Recommend me one film...and I'll review it.

[elixir]

I figure this would be a fun way to get to know you guys better (lame?) and also, I have such a large to-see list, but personal recommendations push films to the top...I have really only gotten into film this past year (late 2009, early 2010), so there are still many famous films I haven't seen, so do NOT feel the need to recommend something really obscure. I can pretty much get access to most films...

So, go at it. Also, I'm not the best writer, so hopefully I can improve with that...(my writing in this post is not representative though, and it's also nearly 3 am).

I'm scared about starting a thread, but I'll post anyways. If this is a stupid or obnoxious idea, no one has to respond. :)

[Watashi]

Whisper of the Heart

That or A Goofy Movie.

[elixir]

Whisper of the Heart

That or A Goofy Movie.

Okay, I haven't seen either. Since you are first, I'll try to watch yours first.

[elixir]

Watashi, I have a question, in regard to Whisper of the Heart: dubbed or subtitled (and how much does it matter)?

[Watashi]

I actually liked the dubbed track a lot (it adds a lot of emotion to the characters), but if you want the "pure" film, go with subtitled. Both are excellent. I saw it subtitled first, but now I just watch it dubbed.

[soitgoes...]

Watashi, I have a question, in regard to Whisper of the Heart: dubbed or subtitled (and how much does it matter)?

Subtitled.

[Ezee E]

Dubbed version actually works just fine in that version. Doesn't seem out of place at all.

[TripZone]

Talking to Strangers (1988)

[Morris Schæffer]

If you'd like, try to see Best of Youth (Giordana, 2003). Yeah, it's long (6 whopping hours!), but I've gotta say something miraculous happened at the three hour mark. That is to say, I had to leave due to an appointment, but honestly didn't want to.

[B-side]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0064546/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050407/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065867/

Whichever one appeals to you the most, or is available to you, etc.

[endingcredits]

Options:

Au hasard Balthazar - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0060138/combined
Possession - http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi1840185625

[balmakboor]

Hitchcock's Rope.

[elixir]

Whisper of the Heart (Yoshifumi Kondō, 1995)
Recommend by: Watashi
http://www.danielthomas.org/Assets/film%20reviews%20pix/Whisper.jpg

I was thinking about writing my review to the lyrics of "Take Me Home, Country Road," but decided it might be too corny...

Whisper of the Heart is a story of young love and ambitious dreams. Shizuki is a young girl who is a voracious reader, who checks out fairy tales from the library nearly every day. She also writes as well, but is not very confident in her skills. She notices that someone keeps on checking out the books she is getting from the library; she wonders who it can be--is it the start of her own fairy tale?

This is one of those movies that you can sort of predict by the beginning, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. We see a boy, Seiji, reading her book, and when she goes back to pick it up, he teases her. Hm, I wonder if they will end up in love, and if he's the one who checked out the books! But no matter, because their interactions do contain truth. One especially striking moment was when Shizuki is having an incredible day, having just been to a magical antique shop, but then after being taunted by Seiji, claims that it's a horrible day now. That was a moment, for me, that captured much of adolescence and how it so easily swings from exuberance to dejection.

So, yes, the two pre-teens do fall in love, but he must go away. He dreams of being a great violin-maker, and leaves for Italy to train. During this time, Shizuki tries to go after her own ambitions, inspired by him, and decided to write a book. The fantasy sequences that are derived from this device are incredibly beautiful, even if I'm not quite sure if they fit with the story.

Indeed, there are some stylistic flourishes that felt superfluous, or even heavy-handed: the grandfather dreaming of his lost love, Shizuki imagining Seiji in the corner of room disappearing. Additionally, sometimes the characters become message-spouters, announcing the messages and themes of the work in blunt terms. It was off-putting at times, even if it did make some sense in the context of the movie.

Still, there is so much genuine emotion in the movie for it to overcome these flaws. Even a scene that I have seen before, in which the girl tells a guy he's dense only for him to say he loves her, comes across as authentic. And even though I suppose it could become annoying to some, I do appreciate the inclusion of the aforementioned song in the movie. It is possible some may roll their eyes at the family joining Shizuki and Seiji's musical sessions, but I decided to roll with it and found myself awarded with a sublime moment.

