28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[Teh Sausage]

I agree. I've always liked Dark City though it originally had quite a few flaws. The scattershot editing was far too MTV at times, the score excessive and bombastic, and the opening voice-over narration made the twists less effective. The director's cut is a slower paced film, it often exchanges music for ambient sound, and spoonfeeds less information - watching it, I felt I was now able to truly soak up the atmosphere and plot details like I had never done before.

[D_Davis]

I agree. I've always liked Dark City though it originally had quite a few flaws. The scattershot editing was far too MTV at times, the score excessive and bombastic, and the opening voice-over narration made the twists less effective. The director's cut is a slower paced film, it often exchanges music for ambient sound, and spoonfeeds less information - watching it, I felt I was now able to truly soak up the atmosphere and plot details like I had never done before.

Good point. The score was overly bombastic, and it often gave away too much of the mood and atmosphere; it was a bit much.

[Ezee E]

We also hear Jennifer Connelly sing with her voice.

The slowed down storytelling didn't seem as edit-heavy either.

[D_Davis]

We also hear Jennifer Connelly sing with her voice.

The slowed down storytelling didn't seem as edit-heavy either.

Wow - it sounds like a DC that is actually worthwhile. Is there a commentary track with Proyas talking about all the changes and why they were originally made?

[Grouchy]

Seen The Headless Woman on the cinema, but I don't feel confident writing a review about it because I was trying hard not to fall asleep and I did for about 20 minutes - I was really behind on my sleep. I can say that Martel's style is definitively the same and becoming subtler with each movie, but this didn't look to me in the same class as The Holy Girl. Of course, I need to re-watch.

Then I saw Basic Instinct 2. Heh. Most of it in x2 speed. It's pretty bad, and Sharon Stone is almost worth it.

[Ezee E]

Wow - it sounds like a DC that is actually worthwhile. Is there a commentary track with Proyas talking about all the changes and why they were originally made?
It has commentaries, but I didn't check them out.

[Raiders]

Dark City: Director's Cut is a strong improvement over the original, which I also liked. I haven't seen it in eight years, but there seemed to be a lot more mystery to it this time. For first-time watchers, the end would be much more of a twist as well when the Shell Beach wall is seen. This is the highlight of Proyas' career.

Awesome. I'm definitely going to have to check this out. I consider the film in its original release form a masterpiece.

[balmakboor]

I too watched Dark City: DC last night and it was awesome. I didn't much care for it ten years or so ago when I first watched it. It became an instant must own on BR last night (once I finally make the move to BR; gotta get my teenager a car first).

The whole family watched CJ7 today. Very fun movie. It was a winner for everyone age 12 to 46.

[megladon8]

Awesome. I'm definitely going to have to check this out. I consider the film in its original release form a masterpiece.


Yes! It's brilliant, I love it.

On my first viewing, I did have some trouble with the ending confrontation. I didn't think the whole "psychic battle" thing was done effectively, and came across a little hoaky.

But on repeat viewings I really grew to like that part.

[Ezee E]

Yes! It's brilliant, I love it.

On my first viewing, I did have some trouble with the ending confrontation. I didn't think the whole "psychic battle" thing was done effectively, and came across a little hoaky.

But on repeat viewings I really grew to like that part.
Yeah, it's that battle that is the weak link of the film. Maybe another viewing will improve on it, or listening to some more thoughts, but everything else is gold.

[MadMan]

Weekend:

Postal
In the name of the King: A Dungeon Siege TaleMan I want to see Postal, out of mad curiosity and a desire to view what appears to be the most subversive, really awful, non-PC film of the year.


The later the better.Well granted that's also true. I'm going to find out if doing drafts earlier rather than later will actually impact things.

[Winston*]

Drafting your players early and drafting your players late is the best way to do it? I've never played fantasy football but I'm pretty sure that makes no fucking sense. Jesus Fucking Christ, Madman_731.

[MadMan]

Drafting your players early and drafting your players late is the best way to do it? I've never played fantasy football but I'm pretty sure that makes no fucking sense. Jesus Fucking Christ, Madman_731.I've won four fantasy football championships, actually. So you can just STFU. :P

[origami_mustache]

Top 50 beach scenes (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2008/08/23/bfbeaches123.xml)

[D_Davis]

I saw Pineapple Express last night. Pretty good. Definitely my favorite flick from these guys. It reminded me a lot of Nurse Betty in how it started off as a comedy and then became kind of crazy and violent.

[Boner M]

Watched Le Corbeau tonight. Didn't blow me away like Clouzot's major two films did. Felt a little too enamored with its own bleak misanthropy, if that's possible. Definitely effective though, especially for the last 20 minutes.

[BIOspasm]

Watched Le Corbeau tonight. Didn't blow me away like Clouzot's major two films did. Felt a little too enamored with its own bleak misanthropy, if that's possible. Definitely effective though, especially for the last 20 minutes.

I absolutely love this film. I agree its not as good as his two most famous films though. The ending was perfect. You can't help but think that Haneke got alot of his inspiration for Cache from this film.

[Yxklyx]

I prefer Le Corbeau to his other films. I think the story and its treatment is more unique - I can't think of another film like it, well except for Cache.

[Derek]

Watched Le Corbeau tonight. Didn't blow me away like Clouzot's major two films did. Felt a little too enamored with its own bleak misanthropy, if that's possible. Definitely effective though, especially for the last 20 minutes.

Check out Preminger's remake, The Thirteenth Letter, whenever it becomes available. I didn't think it was quite as good, but the major difference I noticed was a significant toning down of the original's misanthropy so you might like it more.

[Ezee E]

Is there anyway you can have other people view your Netflix queue without being a "Netflix friend?" I see that it is on RSS, but I don't know too much about it.

There's so many movies on there, I want to create a thread where you guys bump one up so that I get around to it.

[Boner M]

Cashback (Ellils, 2006) ***1/2
WTF.

[Spinal]

WTF.

What? Great film.

[number8]

So a visiting friend staying with us for a few weeks bought a PS3 the other day and hooked it up in the living room. Might make my first Blu-Ray viewing Dark City.

[megladon8]

So a visiting friend staying with us for a few weeks bought a PS3 the other day and hooked it up in the living room. Might make my first Blu-Ray viewing Dark City.


Sweet. Let me know how that works out.

[Boner M]

What? Great film.
Hated the short, couldn't finish the feature. Pretty much exactly the kind of film I'd expect from any imagination-deprived film student to make.

[Spinal]

Hated the short, couldn't finish the feature. Pretty much exactly the kind of film I'd expect from any imagination-deprived film student to make.

OK. I thought it was a sweet, well-made comedy that was very thoughtful in its subject matter and in the way it explored those moments in life that we want to hold on to and cherish.

[number8]

Sweet. Let me know how that works out.

I don't see myself liking the DC any more than I already like the movie, but I'm excited. I just bought an HDMI cable, too, so it should look gooooood.

If I love it, will you forgive me for playing soccer with a baby?

[Boner M]

OK. I thought it was a sweet, well-made comedy that was very thoughtful in its subject matter and in the way it explored those moments in life that we want to hold on to and cherish.
Aww, that sounds like a nice little movie.

[Spinal]

Aww, that sounds like a nice little movie.

It was. Likable lead. Charismatic love interest. Optimistic world view. Not everything's gotta be a Cassavetean descent into proto-mumblecore hell, y'know.

[Boner M]

It was. Likable lead. Charismatic love interest. Optimistic world view. Not everything's gotta be a Cassavetean descent into proto-mumblecore hell, y'know.
Cassavetes' films are frequently optimistic.

[Boner M]

Also Spinal, I'm not looking for a fight. Just hoping you realise that you're a crazy.

[Spinal]

Just hoping you realise that you're a crazy.

Well, sure. But there's far better evidence of that elsewhere. I watched the film without any idea what the critical reaction had been which is kind of nice sometimes. I was surprised that no one here had mentioned the film before, since it seemed like something a lot of people would like.

[Boner M]

Well, sure. But there's far better evidence of that elsewhere. I watched the film without any idea what the critical reaction had been which is kind of nice sometimes. I was surprised that no one here had mentioned the film before, since it seemed like something a lot of people would like.
I apologise if I seem hostile; my attitudes to your ratings is largely facetious. Anyway, I was suprised you liked it since the first thing it reminded me of was a third-rate Wong Kar-Wai pastiche. And I know your tolerance for 20-something angst is low.

[Spinal]

I apologise if I seem hostile; my attitudes to your ratings is largely facetious. Anyway, I was suprised you liked it since the first thing it reminded me of was a third-rate Wong Kar-Wai pastiche. And I know your tolerance for 20-something angst is low.

You don't seem hostile. My Cassavetes post was intended to be facetious as well.

Didn't really get any Wong Kar-Wai hit off of it. Not sure what you mean by that.

Also didn't really think it was all that angsty. On the contrary, I thought it was a light and breezy film that worked like a daydream rather than anything self-indulgent. I wouldn't say that the main character is suffering from the dreaded collegiate ennui. He's a guy who wants to take purposeful action. But he also realizes that the mistakes he makes can be irreversible. The key to the film for me is that scene where he snaps out of the freeze and says "I forgot how fast things move."

[Watashi]

I wanted to see Cashback just for all the nudity.

And Boner... GTFO.

[Boner M]

I hate everyone.

[Derek]

I hate everyone.

You can say anything with that avatar and get away with it.

EDIT: As I look over and realize I have a goofy faux-scientist applauding dancing Elmo as my own. :)

[Spinal]

I hate everyone.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v696/joel_harmon/haterade.jpg

[DavidSeven]

I saw the short version of Cashback. Watchable enough, but it didn't really draw an emotional response from me in any way. Kinda dull. I remember thinking it was technically well-made, but I was surprised he got a feature deal based on it.

[Sxottlan]

How is it that the director's cut of Dark City has been out almost a month and I didn't know it?

(*grumbles as he heads to the store*)

[Boner M]

Innocence is one damn haunting movie. Feels maybe a little one-dimensional as an allegory for how young women are tailored at early ages in order to fit society's amorphous demands, but it gets point for formal assurance and a remarkably sustained unsettling atmosphere. Very much looking forward to what Hadzihalilovic does next.

[Ezee E]

How is that the director's cut of Dark City has been out almost a month and I didn't know it?

(*grumbles as he heads to the store*)
I blame DSNT.

[dreamdead]

Saw a film up at the Siskel Film Center, Serge Bozon's La France, which concerns a French WW1 young wife going off in pursuit of her husband and masking her gender to better blend in with vagabond solders. It's interesting for its use of the fantastic, since it combines the WW1 war genre with odd and unlikely musical numbers based around the same music. Though the musical moments lend it a useful surrealism and help offset the habitual drudgery that's a part of the daily life of the soldiers, they also feel overly artificial and not really tied to the narrative beyond any liminal way. And the age-old treatise of "you're nothing without an imagination" is hammered home too much with the coda, which is unfortunate since the film is worthwhile until the heavy-handed finale (which lacks any and all credibility).

Wong Kar Wai's My Blueberry Nights, meanwhile, is decent but unremarkable outside of its cinematic elements. It's well-shot throughout, but the whole film feels too slight and juvenile to truly work. Narratives feel separate rather than building on one another, and Jones' character has no real interior beyond the spurned-lover; she lacks any subjectivity and exists only as a cipher for the camera. All that said, though, the last few minutes still work nicely; Law and Strathairn are solid...

