MC Yearly Consensus - 1998

[Eleven]

Submit your five favorite films from this year and in a week I will give you a top ten. IMDb dates will be used.

The point system is as follows

1st Place-5 points
2nd Place-4 points
3rd Place-3.5 points
4th Place-3 points
5th Place-2.5 points

There will be no restrictions on short films. A minimum of three films must be listed. You may edit your post freely up until the time that the thread is locked, which will be in about a week. I will give at least 24 hours warning before tallying votes.

You may begin now.

IMDB Power Search (http://www.imdb.com/list)

[Spinal]

1. Kirikou and the Sorceress
2. The Celebration
3. Run Lola Run
4. Fucking Amal
5. Perfect Blue

I'm leaving out The Humiliated because I think only DavidSeven has seen it besides me.

[Eleven]

1. Rushmore
2. 42 Up
3. The Hole
4. Flowers of Shanghai
5. Perfect Blue

EDIT: Forgot about the Hou. The Big Lebowski is now a HM.

[Raiders]

1. The Thin Red Line
2. Beloved
3. The Dreamlife of Angels
4. The Quiet Family
5. Babe: Pig in the City

Regrets:

Velvet Goldmine
Show Me Love (Fucking Amal)
Out of Sight
Dark City
The Apple

[Sycophant]

1. The Truman Show
2. After Life
3. The Big Lebowski
4. Rushmore
5. The Bird People in China

6. Babe II: Pig in the City
7. Love & Pop
8. April Story
9. Run Lola Run
10. A Hero Never Dies

OH HAI. This year possessed some amazing films, and that's just from what I've seen. In many years, any of the those could end up in a top five. It actually really pains me to put Babe II and Love & Pop in the non-scoring category.

[Yxklyx]

1. Run Lola Run (Tom Tykwer)
2. The Celebration (Thomas Vinterberg)
3. Fucking Åmål (Lukas Moodysson)
4. Velvet Goldmine (Todd Haynes)
5. Lovers of the Arctic Circle (Julio Medem)


6. Pi (Darren Aronofsky)
7. Buffalo '66 (Vincent Gallo)
8. Kirikou and the Sorceress (Michel Ocelot)
9. Saving Private Ryan (Steven Spielberg)
10. Shakespeare in Love (John Madden)

[EyesWideOpen]

1. Rushmore
2. The Truman Show
3. A Bug's Life
4. The Bird People in China
5. Samurai Fiction

[Mysterious Dude]

1. Run Lola Run
2. The Celebration
3. Pleasantville
4. Primary Colors
5. The Prince of Egypt

6. The Truman Show
7. Pi
8. The Big Lebowski
9. A Simple Plan
10. Saving Private Ryan

[Russ]

1. Happiness
2. The Big Lebowski
3. Rushmore
4. A Bug's Life
5. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas

[Weeping_Guitar]

1. Rushmore
2. The Big Lebowski
3. Saving Private Ryan
4. Pleasantville
5. Shakespeare in Love

[Raiders]

... what the hell? Didn't Malick's film do really well at the MC awards? I'm still the only one to vote for it? Sheesh.

[Spinal]

... what the hell? Didn't Malick's film do really well at the MC awards? I'm still the only one to vote for it? Sheesh.

#18 for me.

[EyesWideOpen]

... what the hell? Didn't Malick's film do really well at the MC awards? I'm still the only one to vote for it? Sheesh.

I saw it back when it was in theaters and haven't seen it since so i don't remember much of it. My favorite Malick so far is The New World so that will make my top 5 of it's year.

[Watashi]

One of my favorite years.

1. Pleasantville
2. The Thin Red Line
3. Saving Private Ryan
4. The Truman Show
5. The Prince of Egypt

[Raiders]

Fans of Miike's Happiness of the Katakuris ought to check out Kim Ji-woon's wickedly awesome The Quiet Family, which Miike's film was unofficially based off.

[Stay Puft]

1. After Life
2. The Emperor and the Assassin
3. Perfect Blue
4. The Big Lebowski
5. Fucking Amal

[ledfloyd]

1. The Big Lebowski
2. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
3. Out of Sight
4. Dark City
5. 42 Up

[Philosophe_rouge]

1. Rushmore
2. Out of Sight
3. Kirikou et la sorciere
4. The Truman Show
5. Buffalo 66’

[soitgoes...]

1. Pleasantville (Gary Ross)
2. The Truman Show (Peter Weir)
3. The Big Lebowski (Joel Coen)
4. More (Mark Osborne)
5. The Thin Red Line (Terrence Malick)
-------------------------------------------------
6. Rushmore (Wes Anderson)
7. The Hole (Tsai Ming-liang)
8. Saving Private Ryan (Steven Spielberg)
9. The Lovers of the Arctic Circle (Julio Medem)
10. Buffalo '66 (Vincent Gallo)

[Kurious Jorge v3.1]

1. Rushmore
2. Buffalo '66
3. Fucking Amal
4. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
5. The Hole

[Boner M]

1. The Thin Red Line
2. Buffalo '66
3. Festen
4. Rushmore
5. The Dreamlife of Angels

With HM's to The Big Lebowski & Black Cat, White Cat.

[Qrazy]

Fantastic Year.

1. The Thin Red Line
2. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
3. Rushmore
4. More
5. Saving Private Ryan

HMs: Black Cat/White Cat, The Celebration and about a dozen others.

[koji]

1. The Celebration (Thomas Vinterberg)
2. The Red Violin (François Girard)
3. Run Lola Run (Tom Tykwer)
4. The Emperor and the Assassin (Kaige Chen)
5. Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (Richie)
****************************** ********************
6. Zero Effect (Kasdan)
7. Hillary and Jackie (Tucker)
8. The Dinner Game (Veber)
9. Croupier (Hodges)
10. The Interview (Craig Monahan)

[Stay Puft]

4. The Emperor and the Assassin (Kaige Chen)

Gah, forgot that was 98!

I re-arranged my list accordingly.

[Watashi]

Fantastic Year.

1. The Thin Red Line
2. Baraka
3. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
4. Rushmore
5. More

HMs: Black Cat/White Cat, The Celebration and about a dozen others.
Uh... Baraka is 1992.

I don't think More counts.

[soitgoes...]

I don't think More counts.
Why?

[Watashi]

Do we include animated shorts? In the last consensus, we didn't. It had to be over 30 minutes in length.

[Spinal]

Do we include animated shorts? In the last consensus, we didn't. It had to be over 30 minutes in length.

The following sentence has appeared in the first post of every single one of these we have posted:

"There will be no restrictions on short films."

[soitgoes...]

Do we include animated shorts? In the last consensus, we didn't. It had to be over 30 minutes in length.


Submit your five favorite films from this year and in a week I will give you a top ten. IMDb dates will be used.

The point system is as follows

1st Place-5 points
2nd Place-4 points
3rd Place-3.5 points
4th Place-3 points
5th Place-2.5 points

There will be no restrictions on short films. A minimum of three films must be listed. You may edit your post freely up until the time that the thread is locked, which will be in about a week. I will give at least 24 hours warning before tallying votes.

You may begin now.

IMDB Power Search (http://www.imdb.com/list)
:)

[Qrazy]

Uh... Baraka is 1992.

I don't think More counts.

Oh, I was just going by imdb but apparently there's another Baraka drifting around out there.

[soitgoes...]

Gah! Beaten to the punch.

[Watashi]

Does this mean I can include TV episodes as well?

[Kurosawa Fan]

1. The Big Lebowski
2. The Celebration (Festen)
3. The Thin Red Line
4. Rushmore
5. Out of Sight

[Spinal]

Does this mean I can include TV episodes as well?