The animation itself was quite beautiful. This is actually the first anime film I have seen, and the first Studio Ghibli movie as well. Funnily enough, I think the grandfather's description of Shizuki's book fits the movie as well: imperfect and rough around the edges, but filled with raw and heartfelt emotion. For those into numerical ratings, I'd give it a 7/10. I enjoyed it quite a bit; thanks for the recommendation!

[Ezee E]

Dear Zachary: A Letter to his son about his father.

[B-side]

Numerical ratings are for losers.

*tries to cover up sig*

[chrisnu]

The Man Who Wasn't There

[elixir]

The Man Who Wasn't There

You picked one of four Coen Brothers movie I've yet to see (the other three being Intolerable Cruelty, The Ladykillers, and Burn After Reading)...and I have access to it, so I'll get to it soon.

I may have to go out of order because of access, but I'll try to get to them all.

[baby doll]

Johnny Guitar

[chrisnu]

I haven't yet seen The Ladykillers myself, primarily due to the vitriolic reaction it received from critics at the time. I should get around to it.

[D_Davis]

Mind Game
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_Game_%28film%29

If you cant find that...

Peking Opera Blues
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peking_Opera_Blues

[Scar]

Rob Zombie's Halloween.

[dmk]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0098994/

or

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100143/

[elixir]

Au Hasard Balthazar (Robert Bresson, 1966)
Recommended by: endingcredits

http://www.examiner.com/images/blog/EXID3880/images/Au_Hasard_Balthazar.jpg

My only previous experience with Bresson is Pickpocket, which was alright but really suffered from its link to Crime and Punishment. But this was something completely different: the acting style really worked here, and it was one of the most empathetic works I have seen.

I am really hit hard by this work, which I think is due to its quiet and understated but very evocative nature. The dialogue is sparse but powerful, as is the wonderful and simple score.

The Balthazar in the title is a donkey. Many animals in movies are used as a cloying device for the audience, but here he is not just a unthoughtful gimmick: he is a character in his own right, and a very enlightening figure in the movie. But he is not extraordinary. He has one moment to shine--at the fair--but other than that, he goes through life pretty simply, moving from owner to owner, of which some are cruel and some are kind

The other main character we follow is Marie, Balthazar's first owner, who loves him but still lets the local boys beat up on him. She is seen as a figure of purity to her family, and her very nice and respectable childhood friend Jacques asks for her hand in marriage, but she is more attracted to the rebellious Gerard. Despite his physical and emotional abuse, she is still drawn to him. Why is this? Because he's exciting, because he has the youth and masculinity that Jacques lacks? The great thing is that Bresson never tells us exactly what the characters are feeling (some of which must be a result of his directing style of actors), so we are forced to draw our own interpretations and conclusions--he asks the viewer to do some work and he never dumbs down the material.

There is so much to look at in this movie. You can view it through a feminist lens, religious perspective, a moral point of view. What I want to focus on is how the individual fits in society. Balthazar and Marie are constantly exploited, abused by society no matter their goodness. We don't always think when we use something or someone; we don't always consider the consequences. But shouldn't we? The movie shows how assumptions are often wrong as well: the drunken criminal is the one who takes the best care of Balthazar.

Ultimately, I think the movie asks us to empathize with every character. For Balthazar, that means we relate to accepting our fate, especially when it seems we have no choice. For Marie, that means we make decisions that don't make irrational sense, we accept our fate even when we have choice. And we can put ourselves in the positions of more minor characters as well. Although there are no telling close-ups or revealing reaction shots, this is one of the most relatable and empathetic movies I have seen.

Bresson is also a master at making striking images. The image in the picture above is one memorable example. But others include the lamp lighting Marie's face when she runs away to the old man's house, the firecrackers and breaking of glass at the party, and especially that magnificent and subtle final scene. This movie is so great because it doesn't tell you how to feel because it has no forceful emotional cues, but it's no so far removed that it's impossible to feel an authentic visceral reaction from it: the film is that rare work that elicits emotions without telling you what the viewer should feel, forcing the audience to work out their own thoughts and conclusions. And it works so well because the film is endlessly fascinating and interpretable, tackling a large number of issues in a minimalist yet very effective manner. 9/10.

