightly praised scene.

[D_Davis]

King Hu's Legend of the Mountain is a film that is so focused on looking beautiful, it lacks strong character development and loses touch with what it ultimately is, a ghost story. A disappointment after A Touch of Zen. Then again it would probably be too much to expect greatness two nights in a row. I think I'm going to step away for a bit from Hu, Chang, and friends, and tackle some Murnau next. God, I love all the choices cinema has to offer.

Sometimes I think King Hu should have made nature documentaries. You should definitely see Dragon Inn, Come Drink With Me, and The Valiant Ones. All three are pretty awesome.

What Chang Cheh films have you seen so far?

[megladon8]

The Kid With the Golden Arm, The One-Armed Swordsman and Return of the One-Armed Swordsman are three of my very favorite kung fu flicks.

All by Chang Cheh.

[balmakboor]

I dunno, I've seen many films from the 70s and the sex scene in Don't Look Now is the only one I can even remember seeing. That and some stuff from a Warhol film.

The one sex scene from the 70s I've seen that really stands out as landmark is the one in Coming Home with Jane Fonda and Jon Voight.

[balmakboor]

The Kid With the Golden Arm, The One-Armed Swordsman and Return of the One-Armed Swordsman are three of my very favorite kung fu flicks.

All by Chang Cheh.

Definitely check out Boxer from Shantung.

[D_Davis]

Definitely check out Boxer from Shantung.

It's okay.

:)

[megladon8]

The one sex scene from the 70s I've seen that really stands out as landmark is the one in Coming Home with Jane Fonda and Jon Voight.


That movie is really under-appreciated.

Jon Voight's performance is incredible.

His speech still gets to me.

[balmakboor]

That movie is really under-appreciated.

Jon Voight's performance is incredible.

His speech still gets to me.

You got that right. The film is stuffed with great scenes and the performances by all three leads are filled with a rare degree of authenticity. I love the way Bruce Dern's voice cracks at a moment when his character is filled with anger, frustration, and fear while fighting with Fonda. I love the use of Rolling Stones music, especially the rarely heard Out of Time during the opening titles. I could go on and on actually.

[Duncan]

Watched Wrath of Khan last night. That's a fun movie. Spock's death still gets me choked up.

[Sycophant]

"Who's been holding up the damn elevator?"

-The only really good moment in Wrath of Khan

[Raiders]

"Who's been holding up the damn elevator?"

-The only really good moment in Wrath of Khan

Ridiculous. There's many great moments. I actually think that as far as emotional exploitative moments go, Kirk's final speech on Spock's humanity is about as delicate and touching as you can get. Surprising gravitas in Shatner's delivery as well.

[Duncan]

Ridiculous. There's many great moments. I actually think that as far as emotional exploitative moments go, Kirk's final speech on Spock's humanity is about as delicate and touching as you can get. Surprising gravitas in Shatner's delivery as well. Also, when Spock dies he just says "No" very softly, then there's a cut to the long shot of the two of them mirrored across the glass. No crazy emotional outburst at all. It's almost shockingly restrained.

[Qrazy]

People rarely talk about Don't Look Now? Weird. It's always getting in Top 100 lists in all the film and genre magazines, and TV programs...then again, it's a British film, and over here in the UK we like to make a big thing about British films that are at least semi-decent, since they're so rare. Every single time a UK horror film is released, the critics always go, "It's the best horror film since Don't Look Now and The Wicker Man!!":)

As a Brit have you seen Brighton Rock? Perhaps you can help me extol it's virtues.

[megladon8]

Has anyone seen these crazy Gary Busey commercials?

He just sits in a chair and seems to say whatever comes into his head.

Here's the best one (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amIh-Jovulw)

Did you know that there are 360 ways to view an elephant?

[megladon8]

This one is great as well. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aw_1sgcSAkc&feature=related)

[Qrazy]

This one is great as well. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aw_1sgcSAkc&feature=related)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hNsSSM68r8&feature=related

"Nothing can take the place of persistence except maybe money and the ability to manipulate the will of others."

[Idioteque Stalker]

Boner: is T,O,U,C,H,I,N,G the one which alternates washes of color with the image of a man seeming to engage in some sort of masochistic action while the word "destroy" is repeated ad nauseum? If I'm right, would you mind posting some thoughts on why you "liked" it? I guess I was so focused on being uncomfortable and wanting it to end that I didn't give it the thought that it deserved. But is that possibly the point? I know nothing about Sharits' theories much less the ideas behind this specific piece, but maybe he intended to make a film which existed for little else but to physically jar the viewer and thus make more explicit film's "power"?

[Boner M]

Boner: is T,O,U,C,H,I,N,G the one which alternates washes of color with the image of a man seeming to engage in some sort of masochistic action while the word "destroy" is repeated ad nauseum? If I'm right, would you mind posting some thoughts on why you "liked" it? I guess I was so focused on being uncomfortable and wanting it to end that I didn't give it the thought that it deserved. But is that possibly the point? I know nothing about Sharits' theories much less the ideas behind this specific piece, but maybe he intended to make a film which existed for little else but to physically jar the viewer and thus make more explicit film's "power"?
I guess if I wanted to be reductive, I could say that I found it notable for battering me into submission like no other film ever has, but I prefer to see it as a thoroughly bracing exploration of the physically affecting properties of the medium. Also, as easy as it is to apply the word 'trancelike' to the film, it's probably more interesting that the "destroy" ends up sounding like other words via repetition, and I found it ended up affecting my interpretation of the images in really fascinating ways (When "destroy" ends up sounding like "his girl", the central images end up seeming tender rather than perverse or masochistic).

N:O:T:H:I:N:G had a similar effect, though it was 3 times as long and I felt like I was going to get cancer, let alone epilepsy, by the end.

[Philosophe_rouge]

Tropic Thunder was hilarious.

I was surprised to see John Toll doing the cinematography, because for a comedy, it is a striking film to look at.
I cannot wait to see this. Though, i'd agree that very few comedies strive to have good visuals, I think the best looking film I've ever seen might very well be Catch-22.

[balmakboor]

I guess if I wanted to be reductive, I could say that I found it notable for battering me into submission like no other film ever has, but I prefer to see it as a thoroughly bracing exploration of the physically affecting properties of the medium. Also, as easy as it is to apply the word 'trancelike' to the film, it's probably more interesting that the "destroy" ends up sounding like other words via repetition, and I found it ended up affecting my interpretation of the images in really fascinating ways (When "destroy" ends up sounding like "his girl", the central images end up seeming tender rather than perverse or masochistic).

N:O:T:H:I:N:G had a similar effect, though it was 3 times as long and I felt like I was going to get cancer, let alone epilepsy, by the end.

These sound really fun. :crazy:

[Melville]

These sound really interesting.
Fixed.