[Grouchy]

http://thumbs.filmstarts.de/image/secretsunshine_scene_01.jpg

I saw an incredible movie last night - Korea's Secret Sunshine. I don't like the word "masterpiece", but if it applies to anything, it's to this. The director, Lee Chang-Dong, has an incredible knack for combining harrowing drama and unexpected comedy in a single scene. And the main actress rightfully won the actress award at Cannes for her work. The movie and the characters that inhabit really seem to have a life of their own and say whatever comes to mind, but when you think back about the movie, you realize that every little moment served a purpose and that every big plot twist was subtly foreshadowed. It's not an easy film to watch. It's long, it seems meandering at times although actually it's not, and it presents us with a portrait of a woman in devastating pain that it's hard to look away from. I let my tears flow with this one. A new 2007 favorite!

[Sxottlan]

I blame DSNT.

I don't know what that is.

[origami_mustache]

I saw an incredible movie last night - Korea's Secret Sunshine. I don't like the word "masterpiece", but if it applies to anything, it's to this. The director, Lee Chang-Dong, has an incredible knack for combining harrowing drama and unexpected comedy in a single scene. And the main actress rightfully won the actress award at Cannes for her work. The movie and the characters that inhabit really seem to have a life of their own and say whatever comes to mind, but when you think back about the movie, you realize that every little moment served a purpose and that every big plot twist was subtly foreshadowed. It's not an easy film to watch. It's long, it seems meandering at times although actually it's not, and it presents us with a portrait of a woman in devastating pain that it's hard to look away from. I let my tears flow with this one. A new 2007 favorite!

I thought this film was great as well, but yes it is also hard to watch and you don't really know where it is going next. The lady next to me was really into the film, crying, gasping, etc., but then she ended up walking out during the religious segment. I'm guessing she was upset at how the film seemed to be embracing Evangelical Christianity...too bad she didn't stick around for the ending.

[Scar]

I don't know what that is.

The poster here who does the Weekly DVD Releases thread....

Formerly known as dissent.

Poor guy is going to get a complex. First meg, now you.

[D_Davis]

The poster here who does the Weekly DVD Releases thread....

Formerly known as dissent.

Poor guy is going to get a complex. First meg, now you.

:lol:

[megladon8]

I don't see myself liking the DC any more than I already like the movie, but I'm excited. I just bought an HDMI cable, too, so it should look gooooood.

If I love it, will you forgive me for playing soccer with a baby?


If it was really playing soccer with a baby that I had to forgive you for, then yes, I could.

As it stands, sorry, your soul is gonna burn in a lake of fire.

/Bruce Dickinson lyrics

[megladon8]

This picture is labelled as being from Cloverfield, but it's obviously not.

http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/5291/cloverfield22kl4.jpg

Anyone know what it's from?

[D_Davis]

From something I want to see.

[megladon8]

From something I want to see.


Here's another.

It's labelled as being from Cloverfield, but again, I don't remember any black and white deep sea segments from the movie...

http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/3050/cloverfield2pics2zg0.jpg

[Rowland]

It's labelled as being from Cloverfield, but again, I don't remember any black and white deep sea segments from the movie...Remember all the pre-release conceptual marketing? It's probably from that.

[Grouchy]

I thought this film was great as well, but yes it is also hard to watch and you don't really know where it is going next. The lady next to me was really into the film, crying, gasping, etc., but then she ended up walking out during the religious segment. I'm guessing she was upset at how the film seemed to be embracing Evangelical Christianity...too bad she didn't stick around for the ending.
I really never knew what was gonna happen. It was a great experience.

I think it was always clear that it wasn't going to become pro-Evangelistic, though, if for nothing else because it portrayed them as crazy from the start.

[Ezee E]

Psh... Netflix skipped over Salo.

[soitgoes...]

I find it neat to see big named directors' names show up in cast credits as something other than director long before they make it big. I just started The 400 Million a 1939 documentary by Joris Ivens and noticed that providing his voice was a "Sydney" Lumet. Curious, I searched IMDb to see if this was indeed actually "Sidney" Lumet the director. Apparently it is. He would be only 15 when this film was made, so part of me thinks this is an IMDb mistake. The name though can't be that common to just be a coincidence, could it?

[Dead & Messed Up]

I watched Children of the Corn.

I'm not proud of the decision, but I don't regret it.

"OUTLANDAH!"

[Winston*]

That French guy who's a minor character in Deep Water, what a fascinating dude.

Good documentary also. Not particularly cinematically impressive or whatever, but well serving of it's subject matter.

[Rowland]

That French guy who's a minor character in Deep Water, what a fascinating dude.

Good documentary also. Not particularly cinematically impressive or whatever, but well serving of it's subject matter.This was my favorite documentary from last year, it made the honorable mentions section on my top ten list. Riveting, haunting stuff, the directors used this outlandish scenario to compassionately explore universal existential themes in a manner I found lucid and utterly engrossing.

[Boner M]

Hmm, The Player is as entertaining and clever as I remember it, but this first viewing in ages highlighted the smug tone and general insubstantiality for me, that categorise it as minor Altman in my eyes.

[Duncan]

Watched A Wedding the other night. Pretty solid Altman. Very funny. The waiter subplot seemed unnecessary, but why not? I loved that pot smoking scene where they're all just chilling on that wall in a line. It's not as exagerrated as the rest of the film. I felt like there really should have been some more tears shed over the two dead people at the end. No one even seemed to care.

[Grouchy]

I watched Children of the Corn.

I'm not proud of the decision, but I don't regret it.

"OUTLANDAH!"
I watched thinking it was some sort of classic for a good reason. Bad thinking. Overall, it's a damn bad film.

My second experience with Korean cinema in a short time - not as good. A Flower in Hell is a 1958 melodrama that takes place in a post-WWII Seoul striken by poverty. One brother who has just come back from the war searches for the other, who's now a ganglord working in the black market. The evil brother is seeing an evil prostitute who takes advantage of the good brother. The prostitute is a tough femme fatale who pretty much takes advantage of everybody, and it's in her contract that every scene must end with her shaking her booty on the way out. The whole thing is corny melodrama to the max, not worthy of being taken seriously. In fact, I laughed my way through the last half an hour.

[origami_mustache]

Psh... Netflix skipped over Salo.

might be for the best

[number8]

Anyone know what it's from?

It was from one of the Cloverfield viral sites, supposed to be an underwater camera. It's old.

[Sven]

Watched A Wedding the other night. Pretty solid Altman. Very funny. The waiter subplot seemed unnecessary, but why not?.

I liked the way the waiter stuff gave Luigi's goodbye scene some extra character. I'm glad you liked it. It's one of my favorite Altman films. The lack of tears is what makes it great, I think, because life and death for Altman is a natural ebb and flow, weaving in and out of circumstance and nobody can do anything about it. To focus on it (melodramatically) would be too banal I think.

[Duncan]

I liked the way the waiter stuff gave Luigi's goodbye scene some extra character. I'm glad you liked it. It's one of my favorite Altman films. The lack of tears is what makes it great, I think, because life and death for Altman is a natural ebb and flow, weaving in and out of circumstance and nobody can do anything about it. To focus on it (melodramatically) would be too banal I think.

But when they think the bride and groom have died then the families do go all melodramatic. I don't think it was needed at all, really, since the matriarch had already died. As for natural, I don't think a lot of the film is that natural. It's very much an Altman atmosphere.

[Sven]

But when they think the bride and groom have died then the families do go all melodramatic. I don't think it was needed at all, really, since the matriarch had already died. As for natural, I don't think a lot of the film is that natural. It's very much an Altman atmosphere.

I'm not so sure about the last bait-and-switch and the ensuing histrionics myself. It does seem a little strange, but perhaps that's why I like it. What point does it serve? I don't know what definite point anything in any Altman film serves, really. Perhaps it's a form of cosmic humor, or perhaps it's a fit of narrative desperation. But the melodrama enacted in response to that occasion fits structurally, I think, as the couple (and its new life) is the hub around which the entire cast (and its complications) rotates. Whereas the grandmother kicks the bucket after talking to only a handful of people, which is at the beginning of the film. So it starts off with a few and the death of the old and ends with a multitude and a baptism by fire (the "sins" eradicated in the collision).

All just random thoughts I'm coming up with right now. Really I have no idea. I just love the way Altman spins his work. I wouldn't call his films all that natural, either, unless we're speaking comparatively (they're "naturalistic" as compared to something like Kubrick's rigidity, in terms of acting styles, casual dialogue, and camera placement/movement). But I do think the way he handles theme in nearly every film I've seen of his (which is nearly every film he's done) has a bit of a formless (which I'm equating here with "natural") feel to it, rather than an overt thematic aim and structure. His films, to me, are mostly about milieu. When people speak of something like McCabe & Mrs. Miller in terms of 'revisionist', I frequently have little to say, because that transforms what I see to be the more important/successful/intentional aims of the picture into something mundane and textual.

Am I making sense? I'm just winging it here.

[MadMan]

It was from one of the Cloverfield viral sites, supposed to be an underwater camera. It's old.Those stills are pretty awesome though, and a bit creepy.

Last night I watched Fistful of Dollars for the second time. Sure Yojimbo is the more intelligent of the two, and is actually a parody/commentary of the gangster and western genres, but I can't help but love Leone's re-imaging. Mainly for its badass macho style, and the fact that its simply Clint Eastwood destroying two gangs. Simply because he really feels like it, although yes he does receive some payment for his troubles.

[Bosco B Thug]

I watched Children of the Corn.

I'm not proud of the decision, but I don't regret it.

"OUTLANDAH!" Baaaaad film. Baaaaad.


Hmm, The Player is as entertaining and clever as I remember it, but this first viewing in ages highlighted the smug tone and general insubstantiality for me, that categorise it as minor Altman in my eyes. Definitely.

A Wedding is awesome.


Saw Paul Schrader's Cat People remake. So all his intentions are in the right place: bring something new to the story, don't make it shy, totally play up the sexual undertones of the original, adapt a provocative and well-thought-out script, and direct the shit out of it! But man, the problem is Schrader doesn't strike me as a very good director. It's like he's trying real hard, and sometimes he succeeds at creating an offbeat visual rhythm, but his style just seems like he's trying really hard to be artsy but he's failing miserably. Thus the film's really cheesy and sloppy, and I'm usually very forgiving of synth scores and 80s aesthetic. And it would be pretty good as an interesting thematic work if the film wasn't so plodding plot-wise as well.

Then again, I may eat my shoe someday because I watched the movie on an old, full screen VHS. But nah, I don't think so. Silly, not very well-made film, but yeah, entertaining. Kinski's cute, and McDowell's really gross in this.

[Philosophe_rouge]

Dune was pretty unbearably bad, it was almost funny, but it was too long and boring to really work as a "lol I can't believe I'm actually watching something so bad" type of film. Painful. I can't believe I watched the entire thing. I also can't believe there is an even longer cut.

[Qrazy]

Baaaaad film. Baaaaad.

Definitely.

A Wedding is awesome.


Saw Paul Schrader's Cat People remake. So all his intentions are in the right place: bring something new to the story, don't make it shy, totally play up the sexual undertones of the original, adapt a provocative and well-thought-out script, and direct the shit out of it! But man, the problem is Schrader doesn't strike me as a very good director. It's like he's trying real hard, and sometimes he succeeds at creating an offbeat visual rhythm, but his style just seems like he's trying really hard to be artsy but he's failing miserably. Thus the film's really cheesy and sloppy, and I'm usually very forgiving of synth scores and 80s aesthetic. And it would be pretty good as an interesting thematic work if the film wasn't so plodding plot-wise as well.

Then again, I may eat my shoe someday because I watched the movie on an old, full screen VHS. But nah, I don't think so. Silly, not very well-made film, but yeah, entertaining. Kinski's cute, and McDowell's really gross in this.

Yes, it's a horrible piece of shit.

[Philosophe_rouge]

I just noticed you saw Ms. 45 Qrazy, I picked that up last week and was planning on seeing it very soon. Aside from a C, any thoughts?