[monolith94]

The Man Who Planted Trees

[Russ]

The Rapture (1991)

[MacGuffin]

Zero Woman: Red Handcuffs

[Skitch]

Akira
Pistol Opera
Tetsuo: The Iron Man

[Scar]

Please forgive Skitch, he never learned how to count.

[elixir]

Please forgive Skitch, he never learned how to count.

It's fine to pick more than one if you think some might be harder to find...I just didn't want to get a huge list of movies from each person.

[balmakboor]

Why is Pickpocket's relation to Crime and Punishment a bad thing?

[elixir]

Why is Pickpocket's relation to Crime and Punishment a bad thing?

Because Crime and Punishment is loads better, and Pickpocket actually follows a lot of C+P very closely. Additionally, it's about pickpocketing instead of a killing, which while more practical, is less interesting. The whole time I was thinking, why not just film C+P? or maybe I should just read the book instead. For me, Pickpocket has none of the insight or intrigue that Crime and Punishment had. Despite all this, I still sort of liked it, but I really do think it suffers from that link--if it didn't have so many of the same plot points, perhaps it wouldn't have mattered as much.

[balmakboor]

Because Crime and Punishment is loads better, and Pickpocket actually follows a lot of C+P very closely. Additionally, it's about pickpocketing instead of a killing, which while more practical, is less interesting. The whole time I was thinking, why not just film C+P? or maybe I should just read the book instead. For me, Pickpocket has none of the insight or intrigue that Crime and Punishment had. Despite all this, I still sort of liked it, but I really do think it suffers from that link--if it didn't have so many of the same plot points, perhaps it wouldn't have mattered as much.

Oh. Okay. That makes sense. At first, I thought you didn't like C&P.

I mostly like Pickpocket, but nowhere near as much as Country Priest, A Man Escaped, Mouchette, or Balthazar.

[Spinal]

Queen Margot

[Yxklyx]

Velvet Goldmine

[Skitch]

Please forgive Skitch, he never learned how to count.

Sorry, I assumed he may have seen or wasn't interested in a couple. Variety is the spice of life. :)

[Kurosawa Fan]

Driven

[Derek]

Chinese Roulette

[Kurosawa Fan]

:lol:

I came this close, but couldn't bring myself to do it.

[elixir]

:lol:

I came this close, but couldn't bring myself to do it.

...I am confused.

[Kurosawa Fan]

...I am confused.

He recommended that film to me in a film swap a couple years ago and I absolutely hated it. I'm still giving him a hard time, and he's still rubbing it in.

[B-side]

Chinese Roulette is brilliant.

[Kurosawa Fan]

*sigh*

[D_Davis]

No one said Torque?

Ya'll be slippin'.

[balmakboor]

I'm a huge Fassbinder freak and I found Chinese Roulette to be one of his misfires. He got overly obsessed with crafting a dense visual style and lost sight of just about everything else. That's ok though. He made good use of what he learned in later works like In a Year With 13 Moons.

[Skitch]

No one said Torque?

Ya'll be slippin'.

I thought of that too. Better pile Speed Racer in there too. Lol

[baby doll]

If you've never seen a Fassbinder movie, The Marriage of Maria Braun is a good place to start.

[Derek]

If you've never seen a Fassbinder movie, The Marriage of Maria Braun is a good place to start.

Yeah, consider that my rec as well since I was joking about Chinese Roulette. I'd never recommend that to a Fassbinder noob, including KF who I did not recommend it to directly.

[Kurosawa Fan]

You didn't? I thought you recommended it to me in a film swap? Man, my memory is shit since I started school again. Too many damn things to remember.

[Derek]

You didn't? I thought you recommended it to me in a film swap? Man, my memory is shit since I started school again. Too many damn things to remember.