Are the guidelines too complex? Is that what you're saying?

[Qrazy]

2. The Celebration (Festen)


While it's powerful it's something I don't ever really want to watch again so it misses the top five for me.

[Watashi]

Are the guidelines too complex? Is that what you're saying?
No. I just want to know what I can and cannot include. Would TV miniseries count (ala Band of Brothers?).

[Kurosawa Fan]

While it's powerful it's something I don't ever really want to watch again so it misses the top five for me.

It was a hard film to watch once, and it's not something I'm eager to revisit, but something that powerful and that emotional gets all the respect in the world from me, and had it not been for the brilliant Lebowski, it would've been my #1.

[Melville]

1. Rushmore
2. The Big Lebowski
3. Buffalo '66
4. The Thin Red Line
5. The Hole

[Spinal]

While it's powerful it's something I don't ever really want to watch again so it misses the top five for me.

The cinematography alone is worth watching it again in my opinion.

[Spinal]

No. I just want to know what I can and cannot include. Would TV miniseries count (ala Band of Brothers?).

If you personally feel that it constitutes a 'film', then sure. There's really no reason for us to have strict guidelines because it's sort of a self-policing issue. If nobody agrees with you, then it doesn't make the list. If enough people feel like you do, then it will.

[Yxklyx]

No. I just want to know what I can and cannot include. Would TV miniseries count (ala Band of Brothers?).

I'd say yes. We allowed The Decalogue at 550 minutes. BoB is 705 minutes. Where do we draw the line.

[Grouchy]

True, since The Decalogue was allowed, Band of Brothers should be allowed as well. No seasons of TV series allowed, though. There's a line, in the sand.

1. The Big Lebowski
2. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
3. The Miracle of P. Tinto
4. Ringu
5. Dark City

[Gizmo]

1. Truman Show
2. Saving Private Ryan
3. Pleasantville
4. Rushmore
5. Run, Lola, Run

[Qrazy]

The cinematography alone is worth watching it again in my opinion.

Ehhh, what it delivers functionally is somewhat counter-ballasted by the general looking like ass-ness of the entire experience. I agree the shots are purposive, but I'd argue that the performances and the editing really adds must of the punch to the piece, much more so than composition, mise-en-scene or lighting (the crudeness of the latter obviously being part of the point thematically and theoretically, as a dogme film).

[baby doll]

1. The Thin Red Line (Terrence Malick)
2. Pleasantville (Gary Ross)
3. Eternity and a Day (Theo Angelopoulos)
4. Fin aoùt, début septembre (Olivier Assayas)
5. Rushmore (Wes Anderson)
6. Secret défense (Jacques Rivette)
7. Lovers of the Arctic Circle (Julio Medem)
8. Flowers of Shanghai (Hou Hsiao-hsien)
9. Black Cat, White Cat (Emir Kusturica)
10. Seul contre tous (Gaspar Noé)
bubblin' under...
11. The Big Lebowski (Joel Coen)
12. Conte d'automne (Eric Rohmer)
Need to re-see: After Life (Hirokazu Kore-eda); New Rose Hotel (Abel Ferrara)

I haven't seen either of my top two in ages (or Lovers of the Arctic Circle for that matter), although I saw Days of Heaven again recently for the first time in almost six years and was surprised at how well it holds up.

[Spinal]

Ehhh, what it delivers functionally is somewhat counter-ballasted by the general looking like ass-ness of the entire experience. I agree the shots are purposive, but I'd argue that the performances and the editing really adds must of the punch to the piece, much more so than composition, mise-en-scene or lighting (the crudeness of the latter obviously being part of the point thematically and theoretically, as a dogme film).

I'm not talking about the lighting or the mise-en-scene. I'm saying that there is a tremendous amount of creativity in where the camera is placed and how it moves. That said, I very much like the look of the film. It serves the story well.

[baby doll]

(the crudeness of the latter obviously being part of the point thematically and theoretically, as a dogme film).I'd just like to point out the error of assuming there's a theory behind the dogme95 manifesto.

[Spinal]

I'd just like to point out the error of assuming there's a theory behind the dogme95 manifesto.

Just a cheap crack or do you really believe this?

[MacGuffin]

I'd just like to point out the error of assuming there's a theory behind the dogme95 manifesto.

:crazy:

[Qrazy]

I'd just like to point out the error of assuming there's a theory behind the dogme95 manifesto.

Hehe, Von Trier needed some way to get his rocks off.

[Qrazy]

A tremendous amount of creativity in where the camera is placed and how it moves.

I know it's a fairly vague term in film theory, but that's what I meant by mise-en-scene (versus the tonal or superordinate visual categorization it is also used by other film theorists/critics to label).

[Spinal]

I know it's a fairly vague term in film theory, but that's what I meant by mise-en-scene (versus the tonal or superordinate visual categorization it is also used by other film theorists/critics to label).

Ah, OK. I'm not a film theorist. I have a theatre background and I'm used to it meaning how everything looks on stage. So I thought you were talking about art direction or something.

[baby doll]

Just a cheap crack or do you really believe this?I'm far more sympathetic to Lars Trier than most, because he makes good films (sometimes. I wasn't wild about The Boss of it All, just because it wasn't that funny or memorable), but any kind of grand manifesto coming from a guy who adds a von to his name has to be taken with a grain of salt--to say nothing of the most dubious aesthetic in the history of dubious aesthetics. How is lazy technique supposed to liberate cinema (yeah, good lighting and tripods are what's killing movies), or add a new level of realism? Is realism necessarily a good thing? Trier's own best films are deliberately anti-naturalistic and allegorical.

[Spinal]

I'm far more sympathetic to Lars Trier than most, because he makes good films (sometimes. I wasn't wild about The Boss of it All, just because it wasn't that funny or memorable), but any kind of grand manifesto coming from a guy who adds a von to his name has to be taken with a grain of salt--to say nothing of the most dubious aesthetic in the history of dubious aesthetics. How is lazy technique supposed to liberate cinema (yeah, good lighting and tripods are what's killing movies), or add a new level of realism? Is realism necessarily a good thing? Trier's own best films are deliberately anti-naturalistic and allegorical.

So you agree that there is a theory. Just not one you take seriously or agree with.

[baby doll]

Ah, OK. I'm not a film theorist. I have a theatre background and I'm used to it meaning how everything looks on stage. So I thought you were talking about art direction or something.But doesn't the term literally mean in French how everything is arranged on stage (a metteur en scene would basically be some one who puts things on the stage, including people)? One of the reasons Louis Feuillade is one of the greatest directors who ever lived is his ability to guide the viewer very subtly through these very intricate ensemble shots without moving his camera or cutting.

[baby doll]

So you agree that there is a theory. Just not one you take seriously or agree with.I agree that without a manifesto and the surrounding media hoopla, The Celebration would not have been accepted to the Cannes film festival.

[Spinal]

But doesn't the term literally mean in French how everything is arranged on stage (a metteur en scene would basically be some one who puts things on the stage, including people)? One of the reasons Louis Feuillade is one of the greatest directors who ever lived is his ability to guide the viewer very subtly through these very intricate ensemble shots without moving his camera or cutting.

Yes, I am aware of what the term means. I was not sure how it was being used here in regards to film. I have never heard of it being used in regards to where the camera is placed and moved, which is what Qrazy was saying he meant.