[Bosco B Thug]

Yes, it's a horrible piece of shit. OK, good, I was hoping for some confirmation on this one. I would not argue against such strong words for it. It's a really poorly made movie, but there are an alarming number of good reviews on IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes. The "It's really not that bad" reviews even throw me off.

[Duncan]

I'm not so sure about the last bait-and-switch and the ensuing histrionics myself. It does seem a little strange, but perhaps that's why I like it. What point does it serve? I don't know what definite point anything in any Altman film serves, really. Perhaps it's a form of cosmic humor, or perhaps it's a fit of narrative desperation. But the melodrama enacted in response to that occasion fits structurally, I think, as the couple (and its new life) is the hub around which the entire cast (and its complications) rotates. Whereas the grandmother kicks the bucket after talking to only a handful of people, which is at the beginning of the film. So it starts off with a few and the death of the old and ends with a multitude and a baptism by fire (the "sins" eradicated in the collision).

All just random thoughts I'm coming up with right now. Really I have no idea. I just love the way Altman spins his work. I wouldn't call his films all that natural, either, unless we're speaking comparatively (they're "naturalistic" as compared to something like Kubrick's rigidity, in terms of acting styles, casual dialogue, and camera placement/movement). But I do think the way he handles theme in nearly every film I've seen of his (which is nearly every film he's done) has a bit of a formless (which I'm equating here with "natural") feel to it, rather than an overt thematic aim and structure. His films, to me, are mostly about milieu. When people speak of something like McCabe & Mrs. Miller in terms of 'revisionist', I frequently have little to say, because that transforms what I see to be the more important/successful/intentional aims of the picture into something mundane and textual.

Am I making sense? I'm just winging it here.
Yeah, you're making sense. Especially about the revisionist stuff.

[Qrazy]

I just noticed you saw Ms. 45 Qrazy, I picked that up last week and was planning on seeing it very soon. Aside from a C, any thoughts?

It functioned for me as a slightly more nuanced B-movie exploitation genre exploration. I possess little enjoyment for the 80's aesthetic so it didn't earn many points with me there. It's marginally competent but the script doesn't have all that much going for it. I don't have many specific criticisms, I just came away from it feeling very lukewarm.

[Qrazy]

OK, good, I was hoping for some confirmation on this one. I would not argue against such strong words for it. It's a really poorly made movie, but there are an alarming number of good reviews on IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes. The "It's really not that bad" reviews even throw me off.

Yeah it's not so much that it's a terrible film outright. It's just that it's so intensely mediocre and lacking in genuine drama or conflict that it becomes terrible as a result of being such a waste of time. This is another one of those films where I accidentally saw the remake first. Damn you internets!!!

[D_Davis]

I didn't watch Postal last weekend - I guess it comes out this week.

This is going to be the first film I watch on my new TV in HD. It will be...incredible.

I did, however, watch AvP:R last weekend, and it was more terrible than I could have ever possibly imagined. Wow. Embarrassingly bad. I still can't believe how bad it is. It was barely even a movie - it was more like a collection of loosely connected scenarios that resembled a movie. We watched in on Blu-ray, and it looked terrible. The entire film looked like it was shot on greenscreen, and the make up was horrible. You could clearly see all the blush and eyeliner...on the dudes! What a train wreck, and not even in a good way.

[Grouchy]

I did, however, watch AvP:R last weekend, and it was more terrible than I could have ever possibly imagined. Wow. Embarrassingly bad. I still can't believe how bad it is. It was barely even a movie - it was more like a collection of loosely connected scenarios that resembled a movie. We watched in on Blu-ray, and it looked terrible. The entire film looked like it was shot on greenscreen, and the make up was horrible. You could clearly see all the blush and eyeliner...on the dudes! What a train wreck, and not even in a good way.
It's all kinds of amazing how Hollywood can fuck up a great concept such as Alien vs. Predator not only once, but TWICE. Specially when it's worked so well for comics, novels and videogames. Shit, they could've just faithfully adapted the first comic-book series and it would have been awesome.

Last night I watched Häxan: Witchcraft through the Ages, the longer cut, without voice-over introduction or Will Burroughs narration. What a fascinating film. Half documentary, half Horror film analysis of witchcraft in the Middle Ages... made in 1922. The special effects are all kinds of groundbreaking, and it has a unique, didactic tone. I wasn't bored for a second. This is probably the first documentary ever made that adjusts to what we perceive as a documentary nowadays... not only filming reality, but using the images to explain a point of view and a particular philosophy. I'd love to get my hands in the Criterion and see exactly what Burroughs had to say about it.

[Rowland]

Dune was pretty unbearably bad, it was almost funny, but it was too long and boring to really work as a "lol I can't believe I'm actually watching something so bad" type of film. Painful. I can't believe I watched the entire thing. I also can't believe there is an even longer cut.I like Dune more than Inland Empire. :pritch:

[Rowland]

So yeah, I like Syndromes and a Century more than Tropical Malady. What a lovely, patient, mysterious, funny, humanistic film. I think I'll watch it again before I return it to Netflix.

[Duncan]

I like Dune a lot, but that's based on years old memories. I can't really mount a defense.

And I should see more Joe, I suppose. I didn't like Blissfully Yours much, but it was at least intriguing.

[D_Davis]

I like Dune, too. It has some great ideas, and I liked the internal monologue of the characters.

I have the Haxan Criterion - it is worth anything?

Probably won't ever watch it again, and I don't even really know why I bought it. It is definitely interesting, and I liked it, but...

[Grouchy]

I have the Haxan Criterion - it is worth anything?

Probably won't ever watch it again, and I don't even really know why I bought it. It is definitely interesting, and I liked it, but...
Interested in getting rid of it? PM me.

I live in Buenos Aires, Argentina, but that's what FedEx is all about. And they don't sell Criterions over here.

[origami_mustache]

Volkswagen has produced a series of “See Film Differently” videos which feature film fanatics sharing their vastly different interpretations of classic movies.

The Toy Story one is by far the best...after that Ghostbusters and Die Hard are pretty funny.

http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/08/27/votd-see-film-differently/

[Watashi]

Saw 4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days today. Not sure what to think of it. I'd probably rate it the same as The Death of Mr. Lazarescu. It's a film I'm probably not going to watch ever again.

[Watashi]

Is Vagabond a good starting point for Agnes Varda?

I will be watching that this weekend.

[Amnesiac]

Saw 4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days today. Not sure what to think of it. I'd probably rate it the same as The Death of Mr. Lazarescu. It's a film I'm probably not going to watch ever again.

I saw 4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days twice in theaters. I really enjoyed it. The minimalism, the sense of verisimilitude and the bubbling tension.

I'm definitely interested in seeing some more Romanian cinema. I guess that means The Death of Mr. Lazarescu and 12:08 East of Bucharest.

[Beau]

What a lovely, patient, mysterious, funny, humanistic film. I think I'll watch it again before I return it to Netflix.

:: agreement evident ::

[Beau]

I saw 4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days twice in theaters. I really enjoyed it. The minimalism, the sense of verisimilitude and the bubbling tension.

:: agreement not quite as evident, but still present ::

[Amnesiac]

:: agreement not quite as evident, but still present ::

Where do you disagree?

[Beau]

Where do you disagree?

You misunderstand. My first agreement was quite evident because of my signature. My second agreement was not quite as evident because of the lack of the film in question within my signature.

[Amnesiac]

You misunderstand. My first agreement was quite evident because of my signature. My second agreement was not quite as evident because of the lack of the film in question within my signature.

Oh. Yeah, my mistake. Sorry.

[Ezee E]

Hmm... Maybe it's because M. Hulot's Holiday is like a poor man's Playtime but add another "meh" to a considered great from me.

I bet if I saw it the other way around, I'd think otherwise, but as is, it's a similar premise, just smaller scaled and less visionary.

[transmogrifier]

Jason Statham, who has the best track record of any contemporary movie actor, continues his winning streak with Death Race. What makes Statham special—that he’s the era’s most dependable action-movie star—can be understood from the fact that this remake of the 1978 American International Pictures cult film, Death Race 2000, is the superior movie. Statham’s not just the latest big-screen badass; he’s come to stand for quality product. None of today’s media favorites (Clooney, Pitt, Depp, Damon) can list so many films as good as Transporter, Cellular, Transporter 2, London, Revolver, Crank, War and Death Race.


The 2002 film Resident Evil showcased Anderson’s fearsome composition and editing gifts. He turned that video-game adaptation into phenomenally visceral cinema. (He’s the good Paul Anderson.)

I can't quit when we get stuff like this.

[Mysterious Dude]

Transporter, Cellular, Transporter 2, London, Revolver, Crank, War and Death Race
Well, I've heard of some of those.

[Qrazy]

Is Vagabond a good starting point for Agnes Varda?

I will be watching that this weekend.

No, Cleo from 5 to 7 is.

[Boner M]

Weekend options:

Lagaan
Through the Olive Trees
Moolaadé
The King of Marvin Gardens
Images
In Praise of Love
A Heart in Winter (rpt)

[Qrazy]

Weekend options:

Lagaan
Through the Olive Trees
Moolaadé
The King of Marvin Gardens
Images
In Praise of Love
A Heart in Winter (rpt)

The King of Marvin Gardens is a truly unique and strange film, not amazing but interesting, I'll be interested to hear your thoughts.

[dreamdead]

Weekend:

The Wayward Cloud
The Blue Kite
The River

[balmakboor]

Hmm... Maybe it's because M. Hulot's Holiday is like a poor man's Playtime but add another "meh" to a considered great from me.

I bet if I saw it the other way around, I'd think otherwise, but as is, it's a similar premise, just smaller scaled and less visionary.

I think all of Tati's Hulot films are the best Tati Hulot film in some way.

Holiday is the funniest, lightest, breeziest. It is also the most visually beautiful with its quite ravishing black & white cinematography.

Mon Oncle is the most perfectly structured. It also has my favorite set from a Tati film -- Hulot's apartment building -- and one of my favorite scenes -- getting thrown out of the job interview.

Playtime is his most ambitious and audacious and visionary. It's as impressive of a directorial work as 2001: ASO.

And Trafic, with its less controlled location filming and wide open road movie structure is Tati's most casual and spontaneous movie. It also shows the most of his dark side, even a cruel streak. The dog sketch for instance.

What I love about all four films more than anything else though is the body language of the performers, all stylized as if he exclusively cast mimes and dancers. And this extends from the leads all the way down to the extras, even to the background cardboard cutout figures striking various poses.

[D_Davis]

So, Missing, the new Tsui Hark film, is terrible. It's totally anemic; it is dull and boring to its very core. If I didn't know it was directed by Tsui, there is nothing in it that would have clued me in. There is no verve; it is a plodding and vapid little romantic thriller with absolutely nothing going for it. Well, that's not entirely true: it looked great on my new TV.

[dreamdead]

Some spoilers below, largely in the last two paragraphs:

Lee Chang-Dong’s Oasis (2002) mines the considerable depths of the modernizing yet prejudical Seoul that marginalizes those who cannot fit into its notion of normalcy. Focusing on both ex-con Hong Jong-Du (Sol Kyung-gu) and Han Gong-Ju (Moon So-ri), a wheelchair-bound woman tormented by celebral palsy, Lee’s film examines the ways in which isolated individuals find a perverse comfort in those who are likewise alien to any notion of a “normal” enviroment. Even this shift toward courtship is complicated, though, by the fact that it’s one predicated on an attempted rape. And while the perversity grows when we discover that Hong killed Han’s father and thinks he can still romance her, it’s abated by the realization that Hong has done time for his brother, who truly hit Han’s father, since the brother has a clean record whereas Hong has several misdemeanor offenses.