You know, it could be my memory, but I remember you watching, blaming me and then me being very confused b/c I knew it wasn't a film I'd recommend on a swap.

[Raiders]

The Internets have destroyed the evidence, but weighing the testimonies, I believe that KF would not have sought out a relatively inaccessible, middle-tier Fassbinder film without the misguided and deviant recommendation of Derek. The Court finds Derek guilty as charged.

[Kurosawa Fan]

The Internets have destroyed the evidence, but weighing the testimonies, I believe that KF would not have sought out a relatively inaccessible, middle-tier Fassbinder film without the misguided and deviant recommendation of Derek. The Court finds Derek guilty as charged.

*kicks feet up*

It's good to be a mod.

[Derek]

The defense submits Exhibit A (below)which clearly shows that I suggested Salesman or The Burmese Harp in my Film Swap with KF in 2008. This was my only film swap with KF and as I MYSELF consider Chinese Roulette a mid-tier Fassbinder (please see my 7.0 rating submitted in the Fassbinder Director Consensus Thread), there is no logical reason why I would choose it as a Film Swap choice.

The jury must now reconvene and I urge you to find KF's memory guilty of being middle-aged.

EXHIBIT A:

http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j94/DSmith724/KFLIESLIKEAMUHFUCKA.jpg

[Derek]

Next case up: The Missing Star in Raiders' Signature. Boner has been assigned to investigation since clearly the mod's are in bed with one another.

[MacGuffin]

Next case up: The Missing Star in Raiders' Signature. Boner has been assigned to investigation since clearly the mod's are in bed with one another.

Indeed! First Spinal with Dogtooth, now this. :lol:

[Spinal]

Wait. Who am I in bed with? :confused:

[Derek]

Wait. Who am I in bed with? :confused:

Oh...did KF say he had to work late?

I hope I've shown he's not to be trusted. My condolences.

[Raiders]

Guess what Spinal, those aren't pillows.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Convenient that you just stumbled upon this now. Photoshop is a very convenient tool.

[Derek]

Convenient that you just stumbled upon this now. Photoshop is a very convenient tool.

If I could use Photoshop, I would've posted fake PMs in Random Thoughts years ago, then Duke would've posted dozens of them until another good joke was beaten into the ground.

Or better, if I could use Photoshop, I would still be donning a Danny Huston avatar at this very moment.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Damn your strong reasoning!!

[Raiders]

Considering KF's viewing and subsequent hatred of the film pre-dates the move to this site, Derek's mere statement that the PM posted above was his only film swap with KF is mere hearsay and is discounted by this Court.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I'm a roller coaster of emotions right now!

[Watashi]

We really need to do another film swap.

[Derek]

Considering KF's viewing and subsequent hatred of the film pre-dates the move to this site, Derek's mere statement that the PM posted above was his only film swap with KF is mere hearsay and is discounted by this Court.

I never had another film swap with KF, I swear! Why, out of all the films in the universe, would I recommend someone whose never seen anything by Fassbinder my EIGHTH favorite film by the guy!?

[Watashi]

Just face it, Derek.

You've been already sentenced. May you be stripped 1,000 rep points.

[Raiders]

I never had another film swap with KF, I swear! Why, out of all the films in the universe, would I recommend someone whose never seen anything by Fassbinder my EIGHTH favorite film by the guy!?

Why indeed. Poor, poor KF.

[elixir]

The Man Who Planted Trees (Frédéric Back, 1988)
Recommend by: monolith94
http://www.filmwell.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/man-who-planted-trees3-300x223.jpg
I have very limited experience with shorts, but this is my favorite now.

The animation is just incredible. Often flickering but always fluid, the movie goes from scene to scene with pitch-perfect pace and uses color magnificently to convey mood and atmosphere. The narration is great--never used as a crutch, but still allowed to have some character to it--and the story itself is simple enough, but transcendent.

Yes, it can certainly be seen as a pro-environmentalist message, but I found it more to be about the ability of one man to change their surroundings, and the power nature has to transform men. Throughout the film, I was reminded of the time I have spent in national and state parks, and the movie perfectly evoked the emotions I felt when I was surrounded by these vast and beautiful landscapes.