[baby doll]

Yes, I am aware of what the term means. I was not sure how it was being used here in regards to film. I have never heard of it being used in regards to where the camera is placed and moved, which is what Qrazy was saying he meant.But I don't think that's correct, either, since somebody like Feuillade doesn't move his camera at all. And then there's the whole issue of constructive montage, where space is created by eyelines. I think a better way to conceive of it is to begin with the idea that there is an environment in which a given scene takes place, and that there is a certain continuity or discontinuity in how the elements in that particular environment are placed in relation to one another.

[Qrazy]

But doesn't the term literally mean in French how everything is arranged on stage (a metteur en scene would basically be some one who puts things on the stage, including people)? One of the reasons Louis Feuillade is one of the greatest directors who ever lived is his ability to guide the viewer very subtly through these very intricate ensemble shots without moving his camera or cutting.

It's been used by so many people so many different ways that it's lost a lot of meaning, but I tend to use it when referring to how the camera moves as well as to how objects/people move/are moved in the frame. I predominantly use it in reference to camera movement and camera movement in relation to object movement because object movement alone I feel is more concretely and coherently labeled as blocking (although it certainly is also mise-en-scene, I feel making blocking the subordinate category is clearer). But yeah, everything plays off one another such that in a moving shot what I would once have referred to the still shot's composition, I now prefer to allocate the framing of the moving shot to mise-en-scene.

[Qrazy]

But I don't think that's correct, either, since somebody like Feuillade doesn't move his camera at all. And then there's the whole issue of constructive montage, where space is created by eyelines. I think a better way to conceive of it is to begin with the idea that there is an environment in which a given scene takes place, and that there is a certain continuity or discontinuity in how the elements in that particular environment are placed in relation to one another.

Well if we're referring to good editing to create the space and to create tension (like Eisenstein's works or Maltese Falcon) then it would be better to refer to excellent edits or use of montage than mise-en-scene (in my opinion at least). I mean that's what we're talking about here, how the term is a very vague one and has been used by different people to mean different things. Yeah you can have great mise-en-scene in still shots... Kubrick, Kurosawa, especially Ozu do it all the time also... but you can also just refer to that as great blocking... as I said I think in those cases it's clearer to do so than to resort to a vaguery like mise-en-scene. However, when meaning is created both by movement of the actors and movement of the camera in relation to the actors than I can't think of any better term to use to describe that meaning creation than mise-en-scene.

[dreamdead]

1. The Thin Red Line
2. Festen (Celebration)
3. Flowers of Shanghai
4. The Hole
5. Run Lola Run

Apparently Affliction was '97...

[MacGuffin]

1. Rushmore (Wes Anderson)
2. The Big Lebowski (Coen Brothers)
3. Small Soldiers (Joe Dante)

[monolith94]

1. Rushmore
2. Perfect Blue
3. The Big Lebowski
4. Elizabeth
5. Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels

[origami_mustache]

1. Bullet Ballet
2. The Hole
3. The Thin Red Line
4. The Big Lebowski
5. Rushmore

Run Lola Run
Pi
Flowers of Shanghai
After Life
Buffalo '66
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
Happiness
Saving Private Ryan

[Ezee E]

Damn, '98 is a solid year:

1. Saving Private Ryan
2. The Big Lebowski
3. There's Something About Mary
4. Run Lola Run
5. He Got Game
--
6. Ronin
7. Buffalo '66
8. The Thin Red Line
9. A Simple Plan
10. The Truman Show

Realistically, Thin Red Line is probably in the Top 5, but I want Saving Private Ryan to get more points... Guess I'm lying.

[Raiders]

Realistically, Thin Red Line is probably in the Top 5, but I want Saving Private Ryan to get more points

:|

[Ezee E]

:|
Indeed.

[Watashi]

:|
They're both pretty equal.

It's like comparing Cinnamon Toast Crunch to Lucky Charms. They're both delicious.

[EyesWideOpen]

They're both pretty equal.

It's like comparing Cinnamon Toast Crunch to Lucky Charms. They're both delicious.

Lucky Charms wears out it's welcome about halfway through the bowl where as Cinnamon Toast Crunch is fantastic throughout and leaves you yummy cinnamon milk.

[Ezee E]

Lucky Charms wears out it's welcome about halfway through the bowl where as Cinnamon Toast Crunch is fantastic throughout and leaves you yummy cinnamon milk.
Whether or not this is an allegory to the films, it is completely true.

[Raiders]

Whether or not this is an allegory to the films, it is completely true.

Indeed, though I imagine we would relate the two cereals to the opposite films.

[Llopin]

1. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (Gilliam)
2. After Life (Kore-eda)
3. Christmas in August (Hur)
4. Fucking Amal (Moodysson)
5. Eternity and a Day (Angelopoulos)
--------------
6. The Hole (Tsai)
7. The Dreamlife of Angels (Zonca)
8. Rushmore (Anderson)
9. Los Amantes del CÃ*rculo Polar (Medem)
10. Art Museum by the Zoo (Lee)
11. Unlucky Monkey (Sabu)
12. Love & Pop (Anno)
13. El Milagro de P. Tinto (Fesser)
14. Conte d'Automne (Rohmer)
15. Barrio (Aranoa)

[MadMan]

This is one of my favorite years for film, and is just flat out fantastic also. PS: Although I did see some really horrible films from this year also. My Bottom 5 for 1998 is the complete polar opposite of my Top 5, as the Top 5 is all 100s and 90s while the bottom 5 is all below 20.

1. The Big Lebowski
2. Rushmore
3. Saving Private Ryan
4. The Truman Show
5. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
6. Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels
7. Ronin
8. Small Soldiers
9. Blade
10. Zero Effect

[Yum-Yum]

1. Run Lola Run
2. Fucking Åmål
3. Henry Fool
4. Happiness
5. Buffalo '66

6. Rushmore
7. The Big Lebowski
8. Cabaret Balkan
9. Pi
10. The Celebration

[Spinal]

Top Songs of 1998:

1. "Too Close", Next
2. "The Boy Is Mine", Brandy and Monica
3. "You're Still The One", Shania Twain
4. "Truly Madly Deeply", Savage Garden
5. "How Do I Live", LeAnn Rimes
6. "Together Again", Janet
7. "All My Life", K-Ci and JoJo
8. "Candle In The Wind 1997", Elton John
9. "Nice and Slow", Usher
10. "I Don't Want To Wait", Paula Cole

source: musicoutfitters.com

[Spinal]

Time Men of the Year for 1998:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v696/joel_harmon/1101981228_400.jpg

[Derek]

1. The Big Lebowski
2. Rushmore
3. Saving Private Ryan
4. The Truman Show
5. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
6. Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels
7. Ronin
8. Small Soldiers
9. Blade
10. Zero Effect

WTF?

[Kurosawa Fan]

It pains me that I couldn't fit Small Soldiers into my list. It doesn't stand a chance anyway.

[Robby P]

1. The Thin Red Line
2. Run Lola Run
3. Out of Sight
4. A Simple Plan
5. Gods and Monsters

Lots of good movies from this year.

[Lazlo]

1. Saving Private Ryan
2. Rushmore
3. Pleasantville
4. Happiness
5. The Thin Red Line

[Spinal]

The following television programs debuted in 1998:

Dawson's Creek
Sex and the City
That 70's Show
Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? (UK)
The King of Queens
Will and Grace
Felicity
Sports Night
Charmed
Becker
The Powerpuff Girls

The #1 rated program in the Nielsen ratings for 1998:

Seinfeld

[MadMan]

It pains me that I couldn't fit Small Soldiers into my list. It doesn't stand a chance anyway.Don't worry about it. I got yah covered. I think its awesome that fans of it exist on this site.


WTF?Nobody uses the colors on this site. I like 'em.