Lee charts the attempt at a humane relationship between these two individuals even as they ignore normal protocol, with Hong bringing Han to a family birthday gathering and escalating the animosity between himself and his family, specifically the brother. This tendency toward self-destruction frequently yields the film’s dramatic action, as Hong is continually chastised and arrested for his wayward ways, but the film’s finale, where Hong’s victory for Han over sawing off a tree branch that would always cast a shadow in her room, is quietly joyous and resonant, even though any future relationship is likewise barred by the misinterpretion of neighbors finding them in the sexual act and assuming that Hong is taking advantage of Han.

Beyond its emphasis on the decrepit buildings modernization that these characters inhabit, which Lee brings to the forefront throughout, Lee also blends a slight magical realist touch into the proceedings, letting Han imagine herself not stricken by the disease but instead able to live a normal life. Ultimately, the only negative is a lack of narrative consistency, since the third act could be negated if Han could only get someone listen to her defend her attraction to Hong; yet Lee is steadfast is his cultural commentary that the city will not listen to her but will instead only let her find her repose evermore in fantasy.

[balmakboor]

"[Kevin Smith]'s not a terribly cinematic director, is he?'

While I know what is meant by this comment, more or less, I always feel it unfair in a way. It sounds to me like the person feels Potemkin is very cinematic because it has lots of cuts and tells its story visually and what not. And My Dinner With Andre is un-cinematic because it is just long static shots of guys talking. But both films are making valid choices from all of the potential options cinema has to offer.

Kevin Smith has been accused of being a flat and uninteresting director, but his simple and direct shooting style gets the job done. His films wouldn't be any better necessarily if he suddenly became David Fincher or Brian De Palma and had stylistic flourishes constantly flying at the audience.

[MadMan]

Weekend:

*Finishing Taxi Driver(1976)

I think that may be about it, considering I may either be going camping or partying with friends. If not, then maybe movies will be watched.

[Amnesiac]

Incidentally, I just re-watched Taxi Driver last night. Hadn't seen it in a few years. I've actually been going on a mini Scorcese marathon lately; Casino, Mean Streets and Raging Bull. I think I still consider Taxi Driver his most interesting work...

Oh, and I really admire DeNiro's performance in Mean Streets. I wonder if he's ever going to work with Scorcese again and channel some of that incredible talent.

[dreamdead]

Set during the Japanese occupation of Shanghai, Ang Lee’s Lust, Caution (2007) considers the amount of wealth that the biggest Chinese supporters of the Japanese went through in order to maintain their status. As such, the film studies the exorbitant spending habits of the wives of bureaucrats, luxuriating in the most expensive of dresses and mahjong games to whittle away the time. At the same time, Lee explores, as is his customary touch, the plight of the individual in a societal system that threatens to swallow her, as Wang Jiazh (Wei Tang) struggles to get close enough to Chinese traitor Yee (Tony Leung) for others to execute him. When the two begin an affair formed around violent sex, though, the double and triple identities that Wang is operating under begin to fall apart, leaving only a consistent desire for Yee even as she assures her superiors that she has the situation under control. Yee finally proves his affection with a ring at a jeweler’s, and Wang becomes despondent over the imminent execution, warning him out of the building. At that point, the sexual becomes political repression, leaving behind duty for a desire that transcends duty, even if it’s self-destructive to her and others. Quality, if a little too muted throughout.

[Teh Sausage]

"[Kevin Smith]'s not a terribly cinematic director, is he?'

While I know what is meant by this comment, more or less, I always feel it unfair in a way. It sounds to me like the person feels Potemkin is very cinematic because it has lots of cuts and tells its story visually and what not. And My Dinner With Andre is un-cinematic because it is just long static shots of guys talking. But both films are making valid choices from all of the potential options cinema has to offer.

Kevin Smith has been accused of being a flat and uninteresting director, but his simple and direct shooting style gets the job done. His films wouldn't be any better necessarily if he suddenly became David Fincher or Brian De Palma and had stylistic flourishes constantly flying at the audience.

Hmmm. I haven't seen My Dinner With Andre unfortunately, but I find that many of my favourite 'talky' movies still manage to communicate ideas in quite a visual way. Lumet and Allen are known to have 'invisible' directing, but if you were to disengage with the material and just focus on the technical aspects of their films, it becomes noticeable that so many things are being expressed through the lighting, the positioning of the camera, the space between the actors, etc.

I once read an interview with Smith, where he explained why he got into filmmaking. He saw Slacker at the cinema and apparently he thought, "Whoa, that movie's nothing but dialogue! I can do that!" This didn't surprise me because I can sometimes see this sort of mindset reflected in his work. Watching Clerks, it really felt like this was a film directed by someone whose idea of directing is to "point and shoot." There's this scene in particular that gets on my nerves everytime I see it...I don't remember the context, but Dante and his girlfriend are simply standing there, talking with their arms crossed, and Smith films it quite close up, framing the upper half of their bodies. The shot lasts about ten minutes.

I find this scene to be genuinely, strangely nauseating to experience. Somehow this simple set up and long take made me feel this way, both times I saw it. I feel like those who watched L'Avventura at Cannes, shouting at the screen "Cut away!" The way Smith just holds that specific shot at the actors for ages and ages and ages make the sequence unbearable for me, and I imagine many others. I agree his films wouldn't be necessarily better if he took a more Fincher-esque approach, (in fact, they'd probably be worse) and I'm all for simple and understated filmmaking. But in general I don't think Smith attempts either method - his directing is just...there.

Kevin Smith appears to hold the belief that "it's all in the script." I've spoken to many of his fans and they often say the same thing. They say that any flaws they find in his films can be looked over because it's all about his brilliant dialogue. Smith is also very self-deprecating about his filmmaking, and admits he's more of a writer than a director. But as Nick Ray said, "If it was all in the script, why make a film?" The way I see it, if Smith is all about the dialogue, then why isn't he working in radio?

[Rowland]

I can't quit when we get stuff like this.
I love how the source doesn't even need to be specified. That perspective can be identified with the intake of half a breath. I need to read the rest of that review... I wonder if Armond is a fan of Mortal Kombat.

[origami_mustache]

I can't quit when we get stuff like this.

That's about as insane as rating Mysterious Skin higher than The Wizard of Oz. (wink)

[D_Davis]

Problem is, Slacker has some interesting camera work. The way it follows people and breaks away to follow others is nicely done. Visually, Slacker is far more interesting and nuanced than anything Smith has ever done. It's also better written and acted.

[soitgoes...]

Weekend choices:

I Was Born, But...
Life, and Nothing More and then maybe Through the Olive Trees
Thieves Like Us
The Human Condition III

[Sycophant]

Weekend: A bunch of my friends are going to see The House Bunny.

...Yeah, it looks like I'm not going to be watching much of anything this weekend, save for a second viewing of The Girl Who Leapt Through Time.

[balmakboor]

I just don't think there is anything inherently un-cinematic about what Kevin Smith does. If he shoots a scene in a static straight-on medium shot and it is bothersome, it is most likely due to the dialog and performances not being able to sustain such a simple and direct approach. Jeanne Dielman is nothing but static, long duration, straight-on medium and long shots and it is remarkable. Akerman's choices seem perfect. There is also a long two-shot of two characters talking in Leigh's Secret & Lies that feels perfect, even riveting. Rohmer's films are filled with simple shots of people talking and talking and talking and I consider those to be first rate cinema.

It my attempts at filmmaking, I've noticed two things that really make a shot pop out and fill it with energy. Shooting from low angles and moving the camera in counterpoint to the direction of the actor. Many directors like Woody Allen and Brian De Palma and Quentin Tarantino have punched up a dialog scene by tracking the camera around the actors. (Although, in the three cases I'm thinking of, the director had a deeper meaning for moving the camera in that manner.) Would Clerks or Chasing Amy be more cinematic if Smith had energized his dialog exchanges in these sorts of ways? Or would he be merely drawing attention away from problems?

I think the only requirement for cinema to be cinematic is 24 fps. (Or some fps anyway.) Bordwell's textbook is basically a catalog of all the variables of filmmaking and the range of possible values for each. The values chosen for each variable can result in films as different as Warhol's Empire and Marker's Sans Soleil, each equally cinematic.

[balmakboor]

Weekend:

Holy Mountain
Vengeance is Mine
Coffy

Plus my 7th grader has her first high school swim meet. This should be good. Her coach asked her what she wanted to swim and she said 200 IM and 500 Free. My 11th grade daughter said, "You're such a suck up."

[Teh Sausage]

You raise some interesting points, but it's 23:56 over here and I need sleep.:) I shall reply tomorrow.

[Qrazy]

I just don't think there is anything inherently un-cinematic about what Kevin Smith does. If he shoots a scene in a static straight-on medium shot and it is bothersome, it is most likely due to the dialog and performances not being able to sustain such a simple and direct approach. Jeanne Dielman is nothing but static, long duration, straight-on medium and long shots and it is remarkable. Akerman's choices seem perfect. There is also a long two-shot of two characters talking in Leigh's Secret & Lies that feels perfect, even riveting. Rohmer's films are filled with simple shots of people talking and talking and talking and I consider those to be first rate cinema.

It my attempts at filmmaking, I've noticed two things that really make a shot pop out and fill it with energy. Shooting from low angles and moving the camera in counterpoint to the direction of the actor. Many directors like Woody Allen and Brian De Palma and Quentin Tarantino have punched up a dialog scene by tracking the camera around the actors. (Although, in the three cases I'm thinking of, the director had a deeper meaning for moving the camera in that manner.) Would Clerks or Chasing Amy be more cinematic if Smith had energized his dialog exchanges in these sorts of ways? Or would he be merely drawing attention away from problems?

I think the only requirement for cinema to be cinematic is 24 fps. (Or some fps anyway.) Bordwell's textbook is basically a catalog of all the variables of filmmaking and the range of possible values for each. The values chosen for each variable can result in films as different as Warhol's Empire and Marker's Sans Soleil, each equally cinematic.

No, I think you're wrong. Flash and dynamism is not what's at issue. Visual communication is what's at issue. Smith's imagery rarely reflects back to the subject matter of the film or says much of anything at all. If you ask yourself in a Kevin Smith film why is it necessary to have a close-up at this moment there is rarely a satisfactory answer. If alternatively we were discussing the medium of writing, an inability to use words to establish atmosphere, beauty and meaning would be at issue. If the writer employs words solely to communicate narrative and their choice of words/sentences/paragraphs is lax and haphazard then they are not equally literary, just as Smith is not equally cinematic.

[balmakboor]

No, I think you're wrong. Flash and dynamism is not what's at issue. Visual communication is what's at issue. Smith's imagery rarely reflects back to the subject matter of the film or says much of anything at all. If you ask yourself in a Kevin Smith film why is it necessary to have a close-up at this moment there is rarely a satisfactory answer. If alternatively we were discussing the medium of writing, an inability to use words to establish atmosphere, beauty and meaning would be at issue. If the writer employs words solely to communicate narrative and their choice of words/sentences/paragraphs is lax and haphazard then they are not equally literary, just as Smith is not equally cinematic.

Actually, now you are really touching on some good reasons to call Kevin Smith's films un-satisfying, and probably un-cinematic as well. I agree. It isn't that he has made the choices he does that makes the films un-cinematic. It is the fact that he doesn't exhibit any evidence of skill or thought in making the choices. They seem haphazard and lazy. Your comparison to writing is also quite good. It immediately caused me to draw the comparison that Kevin Smith is like the Dan Brown of cinema.

[Qrazy]

Actually, now you are really touching on some good reasons to call Kevin Smith's films un-satisfying, and probably un-cinematic as well. I agree. It isn't that he has made the choices he does that makes the films un-cinematic. It is the fact that he doesn't exhibit any evidence of skill or thought in making the choices. They seem haphazard and lazy. Your comparison to writing is also quite good. It immediately caused me to draw the comparison that Kevin Smith is like the Dan Brown of cinema.

