28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[MadMan]

I love A Serious Man, but I'm not sure if enough people saw it for it to be remembered in the long run. Its top tier Coens Brothers as far as I'm concerned.

[Boner M]

Weekend:

Beware of a Holy Whore (Fassbinder)
Something I've been promising to watch for the last month (Close-up, Fury, Story of the Late Chrysanthemums, Le pont du nord)
The Messenger[/b] (rpt, gotta review it for the alt-weekly and wasn't conscious enough the first time... not looking forward to sitting through that macho angst-fest again, esp. since it means missing Gods of the Plague at the cinematheque, first world problems etc)
I'm Still Here or Let Me In or Detective Dee at the movies

[Derek]

The Jerk is neither a good nor funny movie.
Apocalypse Now is the second-best film of all-time
The Hurt Locker is even slighter and more forgettable than Slumdog Millionaire or Shakespeare in Love
The Deer Hunter is crazy good.
Reservoir Dogs is still Tarantino's best film

IB is only the 12th best film I saw in a pretty weak year.

All of this wrongness is forgiven if you could please explain how When Harry Met Sally gets the highest score I've ever seen you give.

[MadMan]

When Harry Meet Sally actually is a great movie, from what I remember. I'm not sure why the hell trans thinks so highly of Grease, though.

[transmogrifier]

All of this wrongness is forgiven if you could please explain how When Harry Met Sally gets the highest score I've ever seen you give.

Because it's funny and has a depth of emotion no other modern romantic comedy has ever got close to.

Also, Rob Reiner is the greatest director that ever lived.

[transmogrifier]

When Harry Meet Sally actually is a great movie, from what I remember. I'm not sure why the hell trans thinks so highly of Grease, though.

Grease is a brilliantly immature romp, with catchy songs.

[baby doll]

Apocalypse Now is the second-best film of all-time

Except that it goes to pieces by the end. The need to keep Brando constantly in the shadows in order to hide his flab brings out in Vittorio Storaro a tendency towards overly arty, high contrast cinematography.

But even before that point, the film is no more critical of America's invasion of Vietnam than Rambo: To paraphrase Noam Chomsky, like a high school newspaper, the film never bothers to ask why its rooting for the school team; the film just knows it's supposed to root for them. The entire ideological thrust of the movie is to vindicate the soldier on the ground after America's defeat by blaming it on the know-nothing generals (like Rambo, or The Deer Hunter for that matter, the film views the end of the war in terms of masculine humiliation). Why, if only Kurtz could've fought the war his way without the bureaucracy, then America might've won this thing--never-mind why they were there in the first place. As filmmaking it's often stunning, but as history it never rises above Cowboys and Indians. One characteristic moment comes during the storming of the village: When a Vietnamese woman throws a grenade into an American helicopter, Robert Duvall remarks (without any hint of irony), "Fucking savages." I'm sorry, who's the one leveling the treeline with napalm, and then saying it smells like "victory"? And while the film isn't uncritical of Duvall's character, it certainly doesn't spend much time considering any perspectives the Vietnamese might have, north or south.

[Duncan]

Good god.

[Mysterious Dude]

I read somewhere that there was more humanity in the reporting of the war while it was still happening than there was in any of the films that followed it. In the climax of John Ford's Stagecoach, the coach-riders are battling Indians, who drop off like flies. The natives are treated as obstacles, not people. Most war movies, especially the ones not set in Europe, treat the indigenous population in a similar fashion.

This bit of film accomplished so much more in putting human faces on the war:

[not safe for work]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ev2dEqrN4i0

[transmogrifier]

And The Wild Bunch doesn't consider the perspectives of Indians, and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind doesn't consider the perspective of beach combers, and Saving Private Ryan doesn't consider the perspective of Egyptians.... There's no criticism of a film more useless than blaming it for not being what it never had any intention of being in the first place.

In other words, you seem to dislike the film for not being the magical Vietnam War movie you have swimming around up there in your head.

[Derek]

Because it's funny and has a depth of emotion no other modern romantic comedy has ever got close to.

One word, two syllables: Lubitsch.

[[ETM]]

Good god.

:lol:

[transmogrifier]

On an unrelated note: how many times, I wonder, have I confused Derek and Duncan?

[transmogrifier]

One word, two syllables: Lubitsch.

One word, two syllables: modern

[[ETM]]

I read somewhere that there was more humanity in the reporting of the war while it was still happening than there was in any of the films that followed it. In the climax of John Ford's Stagecoach, the coach-riders are battling Indians, who drop off like flies. The natives are treated as obstacles, not people. Most war movies, especially the ones not set in Europe, treat the indigenous population in a similar fashion.

Black Hawk Down is a perfect example. It's a powerful survival story only if you completely disregard the fact that they're killing people by the dozens themselves.