[MacGuffin]

It pains me that I couldn't fit Small Soldiers into my list. It doesn't stand a chance anyway.

Yes! It's a wonderful little movie.

[Derek]

Don't worry about it. I got yah covered. I think its awesome that fans of it exist on this site.

Nobody uses the colors on this site. I like 'em.

So there really is not method to your madness then?

[MadMan]

So there really is not method to your madness then?Well there is in that I try to use certain colors for certain films. I only use the colors for these lists though.

[Sycophant]

Well there is in that I try to use certain colors for certain films. I only use the colors for these lists though.
MadMan, your war on my retinas will not be tolerated.

I will continue to privately grimace whenever I see you pull out such wildly abrasive colors.

[Pop Trash]

1. The Truman Show
2. Shakespeare in Love
3. Saving Private Ryan
4. Out of Sight
5. A Simple Plan

6. The Big Lebowski
7. There's Something About Mary
8. Pleasantville
9. Pecker
10.Show Me Love (AKA Fucking Amal)

[Eleven]

#10

http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/6738/10xo8.jpg

Fucking Åmål

Director: Lukas Moodysson

Countries: Sweden / Denmark

The sixteen year old Agnes has been living in the small Swedish town of Åmål with her family for one year and half, but she has no friends. She secretly loves her popular school mate Elin, a girl bored with the lack of perspective of Åmål. In Agnes's birthday party, Elin kisses her and changes their lives.

Although set in the Swedish town Åmål, not a single scene was actually shot there. All exteriors were filmed in Trollhättan, almost 100 miles away. The title of the movie was a phrase director Lukas Moodysson wrote on the first page of his script. Somebody noticed it sounded like a good title and Moodysson used it officially as the movie's title from then on.

“Instead of earnest narration or precocious coming-of-age speeches, Moodysson uses intimate close-ups to illuminate his characters' emotional uncertainty. With her high forehead and grave gaze, the beautiful Rebecca Liljeberg gives a wonderfully expressive performance in the largely reactive role of Agnes. Equally arresting is Alexandra Dahlström's fidgety, frustrated Elin, a bottle-blonde sulk of thwarted rebellion.� -- Liese Spencer

[dreamdead]

One can't discredit the wonderful juxtaposition of Foreigner and the awkward first kiss here in Fucking Amal. And there's something honest and transgressive about how Moodysson distills the big moment (leaving the bathroom) into something far more mundane in the chocolate milk scene.

[Watashi]

Off to an eh start.

[Eleven]

#9

http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/3895/16749020lw7.jpg

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas

Director: Terry Gilliam

Country: USA

The big-screen version of Hunter S. Thompson's seminal psychedelic classic about his road trip across Western America as he and his large Samoan lawyer searched desperately for the "American dream"... they were helped in large part by the huge amount of drugs and alcohol kept in their convertible, The Red Shark.

While Hunter S. Thompson developed a strong friendship with Johnny Depp and heartily approved of his performance, he once said that if he ever saw anyone acting the way Depp does in the film, he would probably hit them with a chair. Thompson cameos at the Jefferson Airplane show. Duos previously considered for Raoul Duke and Dr. Gonzo: Jack Nicholson and Marlon Brando, and Dan Akroyd and John Belushi.

“These are the rocked-out, half-crazed spokesmen of an insane generation, and it's not until later in the movie that we realize that (a) Thompson's a genius, recognizing the bigger picture and the zombification of the world around him (Las Vegas is the capitalist hub, the gaudy emblem, of American consumption); and (b) his lawyer may be a roving psycho who can't be trusted with a knife, a gun, a chair, or a television set (he'll just smash ‘em, and maybe smash some people too), but he's also a real lawyer with his finger on the pulse of Chilean activism and human rights. They're hellish figures, grotesquely warped by Gilliam's wide angle lenses, but they're positively heroes when faced off against natty politicians, lazy Americans, piggish cops, lounge lizards (who, in an atypical Gilliam flourish, actually morph into lizards), and dilettante artists.� – Jeremiah Kipp

[Spinal]

I did not see that coming.

[dreamdead]

Wow. Really? Hrm. It's not a bad film in my opinion, but... wow.

[Eleven]

#8

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/3366/18927327li9.jpg

Pleasantville

Director: Gary Ross

Country: USA

A brother and sister from the 1990s are sucked into their television set and suddenly find themselves trapped in a "Leave it to Beaver" style 1950's television show, complete with loving parents, old fashioned values, and an overwhelming amount of innocence and naivete. Not sure how to get home, they integrate themselves into this "backwards" society and slowly bring some color to this black and white world. But as innocence fades, the two teens begin to wonder if their 90s outlook is really to be preferred.

Since every scene from the middle of the movie on had to be in some way digitally changed to have black and white characters interact with characters who are in color, technically this film had the most digital effects shots until Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace. Bud brings Mr. Johnson an art book from the library titled "The World Of Art" by an author named Edward Bissell. The book is purely fictional being made just as a prop for this film. Though many believe that the shot of Bud raising his arms up in triumph during a rainstorm is an homage to The Shawshank Redemption, Gary Ross thought it was an original idea, and didn't realize the connection until after the film was released.

“The film observes that sometimes pleasant people are pleasant simply because they have never, ever been challenged. That it's scary and dangerous to learn new ways. The movie is like the defeat of the body snatchers: The people in color are like former pod people now freed to move on into the future. We observe that nothing creates fascists like the threat of freedom.� -- Roger Ebert

[Spinal]

Speaking of films that are "eh".

[Watashi]

8 spots too low.

[Eleven]

#7

http://img390.imageshack.us/img390/1751/20572848ug1.jpg

Festen [The Celebration]

Director: Thomas Vinterberg

Countries: Demark / Sweden

A darkly comic journey into forbidden family territory. No one can ignore a person like Danish patriarch Helge Klingenfeldt. So on his sixtieth birthday, a celebration is required. Friends and relatives scurry to the country estate. Eventually, every family's secrets will come out. And since his twin sister's death two months ago, prodigal son Christian is more haunted than usual. The time has come for the darkest family skeleton to be revealed, and it must be done in their father's style - with flair, and malice.

Since this is a Dogme-film, there cannot be any non diegetic sounds added, no post-production. The camera also needs to be hand-held. So when Christian falls to the floor in the reception and sees his sister, Christian himself had to hold the camera when falling. To achieve the "dizzy" sound, the original cameraman swung the microphone around in the air. Vinterberg "confessed" to having covered a window during the shooting of one scene, which is a breaking of two Dogme rules -- no bringing props onto the set, and no use of special lighting.

“Vinterberg establishes the potency of the Dogme approach early on, introducing characters and their various relationships in the most naturalistic way possible—outside of some effective, stylized editing—at times recreating the sort of home movie that might have been made at the event anyway. The segments that follow Thomsen's announcement, however, make the greatest impression, as the gathering's dynamic, its desire to restore order against Thomsen's best efforts to push it toward catharsis, plays itself out. Whether a genre or not, plenty of films have been made about dark family secrets, but few are as honest and moving as The Celebration.� – Keith Phipps

[dreamdead]

Excellent. This one still lingers at the recesses of my memory some five years later. Good to see it's still remembered. Though I do question whether it's a "comedy" on any level...

[Spinal]

Excellent. This one still lingers at the recesses of my memory some five years later. Good to see it's still remembered. Though I do question whether it's a "comedy" on any level...

Really? I thought it was frequently quite funny.