Yeah Dan Brown is who I had in mind when I was making that comparison haha.

[balmakboor]

Green Snake - C-
Ms .45 - C


Btw, I find these ratings disheartening. Both have been on my to-see list for some time.

[Qrazy]

Btw, I find these ratings disheartening. Both have been on my to-see list for some time.

I think you'll like them more than I did. Also please don't take that as a negative commentary on your taste or anything like that, I just think our tastes are sufficiently different enough that you'll get more enjoyment out of them than I could.

[transmogrifier]

That's about as insane as rating Mysterious Skin higher than The Wizard of Oz. (wink)

Eh, The Wizard of Oz peaks too early in terms of the song and dance routines, and I hate the idea of the good witch, who is just a glorified deus ex machina. But it's a good time overall.

[Qrazy]

Eh, The Wizard of Oz peaks too early in terms of the song and dance routines, and I hate the idea of the good witch, who is just a glorified deus ex machina. But it's a good time overall.

She's also a bubble.

[transmogrifier]

She's also a bubble.


I got nothing against bubbles. They're alright with me.

[balmakboor]

Slither (2006) 40

I definitely disagree with this. I was entertained beyond belief by this. It was like the movie was wired into my wildest dreams and knew exactly what I wanted to see at every moment. Extremely well made to boot.

[transmogrifier]

I definitely disagree with this. I was entertained beyond belief by this. It was like the movie was wired into my wildest dreams and knew exactly what I wanted to see at every moment. Extremely well made to boot.

I think 40 probably overrates it, now that I'm a couple of weeks removed. The last half is a total waste of celluloid, with no wit, invention or even momentum. The first 20 minutes was okay.

[balmakboor]

I think 40 probably overrates it, now that I'm a couple of weeks removed. The last half is a total waste of celluloid, with no wit, invention or even momentum. The first 20 minutes was okay.

Wow. The different ways that two people can see the same movie never ceases to amaze me. The only thing that didn't work for me was the opening scene that fell flat like a joke without a punchline. It built from there to pure bliss by the end.

[baby doll]

Weekend:
Magnificent Obsession (Douglas Sirk)
To Be or Not to Be (Ernst Lubitsch)

Next Weekend:
The Flavor of Green Tea Over Rice (Yasujiro Ozu)
I Was Born, but... (Yasujiro Ozu)
The Record of a Tenement Gentlemen (Yasujiro Ozu)
Tokyo Story (Yasujiro Ozu)
Tokyo Twilight (Yasujiro Ozu)

[origami_mustache]

Boccaccio '70 was a wonderful eros themed anthology that updates some of the stories in Boccacio's Decameron with strong women character's directed by some of Italy's most talented filmmakers. Each of the 4 films averaged out to be around 50 minutes and had quality production value, great scripts, were expertly directed, and they all fit together so well.

[baby doll]

Boccaccio '70 was a wonderful eros themed anthology that updates some of the stories in Boccacio's Decameron with strong women character's directed by some of Italy's most talented filmmakers. Each of the 4 films averaged out to be around 50 minutes each and had quality production value, great scripts, were expertly directed, and they all fit together so well.But only four out of ten for Silent Light?

[transmogrifier]

Wow. The different ways that two people can see the same movie never ceases to amaze me. The only thing that didn't work for me was the opening scene that fell flat like a joke without a punchline. It built from there to pure bliss by the end.

Yep. Movies are great.

[Watashi]

Yep. Movies are great.

First time I've seen you say something positive.

[transmogrifier]

First time I've seen you say something positive.

Posted two minutes ago in another thread:


Stardust Memories is awesomely crafted. Allen can be really quite a stylized director if he wants to be.

Go me!

[origami_mustache]

But only four out of ten for Silent Light?

this was what I posted in another thread...


Well I mean, yeah visually I can understand the comparisons to Malick, as it looks a lot like Days of Heaven in some parts, but so what?...it has to amount to something. I haven't seen Ordet, but from what I've read he sort of copies a lot from that film. It also reminds me of Bergman's trilogy a little bit, but I don't see it as anything more than an amateur trying to mimic his heroes, but failing to come up with something original let alone engaging.

I will read your thoughts on it.

[Melville]

I think 40 probably overrates it, now that I'm a couple of weeks removed. The last half is a total waste of celluloid, with no wit, invention or even momentum. The first 20 minutes was okay.
Yeah, I gave it a 3/10. The humor was witless and the story just kind of plodded along with nothing of any significance happening. I don't understand the praise it gets around here.

Also, Mysterious Skin >> The Wizard of Oz

[megladon8]

I think Slither is overrated for sure, but it's hardly a bad movie.

[D_Davis]

Green Snake is awesome.

[Qrazy]

Also, Mysterious Skin >> The Wizard of Oz

Nah.

[transmogrifier]

Nah.

Try again.

[Qrazy]

Try again.

Nah.

[transmogrifier]

Nah.

Oh, sooo close. I can sense that you really want to be right, but you're not quite there yet.

[Spinal]

Epic flippancy duel. Who will win?

[MadMan]

Taxi Driver is pretty great, but is it really brilliant? (There is a difference). I'll have to file the film under "Movies I must review but I won't for now due to time restraints and the fact that I procrastinate." That's a pretty long list. Maybe even longer than that list of movies I need to see ;)

BTW the line "I am God's lonely man" is a really cool line. I spent half of one of my classes pondering that line, and its central meaning to the film. For I'm sure it has high significance.

Oh and Soylent Green is on TCM. "SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE!!!! PEOOOOPPPPLEEEEE!!!!" :lol: Good film, and it actually sports Edward G. Robinson's final performance. He sticks it completely, doing pretty sweet work. This movie also features one of Heston's best performances. Hopefully some folks tonight had the time to catch the extended edition of Major Dundee, which was screened before "Green." Its a new favorite western of mine, and its really underrated. Plus its actually the original cut of the movie, before the studio butchered it.

[Philosophe_rouge]

On the Town (1950) was an amusing, but slight musical that felt like an experiment for greater things for both Kelly and Donen. The musical sequences just miss the mark, and the story is too slight to be worth any concern. It's held afloat by Kelly's enthousiasm and magnetism, and the help of a few members of the supporting cast. Yea, just okay

[transmogrifier]

Epic flippancy duel. Who will win?


I have rightness on my side, if that counts for anything.

[Raiders]

I have rightness on my side, if that counts for anything.

It usually doesn't, especially not with Qrazy.

By the by, spot on rating for Out of the Blue. I liked the style, but at the same time it felt a little too removed and unaffecting and it never seemed very sure what it wanted to do with the villain. I thought the way it showed the almost alien nature of such brutality here and the subsequent confusion and almost ineptitude of the police force was easily the best part.

[Qrazy]

Epic flippancy duel. Who will win?

The person not valuing Araki over Fleming.

[Qrazy]

It usually doesn't, especially not with Qrazy.

By the by, spot on rating for Out of the Blue. I liked the style, but at the same time it felt a little too removed and unaffecting and it never seemed very sure what it wanted to do with the villain. I thought the way it showed the almost alien nature of such brutality here and the subsequent confusion and almost ineptitude of the police force was easily the best part.

The problem here is that what you perceive to be rightness is actually wrongness. No worries though it's a common misconception.

[balmakboor]

There was a time when I thought I'd never find a place where Araki was valued over anyone. I think he has made three and maybe four great movies so far.

Great
The Living End
Mysterious Skin
Smiley Face

Possibly Great
Totally Fucked Up

Need to see again
The Doom Generation

Haven't seen
The Long Weekend O'Despair
Three Bewildered People in the Night
Nowhere
Splendor

[BIOspasm]

MadMan check out CB's essay on Taxi Driver. Yes, its a brilliant film.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/showthread.php?t=578348&page=6&pp=30

[D_Davis]

Weekend:

Lady Whirlwind aka Deep Thrust


http://lh5.ggpht.com/_IGcPoXkEPio/SHSddgC-TLI/AAAAAAAANT8/h6mcFojeWpA/lady_whirlwind_and_the_rangers _poster_01.jpg

[transmogrifier]

It usually doesn't, especially not with Qrazy.

By the by, spot on rating for Out of the Blue. I liked the style, but at the same time it felt a little too removed and unaffecting and it never seemed very sure what it wanted to do with the villain. I thought the way it showed the almost alien nature of such brutality here and the subsequent confusion and almost ineptitude of the police force was easily the best part.

Yeah, at the start of the film, the director has no idea what tone to take, and so it becomes a montage of disparate movie techniques (it starts with the moody, highly stylized beach shot for the credits - a style which is never repeated again; goes for some starkly cut, peaceful everyday life montages - which are never repeated again; uses the pretty standard jump cuts/out-of-focus/shaky cam = mental unbalance and it's really an uncomfortable mix)

So you're definitely right where the value in the film lies. I especially liked the casting of Urban, the "biggest" actor in the film, because it really emphasizes, as you say, the confusion of the police.

[transmogrifier]

The person not valuing Araki over Fleming.

I could have sworn we were talking about two films, not careers. It appears your wrongness knows no bounds.

[Grouchy]

Heh. Movies and sexual fetishes have always been great friends.

I didn't like Silent Light either, but instead of all those filmmakers origami mentioned, I think Reygadas was clearly trying to copy Tarkovsky.

[Qrazy]

I could have sworn we were talking about two films, not careers. It appears your wrongness knows no bounds.

Or the people who made the films we're discussing? Get it now? I know it's hard, bear with it.

[transmogrifier]

Or the people who made the films we're discussing? Get it now? I know it's hard, bear with it.

Come on, this started off as a silly argument, but even you should be able to accept that liking one movie over another in isolation does not necessarily correspond to the esteem the respective directors are held in.

After all, I think Dr. T and the Woman is worse than Parenthood. Ron Howard FTW!

[Qrazy]

Come on, this started off as a silly argument, but even you should be able to accept that liking one movie over another in isolation does not necessarily correspond to the esteem the respective directors are held in.

After all, I think Dr. T and the Woman is worse than Parenthood. Ron Howard FTW!

I wasn't referring to their overarching careers, that's your interpretation of what I said. What I meant was picking one over the another, in this instance/comparison where they serve as avatars for their creations. Anyway I fail to see why we've actually started dissecting arguments in what began as and continued as a tongue in cheek flippissing contest i.e. horsing around.

[balmakboor]

Come on, this started off as a silly argument, but even you should be able to accept that liking one movie over another in isolation does not necessarily correspond to the esteem the respective directors are held in.

After all, I think Dr. T and the Woman is worse than Parenthood. Ron Howard FTW!

I would've said Parenthood is better than Dr. T and the Women. I say to-may-to. You say to-mah-to.

[origami_mustache]

Weekend:
The Man From London
I Am Curious: Yellow and Blue

[Grouchy]

The Man From London
Great.

[origami_mustache]

Heh. Movies and sexual fetishes have always been great friends.

I didn't like Silent Light either, but instead of all those filmmakers origami mentioned, I think Reygadas was clearly trying to copy Tarkovsky.

Yeah, I think so too, but didn't really want to mention my favorite filmmakers name in the same breath.

[Russ]

I've watched the first ten minutes of Funky Forest.

I'm hooked.

[Sycophant]

I've watched the first ten minutes of Funky Forest.

I'm hooked.The next 140 are just as glorious.

I need to convince more friends to watch this with me. The last group I showed it to was pretty blah on it.

[D_Davis]

I've watched the first ten minutes of Funky Forest.

I'm hooked.

It's great.