But as in any movie, it's not just what it's about, but how it's about--and therein lies the movie's greatest strength. It's just incredible how the movie could move from a scene of a village home to flashbacks of the village's dangers or from a desolate landscape to a forest to an ocean. It never feels forced or arbitrary, but always a completely organic and naturalistic progression of the story.

The movie is beautiful in so many ways, specifically in its animation and messages. The titular character is certainly one who deserves admiration, and I love how humble he is throughout the narrative. The movie is just really wonderful to look at and I feel like it's such a great experience to see both the transformations the landscape and the protagonist go through over time. 9/10.

Sorry this review sucks, but thanks for the recommendation!

[B-side]

I suspect you're chomping at the bit to see and review the Czechoslovakian film I recommended?

[balmakboor]

I've seen Rope three times in the past two weeks, once on the big screen. I'm curious about other thoughts. Thus my reasoning for suggesting it.

I've seen it about seven times now and each time I come away even more convinced of its genius and even more aware of its shortcomings.

[Russ]

Sorry this review sucks, but thanks for the recommendation!
It doesn't suck, you were succinct and eloquent. Your words do the film justice, and that's pretty great.

[elixir]

I suspect you're chomping at the bit to see and review the Czechoslovakian film I recommended?

I'm first seeing what's easily available, but I hope to get to all of the recommendations eventually. I don't think I've ever seen a Czech film actually, though we are watching one in my film class soon!

[elixir]

It doesn't suck, you were succinct and eloquent. Your words do the film justice, and that's pretty great.

Thanks! It's one of those films that gave me this indescribable feeling in my stomach, and that's when I know I've witnessed something great. Like I said, hard to describe...does anyone else get this?

[B-side]

I'm first seeing what's easily available, but I hope to get to all of the recommendations eventually. I don't think I've ever seen a Czech film actually, though we are watching one in my film class soon!

I'm not opposed to re-downloading it and uploading it on a public site for you. I mean, if you'd rather watch one of the others, which are readily available via Netflix, you're certainly free to do so, but if you happen to be particularly interested in the Czech one, I can host it for you.

[elixir]

The Man Who Wasn't There (Ethan Coen and Joel Coen, 2001)
Recommended by: chrisnu
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a55/franzpatrick/Films/TheManWhoWasntThere.jpg

This film is top-tier Coens for me, and perhaps their most beautifully photographed. Really gorgeous cinematography.

The film follows Ed Crane (Billy Bob Thornton), a discontented man who seems to have problems come at me left and right, some a direct result of his doing and others borne from the simple act of misfortune. Thornton was just perfect for this role. You could see it just in his face: his sunken eyes, somewhat craggy profile, his questioning eyebrows--it all felt just right for a man who kept his discontent hidden away, who had a deep inner life even though he had quite a taciturn demeanor.

Besides Thornton's subtle and revealing portrayal, along with the great black-and-white cinematography, I also want to highlight Shaloub's wonderful performance as a slick lawyer. It was consistently funny, featuring the snappy dialogue the Coens have become famous for.

I love how this movie is paced; it never feels like it's in a rush to get to the next plot point, and we are allowed to really let the atmosphere seep in, and thus we gain insight and can empathize with Crane's situation. Indeed, I found it very easy to relate to the man, because haven't we all had the feeling of discontent and ennui? That things were happening to us that we didn't perhaps "deserve?" Which brings me to another point: the narration was sublime. Most often, I find the use of voice-over distracting and even lazy, but here is just fit the mold, considering how quiet Crane was even though it was obvious he internalized so many of his feelings. The ending was particular beautiful, as he narrates somberly over a blindingly white background.

It's a really great film, full of moments with stylistic flourishes that elevate the film, like showing the different haircuts of the day, Crane's life flashing before his eyes (with one moment, that is), and the aforementioned final sequence. Some of these are small little moments, and others are quite important in the narrative, but they build a sense of an ennui-laced atmosphere where the characters feels the impetus to change something in his life. 8/10.