[Eleven]

#6

http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/1150/77435059vt1.jpg

Saving Private Ryan

Director: Steven Spielberg

Country: USA

Following the Allied invasion of Normandy, two brothers lay dead in the wake of the onslaught. Meanwhile, in New Guinea, a third brother has been killed fighting the Japanese. After the Army General Staff learns that a fourth brother is missing in the French countryside, a rescue mission is ordered to find the young soldier and return him safely home. The mission is mounted by a veteran Ranger Captain commanding a squad of men who have mixed feelings about risking their lives to save Private Ryan.

All the principal actors underwent several days of grueling army training - except for Matt Damon, who was spared so that the other actors would resent him, and would convey that resentment in their performances. The role of Caparzo was written just for Vin Diesel after director Steven Spielberg saw Diesel's independent film "Strays", which was also Vin Diesel's directorial, writing, producing, and lead acting debut. Many veterans of D-Day have congratulated director Steven Spielberg for the film's authenticity, including actor James Doohan, best known as Scotty from "Star Trek." Doohan lost the middle finger of his right hand and was wounded in the leg during the war. He commended Spielberg for not leaving out any gory details. This is the last film edited on a non-digital editing system to win an Academy Award for editing.

“Spielberg paints everything in desaturated, khaki tones; dirt clods hang suspended, jittering in the frigid air while bullets impact and bodies sag and fall like sad, untethered marionettes. On top of this epic, disturbing realism, of course, is Saving Private Ryan's genuine sense of loss and humanity; it's perhaps the most humanistic war film since J'Accuse or All Quiet on the Western Front. A bitter, bloody masterpiece with adrenalized emotions and hyper-realized images, this is perhaps as close to battle as any sane human being should ever hope to tread.� – Marc Savlov

[Eleven]

#5

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/9540/98490755bu8.jpg

The Truman Show

Director: Peter Weir

Country: USA

Truman Burbank lives a happy life. However, what he doesn't know is that his life is actually the focus of a reality TV show aired since his birth that he's the star, his hometown is a giant set piece, and everyone around him is an actor going by a script.

Director Peter Weir filmed in the 1.66:1 ratio to make it feel more like a television show. People on the set were forbidden from uttering phrases from Carrey's past "silly" movies. The motto on the double archway in the Seahaven town center is UNUS PRO OMNIBUS, OMNES PRO UNO: "One for all, all for one" in Latin, thus fitting the premise of the Truman Show.

“But Niccol and Weir have also latched onto a great, much bigger subject: the way the media has eroded any separation between our public and private lives. All sorts of cultural signposts zip through your brain as you watch The Truman Show: programs where people agree to live their lives in front of cameras; talk shows where guests reveal some embarrassing secret in front of an audience; those terrifying "I'm going to Disneyworld!" ads that convert private moments into advertising space; the people on the Internet who've set up cameras to broadcast their lives to whoever wants to log on and watch. The Truman Show goes beyond those examples of voluntary exhibitionism to get at the spongelike nature of media, how it absorbs everything that comes into contact with it, recasting and simplifying experience into commodity.� -- Charles Taylor

[Eleven]

#4

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/9070/36016055nf2.jpg

Run, Lola, Run

Director: Tom Tykwer

Country: Germany

At home, Lola gets a call from her frightened boyfriend who has lost a large amount of gang money he was smuggling into the country. His only chance of staying alive is if she can get replacement cash to him in twenty minutes. Lola decides to try her father at the bank where he works. But exactly how things will turn out depends crucially, almost to the second, on how she sets off on her errand.

It took nearly five weeks to persuade a supermarket in Berlin to allow them to shoot the robbery sequence. The shot where the roulette ball lands on 20 was not a trick shot - the crew simply filmed the ball dropping into the wheel, and it hit 20 on one of their first takes. This film contains about 1581 transitions (edits, dissolves, fades, wipes, etc) in 71 minutes of action (i.e. excluding the credits, and pre-credits sequence). This equates to an Average Shot Length of about 2.7 seconds. Interestingly, the editing is relatively slower towards the end of the film. For most contemporary films, the opposite is the norm.

“Run Lola Run is something like a board game played on multiple levels at once; by the time Tykwer's done noodling with various permutations of reality and possibility, he has fashioned a hyperkinetic meditation on chaos, chance and the more mysterious qualities of time. In Tykwer's eyes, the means are what justify the end: His bag of tricks includes snappy jump cuts, dizzying aerial shots, superfast cutting and animation sequences that bring back that feeling of having eaten too much Trix cereal while parked in front of Saturday-morning cartoons.� -- Stephanie Zacharek

[Qrazy]

Yeah, after seeing Kieslowski's Blind Chance I lost what little love I had for Run Lola Run.

[Eleven]

#3

http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/7535/99638688qr8.jpg

The Thin Red Line

Director: Terrence Malick

Countries: Canada / USA

In 1943, the first major U.S. offensive of World War II is drawing to a close on the South Pacific island of Guadalcanal. To put an end to this campaign, the United States Army arrives with a full division of troops and equipment, deployed to break the last resistence of the Japanese. The exploits of this Division are seen from a number of perspectives amongst the soldiers; to include a war weary Sergeant, a power hungry Colonel, a Private who has known only desertion and AWOL, and a Company Commander is struggling with his abilities as a leader.

The original cut of the film was just under 6 hours in length. Over a million feet of film was shot. Billy Bob Thornton recorded a narration for the three-hour-plus version under the supervision of Malick. However, the final print of the film has voice-overs by eight of the main characters in the film; none of the narration from Thornton is in the final print. In addition, several other stars who filmed scenes were left on the cutting-room floor, including Bill Pullman, Gary Oldman, Lukas Haas, Viggo Mortensen and Mickey Rourke. Before pre-production began, Malick walked on foot across the entire southwest, stopping periodically to call producers Robert Michael Geisler and Grant Hill to talk about the meaning of the film.

“In the economy of images in The Thin Red Line, as in Days of Heaven, the visual "surplus" of shots of animal, bird, and plant life, of jungle, sky, water, texture, space, and light, impose metaphysical perspective and reaffirm an order and harmony in the world that makes a war pale in significance. That's not to say that by some perverse gesture the shots of blades of grass and fruit bats now take precedence over the narrative: on the contrary, the true film exists at the place where the narrative and the ineffable meet as equals. The interplay of the self-evidently fateful and the seemingly inconsequential or circumstantial holds the promise of authentic if transient metaphysical epiphany. To take an example: just before the fighting resumes on the hill, a young GI lying in the grass reaches out to touch a tiny leaf, whose delicate fronds gently close on contact. This interpolation, as immaterial as it is exquisite, is absolutely representative of Malick's cinematic sensibility.� -- Gavin Smith

[Eleven]

#2

http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/6925/13975427jv1.jpg

The Big Lebowski

Director: Joel Coen (and Ethan Coen)

Country: USA

Jeffrey "The Dude" Lebowski is the ultimate LA slacker, until one day his house is broken into and his rug is peed on by two angry gangsters who have mistaken him for Jeffrey Lebowski, the LA millionaire, whose wife owes some bad people some big money. The Dude becomes entangled in the plot when he goes to visit the real Lebowski in order to get some retribution for his soiled rug, and is recruited to be the liaison between Lebowski and the captors of his now "kidnapped" wife.

The screenplay was written with Jeff Bridges, John Goodman, Steve Buscemi and Sam Elliott in mind. The Dude never actually bowls. The Dude's shirt with Chinese characters and an Asian holding a baseball bat, worn during the scene in which the Big Lebowski describes Bunny's kidnapping, is the same shirt worn by Jeff Bridges in part of The Fisher King. The Dude says "man" 147 times in the movie, nearly 1.5 times a minute. Before filming a scene, Jeff Bridges would frequently ask the Coen brothers, "Did the Dude burn one on the way over?" If they said he had, he would rub his knuckles in his eyes before doing a take.