[dreamdead]

Christopher Nolan's The Prestige ultimately feels a bit too mechanical and slight given the ideas that are juggled, but I'd be lying if I didn't admit to a general appreciation for the oneupmanship demonstrated by Bale and Caine throughout. As usual, though, the women are all underdeveloped, existing as stopgaps to get their men to the next plot point, which is unfortunate with the quality of the actresses, Scarlett notwithstanding. If Nolan wouldn't try to hammer the twist-ness of the story so much, it'd be a revelation, but as it stands it's generally solid entertainment.

[BIOspasm]

Christopher Nolan's The Prestige ultimately feels a bit too mechanical and slight given the ideas that are juggled, but I'd be lying if I didn't admit to a general appreciation for the oneupmanship demonstrated by Bale and Caine throughout. As usual, though, the women are all underdeveloped, existing as stopgaps to get their men to the next plot point, which is unfortunate with the quality of the actresses, Scarlett notwithstanding. If Nolan wouldn't try to hammer the twist-ness of the story so much, it'd be a revelation, but as it stands it's generally solid entertainment.

I agree with this. Nolan has still yet to floor me and I doubt he ever will.

[origami_mustache]

I saw Human Giant perform live last night with special guests Thomas Lennon from Reno 911 and Mindy Kaling from The Office and of course it was awesome, but anyways there was a portion of the show where they talked about how awesomely terrible Death Race is and how 3 of the trailers were upcoming Vin Diesel films, including the new Fast and the Furious movie which "reinvents the mythology" of the original characters (not called 4 Fast 4 Furious unfortunately), gave them raging hard-ons. They also pointed out how cocky this trailer is, as if the audience is supposed to get really excited about the triumphant return of Vin, Paul Walker, Michelle Rodriguez, and Jordana Brewster. (who?)

here it is (http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.indi vidual&videoid=41522995)

“Twenty years ago they kicked me out of the medical community for trying to put artificial intelligence in babies.”
— That is an actual line in the new Vin Diesel movie Babylon A.D.

This just makes me want to watch more bad movies for laughs and parody material.

[Watashi]

I agree with this. Nolan has still yet to floor me and I doubt he ever will.

You've seen the future? Wow... so won WWIV? Was is Americanada?

[Derek]

You've seen the future? Wow... so won WWIV? Was is Americanada?

Doubt (verb)

1. to be uncertain about; consider questionable or unlikely; hesitate to believe.

[Raiders]

The Astronaut Farmer is among the most insufferable and aggravating pieces of sentimental, mawkish garbage I have ever come across. The arrogance of it astounds me as the Polish brothers cop some sort of children's fairytale vibe and apply it to the story of the most self-centered and careless man in the world, and guess what?... he's the hero of the story! He also is blessed with the most oblivious wife who stands by her man like some sort of sick puppy who can never stay mad at its owner and his children are there merely as menial labor and pawns to move about to achieve this opulent dream. If the government exists in this story, it is big, evil and just wants to squash a poor man's dream of setting off his rocket ship from his barn because he poses a serious danger to himself and others (not to mention that there might be other objects in the sky, like satellites, that he is unaware of the position and... oh fuck it). Even after the man proves all the critics and naysayers right, we have to suffer through a final act that should make even the most optimistic of people roll their eyes.

I'm pretty sure Capra would have thrown this in the garbage.

[Watashi]

Yeah, it's pretty bad, but it's full of unintentional lulz.

[Stay Puft]

Scattershot comments on stuff I watched recently...

Broken Flowers. I enjoyed this more on my second viewing. Love the ambiguity of each conversation and the visual motifs. The second dinner scene is perhaps my favorite, as it perfectly captures Don's frustrated attempts to read body language and find meaningful patterns. Watching frustration turn to desperation is heartbreaking. Don's visit to the graveyard is a wonderfully small and touching moment. Hurry up and finish your new movie, Jarmusch.

Death Race. Exactly what you think it is. Haphazard action direction, bad jokes, stupid story. Opens with a wall of text telling us private corporations are EVIL, and our hero then proceeds to stick it to "The Man" (in this case a woman, natch). Happy ending, everybody goes home to their nuclear families (dead members conveniently replaced with new ones). All is apparently right in the world? Tyrese Gibson goes from prisoner to indentured servant? I don't understand this movie.

Benny's Video. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v473/laxpie777/IMPASTABOWL/gonk.gif

[Watashi]

Scattershot comments on stuff I watched recently...

Broken Flowers. I enjoyed this more on my second viewing. Love the ambiguity of each conversation and the visual motifs. The second dinner scene is perhaps my favorite, as it perfectly captures Don's frustrated attempts to read body language and find meaningful patterns. Watching frustration turn to desperation is heartbreaking. Don's visit to the graveyard is a wonderfully small and touching moment. Hurry up and finish your new movie, Jarmusch.

Death Race. Exactly what you think it is. Haphazard action direction, bad jokes, stupid story. Opens with a wall of text telling us private corporations are EVIL, and our hero then proceeds to stick it to "The Man" (in this case a woman, natch). Happy ending, everybody goes home to their nuclear families (dead members conveniently replaced with new ones). All is apparently right in the world? Tyrese Gibson goes from prisoner to indentured servant? I don't understand this movie.

Benny's Video. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v473/laxpie777/IMPASTABOWL/gonk.gif
You fuck with me and we'll see who shits on the sidewalk.

[Stay Puft]

You fuck with me and we'll see who shits on the sidewalk.

I sat through the credits just to hear that? I mean I stay until the end of movies anyways, but yeah, I don't get it. I don't get that movie.

I forgot to mention how reminiscent it is of a videogame. Much like Speed Racer, only not good. The Mario Kart style power-ups were hilarious.

[origami_mustache]

Benny's Video. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v473/laxpie777/IMPASTABOWL/gonk.gif

what does this mean?

[Spinal]

what does this mean?

Perhaps he is fond of pigs.

[Derek]

Perhaps he is fond of pigs.

Or he wants a captive bolt pistol of his own...

[transmogrifier]

Is it just me, or is Licence to Kill better than any of the Brosnan Bond movies?

[Watashi]

Is it just me, or is Licence to Kill better than any of the Brosnan Bond movies?
I can tell you that it's not better than Fitzcarraldo.

[transmogrifier]

I can tell you that it's not better than Fitzcarraldo.

As any good student would know, you should just answer the question in front of you.

[megladon8]

Is it just me, or is Licence to Kill better than any of the Brosnan Bond movies?


All except Goldeneye.

[transmogrifier]

All except Goldeneye.

Especially Goldeneye. After rewatching it, it's my least favorite Brosnan Bond, mainly because it's so committed to being a "return to form", and is thus safely dull. At least the others are various degrees of preposterously entertaining.

[megladon8]

Especially Goldeneye. After rewatching it, it's my least favorite Brosnan Bond, mainly because it's so committed to being a "return to form", and is thus safely dull. At least the others are various degrees of preposterously entertaining.


Pretty much everything in this post is wrong.

Keep trying.

[transmogrifier]

Pretty much everything in this post is wrong.

Keep trying.

Hey! Stop stealing my favorite way of dismissing people without the bother of having to discuss anything!

It's patented.

PS: You'd have to admit, at least, that the statment "my least favorite Brosnan Bond" is true.

[Raiders]

GoldenEye is indeed quite lame. I have seen two of the other Brosnan Bond films and they were pretty bad as well. I have nothing more enlightening to add.

[origami_mustache]

I have only seen the Brosnan Bonds and they are all quite terrible.

[monolith94]

I think Tomorrow Never Dies might be my favorite Brosnan simply because Jonathan Pryce is so damned awesome in everything that he does. The one with Denise Richards was easily the worst, although I don't find any of them particularly painful to watch. They clearly are all out-classed by Casino Royale, of course.

[D_Davis]

Goldeneye is absolutely terrible.

[Watashi]

Goldeneye is great.

[Qrazy]

Goldeneye is significantly better than Tomorrow Never Dies and they are both significantly better than The World is Not Enough and Die Another Day which are simply awful films on every level.

[Grouchy]

1. From Russia with Love
2. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
3. Licence to Kill
4. Goldfinger
5. Goldeneye

Casino Royale is good, but it's still number six.

[transmogrifier]

I was hoping that the discussion would veer closer to "yeah, it's awesome how bitter and angry Licence to Kill is, how it almost seems like a franchise cross-over, James Bond in a Die Hard-type universe, how the plot never derails into the underbrush of loopy technological scene-for-scene one-upmanship, how things actually seem to matter to the characters involved" than "Goldeneye et al sucks".

But discussion is what it is.

[soitgoes...]

Goldeneye is significantly better than Tomorrow Never Dies and they are both significantly better than The World is Not Enough and Die Another Day which are simply awful films on every level.I believe this is the closest to being correct. The only absolutely true thing I know is that Die Another Day is the worst Bond film I've seen recently enough to be able to rate. I can't say that the Dalton films are better or worse, because it's been too long since I've seen them.

[Teh Sausage]

No, I think you're wrong. Flash and dynamism is not what's at issue. Visual communication is what's at issue. Smith's imagery rarely reflects back to the subject matter of the film or says much of anything at all. If you ask yourself in a Kevin Smith film why is it necessary to have a close-up at this moment there is rarely a satisfactory answer. If alternatively we were discussing the medium of writing, an inability to use words to establish atmosphere, beauty and meaning would be at issue. If the writer employs words solely to communicate narrative and their choice of words/sentences/paragraphs is lax and haphazard then they are not equally literary, just as Smith is not equally cinematic.

Er...yup! That's it.:)


And Goldeneye is one of the few Bond movies I can watch anymore. It's not a great film but I can't help but still love it; perhaps because it’s the one I watched and loved the most during my childhood. Yet I no longer care for the other Brosnan movies, Roger Moore is...Roger Moore, and I don't find the Connery movies to be very well paced. Licence to Kill used to bore me but maybe I'll like it more now, though I can't be bothered watching it again. I never felt compelled to give Casino Royale a repeat viewing either, despite enjoying that one so much when it was first released. I guess that James Bond is not for me, with the strange exception of Goldeneye.

[baby doll]

They clearly are all out-classed by Casino Royale, of course.How unbelievably sad is that?

[transmogrifier]

How unbelievably sad is that?

Not very.

[baby doll]

Not very.The spy genre has produced the occassional great film (Fritz Lang's Spies being the most obvious example), but Casino Royale (2006) is little more than an extended advertisement for a swanky lifestyle that associates carefully placed products (laptops, digital cameras and, of course, BMW cars) with all the danger and excitement of a James Bond adventure. If you want to bag Eva Green, you're going to need a bigger boat to sail through Venice on. This would be less of a problem if the film had an ounce of style beyond the opening sequence in black-and-white, which at least had dramatic lighting and angles going for it. After that, it's undistinguished hackwork as far as the eye can see. The way it's been over-praised smacks of desperation, like fans of a losing baseball team who think covering the spread is as good as a win.

[Scar]

If you want to bag Eva Green, you're going to need a bigger boat to sail through Venice on.

No.

You have to save her life. They shagged before he got the boat.

EDIT: And Bond didn't drive a BMW, but keep trying.

[megladon8]

People who think Goldeneye sucks make me sick.

The only way they could possibly redeem themselves is by admitting From Russia With Love is fantastic.

[Sven]

smacks of desperation...

Speaking of smacking of desperation...

[Qrazy]

I was hoping that the discussion would veer closer to "yeah, it's awesome how bitter and angry Licence to Kill is, how it almost seems like a franchise cross-over, James Bond in a Die Hard-type universe, how the plot never derails into the underbrush of loopy technological scene-for-scene one-upmanship, how things actually seem to matter to the characters involved" than "Goldeneye et al sucks".

But discussion is what it is.

I don't think I've seen License to Kill yet although I often find it hard to remember/separate some of the earlier Bonds because I watched many in a marathon of a few days. I think this is what I have left to see...