[baby doll]

And The Wild Bunch doesn't consider the perspectives of Indians, and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind doesn't consider the perspective of beach combers, and Saving Private Ryan doesn't consider the perspective of Egyptians.... There's no criticism of a film more useless than blaming it for not being what it never had any intention of being in the first place.

In other words, you seem to dislike the film for not being the magical Vietnam War movie you have swimming around up there in your head.

Coppola set out to make a film about the Vietnam war (I'll let it slide that he once claimed that the film "was Vietnam"), and as assessment of said war, it's limited to acceptable criticisms. During the run-up to the present war in Iraq, any criticism of the grounds for war was marginalized by the mass media. When the war began, it was acceptable to criticize the war for being poorly run, and when the surge started to turn things around, it was seen as a vindication of the Bush policy that a war the US shouldn't have entered into in the first place was now starting to go well. (There's a reason why The Hurt Locker got so much press and won an Oscar without making much more money than any of the earlier Iraq war films, which were completely marginalized. Bigelow doesn't even concern herself with how the war's going--which doesn't make it a bad movie, just not the second greatest ever made.) Similarly, Coppola limits his criticisms to chiding the generals for losing the war without asking any fundamental questions about why the war started in the first place. And for a film purporting to take a clear-eyed assessment of what happened in Vietnam, yes, I think that's a valid criticism.

[transmogrifier]

And for a film purporting to take a clear-eyed assessment of what happened in Vietnam, yes, I think that's a valid criticism.

Yeah, we didn't see the same film.

[Mysterious Dude]

And The Wild Bunch doesn't consider the perspectives of Indians, and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind doesn't consider the perspective of beach combers, and Saving Private Ryan doesn't consider the perspective of Egyptians.... There's no criticism of a film more useless than blaming it for not being what it never had any intention of being in the first place.

Saving Private Ryan is set in France, so I do not fault it for ignoring the Egyptians. Apocalypse Now is set in Vietnam.

Now I don't begrudge Apocalypse Now for being what it is, at least not to the extent than BabyDoll does (I like the cinematography). But it would be nice if what I said didn't apply to pretty much all of the well-known Vietnam movies (The Deer Hunter, Full Metal Jacket, Platoon, fucking Forrest Gump). Is there any movie "about" Vietnam that doesn't ignore the Vietnamese?

[Derek]

On an unrelated note: how many times, I wonder, have I confused Derek and Duncan?

The problem is that unlike some other posters, you so often come across as a reasonable person with good taste and valid opinions and then you blindside me with statements that completely invalidate that. You are the enigma of MatchCut for me.

One word, two syllables: modern

One sentence, many syllables: I didn't read your post that closely.

[Derek]

Saving Private Ryan is set in France, so I do not fault it for ignoring the Egyptians. Apocalypse Now is set in Vietnam.

Now I don't begrudge Apocalypse Now for being what it is, at least not to the extent than BabyDoll does (I like the cinematography). But it would be nice if what I said didn't apply to pretty much all of the well-known Vietnam movies (The Deer Hunter, Full Metal Jacket, Platoon, fucking Forrest Gump).

Have you seen Hearts & Minds? You'd love it.

[baby doll]

Yeah, we didn't see the same film.

So the film you saw wasn't full of references to the generals fucking things up, and didn't contain narration that explicitly contrasted US soldiers going to USO shows with "Charlie [squatting] in a bush," and didn't have Brando give a speech about Viet-Cong hacking off children's arms (never happened) in order to make the point that "they" were "stronger," and if the "we" had been "strong" like that, "our troubles" over there would be over shortly?

[transmogrifier]

Saving Private Ryan is set in France, so I do not fault it for ignoring the Egyptians. Apocalypse Now is set in Vietnam.

Now I don't begrudge Apocalypse Now for being what it is, at least not to the extent than BabyDoll does (I like the cinematography). But it would be nice if what I said didn't apply to pretty much all of the well-known Vietnam movies (The Deer Hunter, Full Metal Jacket, Platoon, fucking Forrest Gump). Is there any movie "about" Vietnam that doesn't ignore the Vietnamese?

Apocalypse Now is not about the Vietnamese. Criticizing it for not focusing enough on the Vietnamese is therefore just silly.

[baby doll]

Apocalypse Now is not about the Vietnamese. Criticizing it for not focusing enough on the Vietnamese is therefore just silly.

It's about Vietnam, and in particular, America's involvement there circa 1968 or '69 when the film is set.

[transmogrifier]

The problem is that unlike some other posters, you so often come across as a reasonable person with good taste and valid opinions and then you blindside me with statements that completely invalidate that. You are the enigma of MatchCut for me.

Which statement? WHMS?

[transmogrifier]

It's about Vietnam, and in particular, America's involvement there circa 1968 or '69 when the film is set.

Yep.