“Every performance from the cast is perfectly modulated here, making thinly written, but somehow fully conceived, characters come wildly alive. The Coens themselves are able to flex a bit more muscle than usual, creating a never-ending series of daft images and situations. Perhaps, it’s the dogged lack of profundity that makes the film so much more fun to me than their other works but The Big Lebowski might be the one Coen film where their distancing irony and snarky condescension toward their characters doesn’t bother me at all. They create a slightly altered reality here that seems wholly worthy of being taken with a grain of salt.� -- Jeremy Heilman

[Eleven]

#1

http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/8123/54430781ri3.jpg

Rushmore

Director: Wes Anderson

Country: USA

Max Fischer is a more than determined student at his prep school, Rushmore Academy where he oversees anything with the word "extra-curricular". He befriends a preschool teacher named Ms. Cross, whom he ends up falling in love with. Only to find things take a turn for the worst when his mentor, Herman Blume, an unhappy millionaire falls for her as well. As a result, their personal and professional lives spiral out of control.

In the scene where Max is picking up a crate of explosives, he shows the clerk his I.D. and tells him to "make it out to Ready Demolition, Tucson, Arizona,� a reference to Val Kilmer’s first scene in Heat. The pictures of Ms. Cross' dead husband in her bedroom are pictures of co-writer Owen Wilson. Bill Murray's character wears the same suit throughout the entire film. He just changes his shirt and tie, which are always the same color as each other. Murray also genuinely found the McCawley brothers, the two actors playing his sons and who were very much like their screen characters, annoying and many of the scenes where he lashes out at them and insults them were improvised. A shot of Max Fischer sitting on a go-kart wearing a pair of goggles is a recreation of a photograph taken in 1909 by French photographer Jacques Henri Lartigue, a child prodigy who started taking photographs at the age of 6.

“Adolescence is a big comic subject in American movies, but it's usually squandered with strident acting and other telegraphed effects. But Anderson, who wrote Rushmore with Owen Wilson, never allows the audience to lose its dignity either; the coolness of the comedy--like that of Buster Keaton, Jacques Tati, and Albert Brooks--respects us and characters alike. The pain and cruelty of adolescence aren't avoided, but the short-scene construction and gliding tempo prevent us from dwelling on them; the calm objectivity of a Keaton, Tati, or Brooks gazing at the world qualifies as a kind of measured wisdom, and Rushmore emulates this sane equipoise throughout.� -- Jonathan Rosenbaum

[Eleven]

Full Results
1. Rushmore 72
2. The Big Lebowski 56.5
3. The Thin Red Line 49
4. Run, Lola, Run 34
5. The Truman Show 32
6. Saving Private Ryan 30.5
7. The Celebration 28.5
8. Pleasantville 27.5
9. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas 25
10. Fucking Amal 19.5

Almost there
Out of Sight 16.5
Buffalo '66 16.5
The Hole 15.5

[Spinal]

Hmmm ... can't say that Rushmore really gets my blood pumping.

[Melville]

Somewhere in between numbers 8 and 4 I started to worry that my taste is completely at odds with that of my fellow Match Cutters. Luckily I love the top 3.

[baby doll]

Hmmm ... can't say that Rushmore really gets my blood pumping.Isn't that what a consensus is? A bunch of films people can live with but aren't blown away by?

[Spinal]

Isn't that what a consensus is? A bunch of films people can live with but aren't blown away by?

No. There are three films here that excite me greatly. Rushmore is just not one of them.

[dreamdead]

:|

I can see love and appreciation for Anderson's The Royal Tenenbaums, but I'm much more ambivalent about Rushmore. Would much rather see The Big Lebowski or especially TTRL at the top spot. Ah well.

And Qrazy, though I am cognizant of Kieslowski doing the whole reconfiguration of time and space in Blind Chance first, that film left without a flutter after viewing it. A strangely empty experience for me, which is probably the only Kieslowski film to leave me like that. Great opening ten minutes or so, though.

[Melville]

:|

I can see love and appreciation for Anderson's The Royal Tenenbaums, but I'm much more ambivalent about Rushmore.
I think Rushmore is not only Anderson's best movie, but one of the best movies. It has the perfect balance of whimsical melancholy and controlled aesthetic. Royal Tenenbaums, while great, is a bit too contrived in its whimsy and its aesthetic.

[Qrazy]

:|

I can see love and appreciation for Anderson's The Royal Tenenbaums, but I'm much more ambivalent about Rushmore. Would much rather see The Big Lebowski or especially TTRL at the top spot. Ah well.

And Qrazy, though I am cognizant of Kieslowski doing the whole reconfiguration of time and space in Blind Chance first, that film left without a flutter after viewing it. A strangely empty experience for me, which is probably the only Kieslowski film to leave me like that. Great opening ten minutes or so, though.

It certainly lacks the energy of Lola, but it makes up for it with greater thematic and aesthetic depth. The characterizations may not be as rich as other Kieslowski films but I still feel it has a lot going for it... more so than The Scar or No End.

And I wouldn't say it just did it first, Lola is essentially a remake of the film.

[Qrazy]

I think Rushmore is not only Anderson's best movie, but one of the best movies.

Ehh, while it's a great deal of fun, the film's deeper elements always struck me as somewhat thinly plumbed.

Don't get me wrong, I like it a great deal, but that's why I don't consider one of the best.

[baby doll]

No. There are three films here that excite me greatly. Rushmore is just not one of them.Well, Rushmore was in my top five, but mostly I was just happy that The Thin Red Line placed higher than Saving Private Ryan.

[Melville]

Ehh, while it's a great deal of fun, the film's deeper elements always struck me as somewhat thinly plumbed.

Don't get me wrong, I like it a great deal, but that's why I don't consider one of the best.
Well, we don't always want thick plumbing, right? I think part of the charm of the film is how light on its feet and hermetic it is; trying to more fully explore its deeper themes would just mar the tightness of its construction. But I see your point.

[Qrazy]

Well, we don't always want thick plumbing, right? I think part of the charm of the film is how light on its feet and hermetic it is; trying to more fully explore its deeper themes would just mar the tightness of its construction. But I see your point.

Well I find Tati for instance is able to maintain that lightness while still exploring the depth... but yeah it's still an excellent film.

So while I agree somewhat that Royal Tenenbaums is more self-conscious about it's visual style, I still find it explores it's themes and emotions more deeply than Rushmore.

[Melville]

Well I find Tati for instance is able to maintain that lightness while still exploring the depth... but yeah it's still an excellent film.
Actually, I was thinking of Tati as an example of my point. His films wear their themes on their sleeves. They still have a light tone, but their overt social commentary detracts from their compactness. Rushmore is like a monad; it has no windows. (How do you like that can of Leibniz?)

[Qrazy]

Actually, I was thinking of Tati as an example of my point. His films wear their themes on their sleeves. They still have a light tone, but their overt social commentary detracts from their compactness. Rushmore is like a monad; it has no windows. (How do you like that can of Leibniz?)

Very leibnice, but I can't say I agree. Rushmore has windows and depth, it just feels like a fairly surface examination to me. *shrug* Similar to the lead, it's more interested in it's own sound and fury ala a Vietnam set play than in it's quiet moments.

I feel it shares similar problems with something like Amelie where any attempts at being genuine are swept aside by cuteness, bombast and whimsy.

I'm not sure what you mean by Tati when you say detracts from their compactness.