Thanks for the recommendation!

[soitgoes...]

Since you said this:


I have very limited experience with shorts, but this is my favorite now.
I will recommend this. (http://www.nfb.ca/film/begone_dull_care_caprice_coule urs)

[Sycophant]

Meanwhile, Double Suicide is good, eh, KF? I just got that in the mail a couple weeks ago, purchased on a total whim.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Meanwhile, Double Suicide is good, eh, KF? I just got that in the mail a couple weeks ago, purchased on a total whim.

YES! One of my favorites. Made my top 100, I believe. Be sure to let me know what you thought. I tend to miss reactions now that I don't watch films very often.

[Watashi]

Speaking of animated shorts, watch this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9u7WiDBek4).

'Tis only 6 minutes.

[elixir]

Rope (Alfred Hitchcock, 1948)
Recommended by: balmakboor
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_OCwKhyxai2s/RiaI7vfCmrI/AAAAAAAAAa0/qG2AqyuB1hA/s400/rope.jpg

The thing that most captured my attention--and engaged me throughout its runtime--in this movie is certainly its formal precision; it is very technically impressive. The wit found in much of Hitchcock's film was there, and the set location itself was detailed and authentic. I didn't find the suspense to be amazingly tight (not that it was poor though), and the story was quite simple. The themes it explores aren't really breaking new ground and it's not really done in a complex manner, but how it's done is what makes this film good. Also, I read before about its homoerotic subtext, but I think I would have caught it without it, because the relationship with Phillip and Brandon just made it clear. And though the story itself wasn't too deep, the change in Rupert (Jimmy Stewart) at the end was interesting if perhaps too explicitly stated.

The way the long shots give a sense of continuity to the narrative makes the film very fluid, and it is quite engaging to see such technical greatness. I can only imagine how hard the crew had to work to get everything in place for these meticulously crafted long shots. So, I found myself enjoying the moving on a surface level with the dialogue and wit, but on a deeper level as someone who appreciates a bit of experimentation with film. Hitchcock doesn't forgo his usual suspense--even though it was a bit lacking in this film--in the name of the experiment, so I was able to enjoy the story along with its formal precision.

The film is never unpredictable really, and it certainly doesn't match up to Hitchcock's greats, but it's a good film (and nothing more to me). The story itself is very simple as are the themes it explores (though perhaps its homoeroticism was more explicit for its times), but as I've said already quite a few times, it's worth watching to see the great director take on this technical experiment. 7/10.

Thanks for the recommendation!

[balmakboor]

Rope (Alfred Hitchcock, 1948)
Recommended by: balmakboor
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_OCwKhyxai2s/RiaI7vfCmrI/AAAAAAAAAa0/qG2AqyuB1hA/s400/rope.jpg

The thing that most captured my attention--and engaged me throughout its runtime--in this movie is certainly its formal precision...

Thanks. I think my favorite bits are the swinging door rope trick, the cutting hand on champagne glass, and when the camera watches the housekeeper almost reveal the surprise too soon.

It is a fascinating technical feat. The long takes were difficult to pull off, especially with the ungainly Technicolor camera. It was very large and moving it about smoothly proved to be something even beyond Hitchcock. The acting feels stiff at times. The cast was probably afraid because any goof meant repeating up to 8 minutes of work. But what intrigues me is that Hitchcock really didn't change his style much at all. He didn't suddenly become Welles or Visconti or something. He always shows us what -- and only what -- he wants us to see at any moment.

I always find it funny reading about the movie where the critic opens by talking about how the film was shot in 10 minute takes and then proceeds to describe the "shot" of Phillip noticing the rope hanging out of the chest, the "shot" of Phillip cutting his hand on the glass, the "shot" of the books tied up with rope, etc. It's as if Hitchcock achieved montage without cutting. I don't even think average audiences notice the great length of the shots.