From Russia with Love
On Her Majesty's Secret Service
Moonraker
For Your Eyes Only
A View to a Kill
The Living Daylights
License to Kill

[megladon8]

You're missing some great ones, Qrazy, if you haven't seen those yet.

From Russia With Love is one of the best films of the 1960s.

[Grouchy]

This is common place by now, but if Connery had starred in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, that would definitively be the best Bond movie. Telly Savalas is CLEARLY the best Blofeld.

[Scar]

From Russia with Love - Wunderbar!
On Her Majesty's Secret Service - Wunderbar!
Moonraker - Loved it as a kid.... Now, no thanks.
For Your Eyes Only - Pretty Good
A View to a Kill - See comments in regards to Moonraker
The Living Daylights - Not bad
License to Kill - Pretty Good

[Scar]

People who think Goldeneye sucks make me sick.



The first time I saw Goldeneye, it took we awhile to get over free falling to the airplane but it is a good movie.

[Philosophe_rouge]

This is common place by now, but if Connery had starred in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, that would definitively be the best Bond movie. Telly Savalas is CLEARLY the best Blofeld.
I don't know if it would be the best, but it might be better (though I don't dislike Lazenby really). Diana Rigg is the best bond girl, so put her with the best Bond, I imagine improved results.

[Spinal]

Anything but more Bond talk! Who cares? Such a lame character.

I enjoyed a lot of Performance, but I also found it to be pretty bewildering. It might be a better film than I'm giving it credit for. Individual scenes stand out as being flat out brilliant, particularly the song where Jagger is dressed up in the suit. However, I also felt lost for long stretches of time and I'm not sure whether to blame myself or the film. Might have helped to watch it with subtitles.

[Grouchy]

I don't know if it would be the best, but it might be better (though I don't dislike Lazenby really). Diana Rigg is the best bond girl, so put her with the best Bond, I imagine improved results.
I don't dislike Lazenby either, but he's a lot more vanilla than the hard edge Connery gave to the character and, considering how important the events of that movie are, I would've liked to see him on the star role.

Diana Rigg is indeed the best Bond girl and one of the most beautiful women in the world.

http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/060925/174926__avenger_l.jpg

[Philosophe_rouge]

I don't dislike Lazenby either, but he's a lot more vanilla than the hard edge Connery gave to the character and, considering how important the events of that movie are, I would've liked to see him on the star role.

Diana Rigg is indeed the best Bond girl and one of the most beautiful women in the world.

http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/060925/174926__avenger_l.jpg
Rigg is incredible, I love the Avengers. And yes, she's foxy... I've been told by a few people that I look like her, that doesn't hurt either.

[Beau]

So, I was disappointed by Petrov's My Love. I thought I would love this and the animation is pretty amazing - I was gasping at times at the sheer beauty of it all. Unfortunately, the thing has a narrative, and it manages to bother my appreciation of the aesthetic. Some silly banal stuff about 'pure love' versus 'sinful love,' and the wonderfulness of the former, compared to the life-destroying horribleness of the latter. It seemed simple. There is some evidence of other interesting ideas, though - the way the boy is 'led' by social opinions, the words of his friends, the things he learns in church, etc. It's an ideologically-packed world, and it influences our protagonist. Unfortunately, the 'morality play' seeps into the narrative too often - and without much in the way of irony, that I could find - and hampers the experience.

[Scar]

Anything but more Bond talk! Who cares? Such a lame character.


I'm guessing a few people around here care.

Its just a hunch.

[D_Davis]

Anything but more Bond talk! Who cares? Such a lame character.


I agree with movie Bond, but book Bond is not lame at all. He's actually pretty dang tragic, and Flemming writes an interesting arc for him.

[dreamdead]

Watched two Tsai's in the past day, which allows for some interesting repetitions and thematic links. First was The Wayward Cloud, which adds a buoyancy to the usual affair of ennui and alienation that dominates this study (and is more memorable in its musical staging than The Hole). Certainly the film embraces its sexual puns amid the explicitness, using the watermelon juice as capital, but the way that Tsai documents and films the city is perhaps the most exciting aspect. What this means, then, is the communal climax at the end, is just a bit too sustained to be effective, since there's still a sense of submission to the proceedings.

The River, meanwhile, serves as a solid introduction to the typical Tsai themes, but Lee's blankness as a lead lack the understated depths that he would show in The Wayward Cloud and WTIIT?, despite the general depth that's shown to the parental figures. Actually, the father is just as interesting here as he is as the deceased figure in WTIIT?. Not really all that successful to me beyond it's status as a precursor to the themes of water, sexuality, and isolation that are better interpreted elsewhere.

[Melville]

What this means, then, is the communal climax at the end, is just a bit too sustained to be effective, since there's still a sense of submission to the proceedings.
I'm not sure what you mean. Could you expand on that thought?

[dreamdead]

I'm not sure what you mean. Could you expand on that thought?

Yeah, sorry about the obliqueness. The whole unconscious Japanese woman arc, wherein the porn crew try to revive her and then carry on oblivious to her body, works thematically but it feels too devoid of character to sustain itself organically. Further, the film's confrontation with the flesh becomes a bit too mechanical at this point when the connection between Hsiao-Kang and Shiang-chyi has already been largely established, so that the finale with the endlessly switching (and yet purely prop) sexual positions becomes interminable before the final release. Tsai builds the connection between the two when Shiang-chyi offers her voice to the proceedings, becoming the surrogate to the pounding of flesh and giving a communal sense of passion that negates the earlier isolation of flesh and mind. Yet the final shot is too oblique for Tsai to make it work; her tear offers too many interpretations, and the way in which her arms drop offer a sense that she's submitted to him, similarly to how the unconscious Japanese woman has submitted to him, which cloud the communal sense that's proceeded it. (Unless, that is, we're meant to read the dropping arms as a metonym for the drooping member, which would still allow for communal release. But this reading feels a bit... silly.)

In a nutshell, I think Tsai needed just a bit more to clarify the final image and leave us with a bit more clarity, as the rest of the film is largely marvelous for me.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I watched Quiz Show again tonight. What a fantastic film that is. It's a shame it doesn't get more recognition with the general public.

[Morris Schæffer]

Is it just me, or is Licence to Kill better than any of the Brosnan Bond movies?

I can see that. True, there's Wayne Newton, but I can still see that.

[Melville]

Yeah, sorry about the obliqueness. The whole unconscious Japanese woman arc, wherein the porn crew try to revive her and then carry on oblivious to her body, works thematically but it feels too devoid of character to sustain itself organically. Further, the film's confrontation with the flesh becomes a bit too mechanical at this point when the connection between Hsiao-Kang and Shiang-chyi has already been largely established, so that the finale with the endlessly switching (and yet purely prop) sexual positions becomes interminable before the final release. Tsai builds the connection between the two when Shiang-chyi offers her voice to the proceedings, becoming the surrogate to the pounding of flesh and giving a communal sense of passion that negates the earlier isolation of flesh and mind. Yet the final shot is too oblique for Tsai to make it work; her tear offers too many interpretations, and the way in which her arms drop offer a sense that she's submitted to him, similarly to how the unconscious Japanese woman has submitted to him, which cloud the communal sense that's proceeded it. (Unless, that is, we're meant to read the dropping arms as a metonym for the drooping member, which would still allow for communal release. But this reading feels a bit... silly.)

In a nutshell, I think Tsai needed just a bit more to clarify the final image and leave us with a bit more clarity, as the rest of the film is largely marvelous for me.
I liked the ambiguity of the final shot: the sense that the connection between the characters is only accomplished through their deadening social/sexual context, and that it's made a bittersweet connection at best because of that. However, you make some good points, and I do think that Tsai's films occasionally veer past ambiguity into meaninglessness.

[Melville]

Was there any purpose to Gummo's parade of grotesques and aggressive perpetuation of stereotypes?

[Spinal]

Was there any purpose to Gummo's parade of grotesques and aggressive perpetuation of stereotypes?

Yes, I think so. It's a nihilistic film, but not without purpose. The key to the film is the voiceover which describes the havoc caused by a natural disaster. It describes children dying, as well as people's fathers. As a girl flies through the air, the narrator takes the opportunity to look up her skirt. The film depicts a world that is absurd, bandied about by chance. The implication is: how can this world be the work of an omnipotent being when it has such people in it living such lives? Korine's world view is perhaps bleaker than my own, but I do think the film has a point and I do think that on the whole it is a successful provocation, even if he gets a little over the top at times.

[Melville]

Yes, I think so. It's a nihilistic film, but not without purpose. The key to the film is the voiceover which describes the havoc caused by a natural disaster. It describes children dying, as well as people's fathers. As a girl flies through the air, the narrator takes the opportunity to look up her skirt. The film depicts a world that is absurd, bandied about by chance. The implication is: how can this world be the work of an omnipotent being when it has such people in it living such lives? Korine's world view is perhaps bleaker than my own, but I do think the film has a point and I do think that on the whole it is a successful provocation, even if he gets a little over the top at times.
Perhaps I should have said "Was there any purpose beyond empty nihilism to Gummo's parade of etc." I'm always up for a bleak examination of the absurdity of human life, but the films characters and their lives don't seem to say much about an absurd world, since they are just grotesque extrapolations from stereotypes of "white trash." If they were given a bit more ambiguity and complexity, I would have liked the film a lot more.

[origami_mustache]

http://culturesoak.files.wordpress.co m/2008/04/blosser.jpg

Beautiful Losers is a collection of interviews from various artists and creative minds influenced by DYI , graffiti, skateboard and punk rock, including Mike Mills, Harmony Korine, Ed Templeton, Geoff McFetridge and others. It is meant to inspire as well as celebrate their work. Aside from the really faddy stuff that all looks the same, that you see on every graphic t-shirt these days, I do enjoy a lot of the work these artist's have done, however this format makes for a very uninteresting cinematic experience. It pretty much encapsulates everything I hate about documentaries. It mostly consists of stock footage, interviews with stuttering awkward responses and collages of artwork, but not much information in return. I'd much rather see their art for myself in person or read up on these artists on my own than see it presented in such a format, and anyone into their work should already be inspired by them. The film only briefly touches on a worthwhile subject when it addresses the "controversial" subject of the value of pop art, commercial art, community service signs, corporate advertising, and how each can be used as a medium to perpetuate underground art. I definitely wouldn't recommend this movie to anyone, unless they were really into this group of creative people.

[balmakboor]

I got around to The Holy Mountain yesterday. I enjoyed it to an extent far beyond my wildest expectations. I think it ranks as a directorial achievement right up there with 2001: ASO, Playtime, WR: Mysteries of the Organism, and Berlin Alexanderplatz. Simply brilliant. I think I'll give El Topo another chance now after watching the restoration demo for the one. Most of my dislike for El Topo may have been due to a really crappy looking VHS bootleg.

[Stay Puft]

The River, meanwhile, serves as a solid introduction to the typical Tsai themes, but Lee's blankness as a lead lack the understated depths that he would show in The Wayward Cloud and WTIIT?, despite the general depth that's shown to the parental figures. Actually, the father is just as interesting here as he is as the deceased figure in WTIIT?. Not really all that successful to me beyond it's status as a precursor to the themes of water, sexuality, and isolation that are better interpreted elsewhere.

This is next on my Tsai list (trying to keep it as chronological as possible). What did you think of Rebels and Vive L'Amour? The themes you point out certainly manifest in those, to varying degrees.

[D_Davis]

I got around to The Holy Mountain yesterday. I enjoyed it to an extent far beyond my wildest expectations. I think it ranks as a directorial achievement right up there with 2001: ASO, Playtime, WR: Mysteries of the Organism, and Berlin Alexanderplatz. Simply brilliant. I think I'll give El Topo another chance now after watching the restoration demo for the one. Most of my dislike for El Topo may have been due to a really crappy looking VHS bootleg.