[Grouchy]

I'm very happy with Fear and Loathing and specially Lebowski, though I wish it had been first. Haven't seen Rushmore, might do it soon.

[Melville]

Very leibnice, but I can't say I agree. Rushmore has windows and depth, it just feels like a fairly surface examination to me. *shrug* Similar to the lead, it's more interested in it's own sound and fury ala a Vietnam set play than in it's quiet moments.

I feel it shares similar problems with something like Amelie where any attempts at being genuine are swept aside by cuteness, bombast and whimsy.

I'm not sure what you mean by Tati when you say detracts from their compactness.
The social critique in Tati's films points to things outside of the films themselves, diverting our attention to those things, whereas Rushmore only points inward. It contains everything it needs: it constructs a specific world that is simultaneously natural enough for us to engage with the characters, but it is distinctly its own world, like in a fairy tale. Its characters, its aesthetic, and its story are all of a piece, inseparable from one another and independent of anything else. Not that I'm saying we can't relate to the characters or anything like that; the film invites us to relate to the characters, who are all emotionally well realized within (and via) the film's aesthetic (which isn't true of Amelie, in which the characters are primarily cute props within the cute world), even if their depths aren't plumbed.

I'll have to try to explain this better in my top 100.

[monolith94]

How exactly are the emotions of Amelie's characters not realized? If anything, Amelie is a more emotionally approachable character than Max Fischer: her desire for human connection is palpable and beautifully evoked.

Whatever, this list is great, I'm not going to complain about it at all.

[Duncan]

How exactly are the emotions of Amelie's characters not realized? If anything, Amelie is a more emotionally approachable character than Max Fischer: her desire for human connection is palpable and beautifully evoked.

Whatever, this list is great, I'm not going to complain about it at all.

Agree. I think it's a shame Amelie's reputation has somewhat diminished in recent years. I rewatched it a few months ago. It still got to me. I like Rushmore a lot too.

[monolith94]

Of course, I hold a special place in my heart for Amelie, having seen it in the movie theaters ON valentine's day.

[Melville]

How exactly are the emotions of Amelie's characters not realized? If anything, Amelie is a more emotionally approachable character than Max Fischer: her desire for human connection is palpable and beautifully evoked.
She seemed more like a precocious puppy dog begging for affection than a real person. I thought Max Fischer had a lot more nuance. Anyway, excise that parenthetical remark from my paragraph if you don't care for it.

[monolith94]

Well, I just don't understand how you could call her a "prop" when most of the elements of the film are in service of us understanding her, rather than her being in service of Jeunet's "world". For example, when she imagines dying alone and it is visualized in faux-newsreel footage. It just doesn't make sense to me. Oh, I'd agree that she isn't very much like a real person, but most people in movies... aren't.

[Bosco B Thug]

So while I agree somewhat that Royal Tenenbaums is more self-conscious about it's visual style, I still find it explores it's themes and emotions more deeply than Rushmore. Does it?

Maybe. I have an irrational bias against The Royal Tenenbaums after an aborted attempt to rewatch it recently. I wasn't feeling it and I haven't convinced myself since to return to it. But then I love Rushmore (happy and surprised to see it at the top), but it's been a good 2 years since I saw that one. I really liked The Darjeeling Limited, and a professor just showed a class that I'm in 15 minutes of The Life Aquatic to convince us how brilliantly Nietzchian it is. Man, I hate it when the urge for a director retrospective hits you. It's impractical but oh so tempting.

My ambivalence toward Amelie probably lies in the super-stylized approach, it tends to effectively estrange me from the story and characters. Could be my own problem, need to rewatch it anyway.

[Qrazy]

Agree. I think it's a shame Amelie's reputation has somewhat diminished in recent years. I rewatched it a few months ago. It still got to me. I like Rushmore a lot too.

I like them both a lot too, but the quality I mentioned is what separates very good/great to the best in my opinion. I wouldn't feel comfortable grouping either with the all time greatest... I seem to be repeating myself *beats dead horse once more*.

[Qrazy]

Does it?

Maybe. I have an irrational bias against The Royal Tenenbaums after an aborted attempt to rewatch it recently. I wasn't feeling it and I haven't convinced myself since to return to it. But then I love Rushmore (happy and surprised to see it at the top), but it's been a good 2 years since I saw that

And a professor just showed a class that I'm in 15 minutes of The Life Aquatic to convince us how brilliantly Nietzchian it is. Man, I hate it when the urge for a director retrospective hits you. It's impractical but oh so tempting.


Well I can understand when and why people love Rushmore more, because it's the funnier of the two. I'm not trying to say that's the only reason someone would prefer it, but I think it's a big factor.

I have a feeling I would despise your professor.

[Melville]

Well, I just don't understand how you could call her a "prop" when most of the elements of the film are in service of us understanding her, rather than her being in service of Jeunet's "world". For example, when she imagines dying alone and it is visualized in faux-newsreel footage. It just doesn't make sense to me. Oh, I'd agree that she isn't very much like a real person, but most people in movies... aren't.
I think, as Bosco said, the hyper-stylization distances me from the character. All the elements that show the world from her perspective just seem over top in their cuteness, never coalescing into a non-puppy-dog character; her character just seems like a prop to support all the little whimsical moments. (I also thought that the whimsical moments seemed too unnatural to actually be whimsical. I prefer my whimsy to just kind of slide right in there.)

[Qrazy]

I think, as Bosco said, the hyper-stylization distances me from the character. All the elements that show the world from her perspective just seem over top in their cuteness, never coalescing into a non-puppy-dog character; her character just seems like a prop to support all the little whimsical moments. (I also thought that the whimsical moments seemed too unnatural to actually be whimsical. I prefer my whimsy to just kind of slide right in there.)

Personally I prefer it to sidle up behind me and sodomize me viciously.

[MadMan]

MadMan, your war on my retinas will not be tolerated.

I will continue to privately grimace whenever I see you pull out such wildly abrasive colors.Oh fine. I'll use darker colors. Kill joy :P

Also I like this list. I actually want to see badly some of the films on here that I haven't, such as The Thin Red Line and Pleasantville.

[Qrazy]

Oh fine. I'll use darker colors. Kill joy :P

Also I like this list. I actually want to see badly some of the films on here that I haven't, such as The Thin Red Line and Pleasantville.

Prioritize the former although the latter is surprisingly solid.

[MadMan]

Prioritize the former although the latter is surprisingly solid.Yeah I plan on doing that. In all honesty I really want to see the latter simply to see why Wats loves it so much.

[Bosco B Thug]

Well I can understand when and why people love Rushmore more, because it's the funnier of the two. I'm not trying to say that's the only reason someone would prefer it, but I think it's a big factor. Probably. But also, my memory likes to tell me the emotions explored in Rushmore are more complex than those in The Royal Tenenbaums. I'll leave the matter of which one digs deeper until after I give them both a re-watch.


I have a feeling I would despise your professor. Hahaha, perhaps. S/he's big into Wes Anderson's moral flippancy, and less so but still thumbs up on momentous whimsy, but I cant say sodomy's high up on his/her list (although s/he did make us read Ginsberg's Howl).

S/he's cool, though, insights are communicated very lucidly. But then there was a large stretch of time where s/he'd always bring up and rhapsodize about There Will Be Blood as a positive example of things. You all could probably gather that that nearly killed me :P

[Llopin]

Actually, I always saw Lola Rennt as some kind of bastard remake of Sabu's Dangan Runner. Kieslowski's movie is not amon my favourites of his, but it certainly is a solid film.

[Boner M]

I always saw Run Lola Run as an elongated energy bar commercial.