As for the gay subtext/text, it's of course very obvious today with keeping the curtains shut while they do "it," smoking cigarettes after they do "it," and speaking about knowing "it" was over when "he went limp." Hard to imagine, but it wasn't obvious at all in 1948. One thing that always gets me is how the gay couple is portrayed like a stereotypical straight couple with the calm, rational "male" partner and the unstable, overly emotional "female" partner. It's like a gay couple could only be imagined as a hysterical variation on the norm. (Of course, I've know gay and lesbian couples who really did fit this stereotype.)

Stewart's self-righteous speech at the end rings oddly hollow -- and maybe it was meant to. This is an intriguing passage from a great discussion:

"There's another question here, one that's implied by all of Brandon and Rupert's rhetoric about superiority. Is society truly structured to protect all equally, or are there certain "superior" classes that are placed above others? This last question is especially loaded within the context of a film where all the characters are obviously upper-class and privileged, where it seems apparent that in countless ways they are superior to the lower classes, in terms of wealth, status, opportunities, privilege and education. Brandon and Rupert, of course, view themselves as superior even in relation to these high-society aristocrats; at the very least, they believe that they possess superior taste and refinement to, say, Mrs. Atwater. But it's obvious that Mrs. Atwater, despite what Rupert regards as her lowbrow taste in culture, is herself a cultural and societal elite. In a way, it makes the film's surface message—that all lives are equal and equally worth protecting—ring somewhat hollow. What does a message like that mean in the context of a movie where all the characters belong to the "superior" class, where all the characters are elites and elitists?

"This is a very hermetic world, where everyone has gone to the same private schools and knows the same small circle of wealthy friends. Rupert and Brandon aren't different from Janet or Mr. Kentley (or, for that matter, David, the victim) in class, only in degree; they're merely more elitist than even their elitist peers. It's hard to deny, in this context, that all people within society are not treated equally, that some are placed on higher rungs than others, that there are hierarchies in which the privileged few are given greater material goods and opportunities. By emphasizing the class barriers that fence these people off from the rest of the world, the film is both providing the basis for Brandon's arguments and confirming his impression that he's in an elevated station. He doesn't possess the moral superiority he believes he does, but Brandon—who obviously comes from a wealthy family and can afford a servant and a fancy apartment with a panoramic view—is unquestionably not one of the masses..."

The whole discussion. (http://www.slantmagazine.com/house/2010/05/the-conversations-minor-hitchcock/)

[Raiders]

As for the gay subtext/text, it's of course very obvious today with keeping the curtains shut while they do "it," smoking cigarettes after they do "it," and speaking about knowing "it" was over when "he went limp." Hard to imagine, but it wasn't obvious at all in 1948.

Not sure how true that is. Despite passing Code, the play the film is adapted from was known to be based off the Leopold and Loeb case and the film itself was banned in many towns. I suppose the innuendos which you cite above (which can be arguable) were not so noticed, but the subtext was always pretty obvious to people.

As for the final speech, I don't think it is "hollow" as much as it is coldly necessary. It is to remind everyone that even if we don't want to believe it, the truth is all human life is sacred. I think ultimately the point is that life, in a vacuum, has no intrinsic value and considering all is subject to debate and opinion and theory, nobody can assign a specific value to what is lost or gained when a life is taken. I think the hollow feeling comes from Stewart's own intonation; that he realizes in exposing his students' minds to his own admiration for Nietzsche and that, expunged of morality, murder is in itself an art form, he has opened this door. His whole lifetime of teaching has been tainted and destroyed.

I think the setting is important in that it makes such distinctions as the two murderers make (well, Brandon at least) seem all the more subjective, argumentative and short-sighted.

[balmakboor]

I was thinking about the "how queer" line in Rope and went off to read about the history of the word. Pretty fascinating and I didn't know that the term has had homosexual connotations for as long as it has. The semantic shift occur around the time of its use in a 1904 Sherlock Holmes story. It's been around since the 16th century meaning roughly a person with mild derangement or who exhibits socially inappropriate behaviour. It was in 1990 with Queer Nation's pamphlet "Queers Read This" that an effort began to reappropriate the term by the LGBT community.

Why do I write all this? Because I was skeptical actually that the use of the word in Rope meant what it does today. But clearly it did.