The Holy Mountain is an all around better film than El Topo. I find it infinitely more watchable, more enjoyable, and better made in every regard.

[Rowland]

Another viewing confirms Syndromes and a Century as, at the very least, a borderline-masterpiece. It reminds me of Lynch, only more formally rigorous, intellectually stimulating, ineffably intoxicating, warmly humorous, and all-around coherent than Lynch's frustrating Inland Empire.

[Derek]

Another viewing confirms Syndromes and a Century as, at the very least, a borderline-masterpiece. It reminds me of Lynch, only more formally rigorous, intellectually stimulating, ineffably intoxicating, warmly humorous, and all-around coherent than Lynch's frustrating Inland Empire.

That's an odd comparison, but I'm glad you found another opportunity to knock Inland Empire.

[Spinal]

That's an odd comparison, but I'm glad you found another opportunity to knock Inland Empire.

We really were overdue.

[megladon8]

78 seems semi-low for a "borderline masterpiece".

I'd think at least 79.

[Rowland]

That's an odd comparison, but I'm glad you found another opportunity to knock Inland Empire.I think they're very similar in their dreamlike qualities, their aesthetic focus on texture and mood, their cinematic rhythms, as well as their offbeat senses of humor. And they came out around the same time... and I like to knock Inland Empire every now and then. ;)

[Melville]

Another viewing confirms Syndromes and a Century as, at the very least, a borderline-masterpiece. It reminds me of Lynch, only more formally rigorous, intellectually stimulating, ineffably intoxicating, warmly humorous, and all-around coherent than Lynch's frustrating Inland Empire.
I agree with Derek that that's a bizarre comparison.... but I'll go with it:

Formal rigor: S & a C, though I'm not sure that's always a good thing
Intellectual stimulation: IE by a country mile
Ineffable intoxication: tie. IE was more intoxicating, but its intoxication was more effable.
Warm humor: S & a C, though IE has some good cold humor.
Coherence: S & a C if we're talking narrative, IE if we're talking thematics

[megladon8]

"People who think Goldeneye sucks make me sick." - Meg


Did you quote this because you also love Goldeneye, or because you love me?

[dreamdead]

This is next on my Tsai list (trying to keep it as chronological as possible). What did you think of Rebels and Vive L'Amour? The themes you point out certainly manifest in those, to varying degrees.

Unfortunately, those you list, as well as Goodbye, Dragon Inn, are the Tsai films I still haven't seen. I know the man works with a limited palette, but I love how each film augments and experiments with the structure of those themes. And actually, I find myself appreciating The River a bit more today, so methinks I might have been too quick to judge it against the later works.

Meantime, Tian Zhuangzhuang's The Blue Kite is a marvel in critique against the Chinese system in power. Though the film is resolutely personal, it nonetheless traverses the vagaries of politics, interrogating a '60's culture in which betrayal and interrogation become routine and unsubstantiated. While the film retains a visual poetry throughout, its humanist vehemence toward these atrocities lends it great resonance. An amazing work through and through, and a wonderful testimony to the individual struggling against the political systems.

[dreamdead]

Another viewing confirms Syndromes and a Century as, at the very least, a borderline-masterpiece. It reminds me of Lynch, only more formally rigorous, intellectually stimulating, ineffably intoxicating, warmly humorous, and all-around coherent than Lynch's frustrating Inland Empire.

I am pleased to see this, as I too will be returning to Joe's film here in the next week. Though I suspect that Tropical Malady possesses the greater originality in stressing slight variation upon themes, I'm interested in how Thai cinema comments on the fast approaching urbanity and general cityscapes that are growing from the villages of old, and so Syndromes is the film that demands my attention.

[megladon8]

The Bourne Supremacy was awesome on a re-watch.

I might even say it's my favorite of the Bourne series, which I would say is one of the greatest action trilogies of all time.

I really love the music here. Used sparsely but effectively.

The entire cast is in great form, even the bit players.

The writing is smart, the filmmaking itself impeccable.

The image of Marie floating away in the water is haunting.

And was that last scene (with Bourne talking to Landy and saying she needs rest because she looks tired) a part that's actually in the 3rd movie, or did he do that to her more than once?

[Grouchy]

And was that last scene (with Bourne talking to Landy and saying she needs rest because she looks tired) a part that's actually in the 3rd movie, or did he do that to her more than once?
We had a debate over this a while back. You're talking about the sniper scene that's in both movies, right?

I used to know what was the real deal on that, but I forgot.

[megladon8]

We had a debate over this a while back. You're talking about the sniper scene that's in both movies, right?

I used to know what was the real deal on that, but I forgot.


No, the sniper scene is different.

About mid-way through Supremacy, he's in a building across the street and looking at Landy through a sniper scope, while talking to her on the phone.

This was the scene where he arranged to meet Nicky.

The scene I'm talking about is literally the last scene of the movie.

He's in NYC, looking at Landy in her office, and she tells him his real name and birth date. I think he was just looking at her through binoculars.

[Boner M]

The King of Marvin Gardens - A quintessential 70's film that feels like it's gone out of it's way to be a quintessential 70's film. Bruce Dern is awesome. Haunting bookending scenes.

Lagaan - Material this predictable shouldn't usually deserve a 4-hour running time, but typical Bollywood high spirits sustain interest. Doesn't exactly encourage me to explore the genre futher, but I'm glad I saw it.

A Heart in Winter (rpt) - The kind of film that makes the term qualité de cinéma sound nowhere near as disparaging as the Cahiers crowd intended it to. Auteil & Beart are sublime.

[Rowland]

Lagaan - Material this predictable shouldn't usually deserve a 4-hour running time, but typical Bollywood high spirits sustain interest. Doesn't exactly encourage me to explore the genre futher, but I'm glad I saw it.I remember that someone assigned this to me for a film swap back in the day, and I dreaded watched it. The movie sat in its Netflix envelope on my desk for a solid two months or so before I mustered the will to pop it in the player, and to my delight, it somehow never dragged and I had a blast. Great music too, the only serious misstep being the number with the English wife.

[Rowland]

Oh, and Supremacy is my favorite entry in the Bourne trilogy, though I'd need to watch them again to support that position with much conviction.

[Boner M]

I remember that someone assigned this to me for a film swap back in the day, and I dreaded watched it. The movie sat in its Netflix envelope on my desk for a solid two months or so before I mustered the will to pop it in the player, and to my delight, it somehow never dragged and I had a blast. Great music too, the only serious misstep being the number with the English wife.
I had to watch it for my lame world cinema class, so I was pleased that I ended up liking it as much as I did. Probably would've liked it more had I not watched it on a VHS tape (couldn't find a DVD around).

[Rowland]

I had to watch it for my lame world cinema class, so I was pleased that I ended up liking it as much as I did. Probably would've liked it more had I not watched it on a VHS tape (couldn't find a DVD around).Was it widescreen? The cinematography is fantastic.

[megladon8]

Batman was on TV last night, and I was stunned to discover that it's an editing nightmare.

What a terribly put together movie.

[Boner M]

Was it widescreen? The cinematography is fantastic.
Only for the opening scene. :(

[Philosophe_rouge]

I'm surprised I liked the Brown Bunny, very little happened and yet I was completely taken in by the atmosphere and the melancholy mood. There are a few things I'm still working over in my mind, but it could rank among my favourites of the decade.

Chacun son Cinema, like all short film compilations, has some bad, nearly all average, and a few gems. Most are forgetteable, a few even I could do better on, and there are maybe 3 or 4 that I'd call great (Cronenberg's, Wender's, Inarritu's and Wong Kar Wai's). Overall the experience is of mild enjoyment, I think the experiment itself is probably funner to go out and do, than to watch. I'm curious, over the years with all of these compilation type things, how many films made actually stand out as great cinema on their own terms. I havent' seen it, but I've heard Toby Dammity does, from les Histoires Extraordinaries. Any others come to mind?

[Grouchy]

No, the sniper scene is different.

About mid-way through Supremacy, he's in a building across the street and looking at Landy through a sniper scope, while talking to her on the phone.

This was the scene where he arranged to meet Nicky.

The scene I'm talking about is literally the last scene of the movie.

He's in NYC, looking at Landy in her office, and she tells him his real name and birth date. I think he was just looking at her through binoculars.
Oh. In that case, I suspect it's the same scene remade for the third movie. Anyway, Supremacy is also my favorite by far.


Chacun son Cinema, like all short film compilations, has some bad, nearly all average, and a few gems. Most are forgetteable, a few even I could do better on, and there are maybe 3 or 4 that I'd call great (Cronenberg's, Wender's, Inarritu's and Wong Kar Wai's). Overall the experience is of mild enjoyment, I think the experiment itself is probably funner to go out and do, than to watch. I'm curious, over the years with all of these compilation type things, how many films made actually stand out as great cinema on their own terms. I havent' seen it, but I've heard Toby Dammity does, from les Histoires Extraordinaries. Any others come to mind?
This doesn't answer your question, but did you notice how many different filmmakers decided to make very similar shorts about blind movie-goers? I bet they hated each other's guts when they saw the whole movie. There's not much you can do in three minutes, and the ones that at least were entertaining for me were Wong Kar Wai, Polanski, Kitano, Von Trier, Salles and Yimou. Cronenberg was the only awesome one.

[Grouchy]

Just finished Angel Heart. What a cool fucking movie. It's actually a genre blend that manages to deliver film noir and Horror at the same time very succesfully, never becoming a parody of either. The atmosphere was pretty much nailed by Alan Parker, and the infamous sex scene was really on its own class. It's a very intelligent script and it speaks of the movie's trust on its audience that the full implications of its twist ending are implied instead of spelled out. It's also a twist that makes perfect sense and is clearly foreshadowed in almost every scene from the beginning onwards. Rourke is awesome as a gritty gumshoe and, although De Niro's Lucifer is painted in very broad strokes, it works very well in the context. Funny that both De Niro and Pacino have played campy, over-the-top incarnations of Satan in pretty good movies.

[megladon8]

I've been meaning to check out Angel Heart since I read "Falling Angel" (the book it's based on) last fall.

The book is nothing like what I expected it to be. It's a good book for sure, but "one of the scariest books ever written"? Not even close.

[Milky Joe]

Question: what exactly makes Supremacy so much better for all of you? I thought it was by far the worst of the series. Just a flat out awful movie, visually and narratively incoherent, ugly, and with the littlest grasp on character of any of the movies. And it is amazing to me considering how good the first and third (the latter being the best and one of my favorite action movies of all time) are.

[megladon8]

Funny, I thought Supremacy had the strongest grasp on character of the three movies.

That's probably the best thing about it.

Also has the best car chase of the three, the best acting from Damon, and had the most ballsiness of the three. Stuff in the third movie that was meant to feel shocking and out-of-the-ordinary (like the sudden death of Considine's character) felt like a retread of material from the second (in this case, the sudden death of Potente's character.).

Also, I thought the trifecta of Karl Urban, Karel Roden and Brian Cox made up the series' best antagonists.


EDIT: Also, what made the narrative incoherent? This is as puzzling to me as people who have said that they didn't understand The Matrix or The Dark Knight.

[Milky Joe]

EDIT: Also, what made the narrative incoherent? This is as puzzling to me as people who have said that they didn't understand The Matrix or The Dark Knight.

I don't know, exactly... I just have a memory of it as a vague jumble of ideas: Bourne is being hunted... there's corruption... Joan Allen wears too much makeup... Russian oil guy has issues... Brian Cox double crosses everyone... blah. It had none of the crunchiness, none of the sharpness, none of the effortless momentum of Ultimatum. Agree to disagree, I guess.