[Qrazy]

Probably. But also, my memory likes to tell me the emotions explored in Rushmore are more complex than those in The Royal Tenenbaums. I'll leave the matter of which one digs deeper until after I give them both a re-watch.

Hahaha, perhaps. S/he's big into Wes Anderson's moral flippancy, and less so but still thumbs up on momentous whimsy, but I cant say sodomy's high up on his/her list (although s/he did make us read Ginsberg's Howl).

S/he's cool, though, insights are communicated very lucidly. But then there was a large stretch of time where s/he'd always bring up and rhapsodize about There Will Be Blood as a positive example of things. You all could probably gather that that nearly killed me :P

Is S/he a transvestite or... where's the confusion?

[Qrazy]

Actually, I always saw Lola Rennt as some kind of bastard remake of Sabu's Dangan Runner. Kieslowski's movie is not amon my favourites of his, but it certainly is a solid film.

Probably a cluster fuck of both... damn you Tykwer!!!

[Bosco B Thug]

Is S/he a transvestite or... where's the confusion? Oh, it was just for the sake of non-dislosure on a whim. If s/he was transgender in some way, I'd have typed (s)he, or He-She, or referred to him only with a proper nominative like "Alternative Gender Man."

[Grouchy]

Oh, it was just for the sake of non-dislosure on a whim. If s/he was transgender in some way, I'd have typed (s)he, or He-She, or referred to him only with a proper nominative like "Alternative Gender Man."
So... what the hell is S/he? A man, a drag queen, a woman, a polar bear? Just curious.

[Bosco B Thug]

So... what the hell is S/he? A man, a drag queen, a woman, a polar bear? Just curious.
S/he's a cool cat, technically... a wandering minstrel, poetically... a hermaphroditic polar bear, symbolically... well, it's all very confusing. Let us just be accepting. Oh, and I guess yeah, s/he's into putting on wo/men's underwear every now and then, too.

[BirdsAteMyFace]

Drats! Didn't get a chance to vote. Buffalo '66 happens to be one of my favorite films. Ohhh well.

[DavidSeven]

A little disappointing to see some of those films finish ahead of The Celebration and Fucking Amal. No love for The Dreamlife of Angels? Buffalo 66' making the cut would have been cool too.

[Raiders]

No love for The Dreamlife of Angels?

I had ya covered on this one. More people need to see it, though.

[Yxklyx]

Run Lola Run is stratospheres better than Blind Chance.

[Qrazy]

Run Lola Run is stratospheres better than Blind Chance.

If you prefer sound and fury.

[Rowland]

If you prefer sound and fury.Both are underrated.

[Spinal]

Run Lola Run is far more than sound and fury. It elegantly expresses complicated ideas in relatively simple terms. That's not lack of depth. That's just a good blend of art and entertainment.

[Rowland]

Run Lola Run is far more than sound and fury. It elegantly expresses complicated ideas in relatively simple terms. That's not lack of depth. That's just a good blend of art and entertainment.Bah, it can't be existential AND exhilarating! ;)

[Melville]

Bah, it can't be existential AND exhilarating! ;)
Personally, I didn't find it to be existential or exhilarating.

[Rowland]

Personally, I didn't find it to be existential or exhilarating.Kickass.

[Qrazy]

Run Lola Run is far more than sound and fury. It elegantly expresses complicated ideas in relatively simple terms. That's not lack of depth. That's just a good blend of art and entertainment.

Nah, it's lack of depth. It's more thoughtful than a lot of films out there, Tykwer and his filmography certainly deserve some credit, but the themes explored are a thin shadow of those in Blind Chance... which is not to say Blind Chance is an amazing film, Kieslowski has done much better, but Lola is like the rambunctious younger brother of Chance... his ideas are less nuanced than his older sibling, but he expresses them loudly and charismatically.

[Spinal]

Nah, it's lack of depth. It's more thoughtful than a lot of films out there, Tykwer and his filmography certainly deserve some credit, but the themes explored are a thin shadow of those in Blind Chance... which is not to say Blind Chance is an amazing film, Kieslowski has done much better, but Lola is like the rambunctious younger brother of Chance... his ideas are less nuanced than his older sibling, but he expresses them loudly and charismatically.

I look forward to seeing the Kieslowski film, but I can't imagine that the two can't live together in the same world. I've seen Kieslowski films before and while I like them a lot, I'm very glad that that is not what Lola is.

[Melville]

Kickass.
:| Let's not be hasty with our sarcasm. You seemed to imply that Lola was only being criticized because people think that meaningfulness and exhilarating filmmaking are mutually exclusive. Since Qrazy wasn't suggesting that one thing excludes the other, I think it was perfectly reasonable for me to point out that neither of the two qualities are objectively present in the film, let alone any particular relation between their presence or absence.

[Rowland]

I think it was perfectly reasonable for me to point out that neither of the two qualities are objectively present in the film, let alone any particular relation between their presence or absence.Quite reasonable. Quite reasonable indeed.

[MacGuffin]

I haven't seen Run Lola Run, but if it's anything like his segment from Paris, je t'aime, then it's absolutely worthless shit. Granted, Natalie Portman, being one of the most annoying and worst actresses of our generation had a little bit to do with that as well.

[Sycophant]

I haven't seen Run Lola Run, but if it's anything like his segment from Paris, je t'aime, then it's absolutely worthless shit. Granted, Natalie Portman, being one of the most annoying and worst actresses of our generation had a little bit to do with that as well.Someone needs a drink! Or has already had too much!

[Qrazy]

I haven't seen Run Lola Run, but if it's anything like his segment from Paris, je t'aime, then it's absolutely worthless shit. Granted, Natalie Portman, being one of the most annoying and worst actresses of our generation had a little bit to do with that as well.

I don't know, her turn in Cold Mountain was pretty solid.

[Melville]

I don't know, her turn in Cold Mountain was pretty solid.
I remember her giving a pretty good performance in Closer.

[Watashi]

Portman was also great in Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium last year.

[Qrazy]

I remember her giving a pretty good performance in Closer.

Nice, still haven't seen that yet, although I'm a very big fan of Nichols early work.

[MacGuffin]

Nice, still haven't seen that yet, although I'm a very big fan of Nichols early work.

It's crap, as you'd say.

[Qrazy]

It's crap, as you'd say.

Well after The Birdcage I did get a little weary, but then he made Angels in America... so I'm still looking forward to checking it out eventually... nothing from the trailers really intrigued me aesthetically though so that's why I've waited.

[MacGuffin]

Well after The Birdcage I did get a little weary, but then he made Angels in America... so I'm still looking forward to checking it out eventually... nothing from the trailers really intrigued me aesthetically though so that's why I've waited.

Basically, obnoxious characters... the most unsubtle assholes you could ever imagine. Nothing profound here. Portman is idolized probably because she shows her ass (ooooh!, daring). The dialogue is really stupid also.

[Qrazy]

Portman is idolized probably because she shows her ass (ooooh!, daring).

*goes and buys three copies of the film*

[Grouchy]

While I actually agree that Portman is annoying, I think all of you need less over-analyzing of movies and more getting drunk and living it up a little.

And I mean ALL of you. Except for Rowland.

[MadMan]

While I actually agree that Portman is annoying, I think all of you need less over-analyzing of movies and more getting drunk and living it up a little.

And I mean ALL of you. Except for Rowland.I drink. But then I'm not obssessed with Portman and her movies. So does that mean your correlation between the two is correct then? Or that I'm slowly inching my way towards alcoholism? I'll let myself and folks who read the drunk thread on this site be the judge :P