28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[baby doll]

Gotta give Reed some credit: It takes serious balls to put Her on a "worst of" list. WTF?

He's been telling Jonze to get off his damn lawn for ages, so that doesn't surprise me.

[Izzy Black]

Jesus, no. Please. No. Let's just stop this foolishness right now.

For the love of God, man!

Hmm, how to respond. Let's see. I think I'll just go with "no u"

[Izzy Black]

I would never say Tarkovsky and Bergman made films about nothing - thematically, they're both as dense as it gets. Malick's last two films have beautiful images and some kind of pretension of depth, but I got nothing from them that lasted in my mind more than an hour.

You don't have to like Malick's new films. If they didn't work for you, that's fine, but to say these fims are "about nothing" is just lazy and, well, as far as it goes, flat out false. Maybe they didn't move you, or maybe you don't find them interesting, compelling, entertaining, enlightening, fascinating, compelling, or [insert adjective]. That's all fine and well. But that's a different question. If you want to have a conversation about value, that's a conversation worth having, but it's not the same conversation as to whether these films are functional on a thematic level. If you really think these films are "about nothing," then let's see an argument.

[elixir]

it's almost 2014

[Winston*]

"It is about … nothing.”

This is the type of hamfisted criticism you would see of Tarkovsky and Bergman films back in the 60s and 70s.

Or Larry David and Jerry Seinfeld television shows in the 90s.

[elixir]

tbh i wish more films were about nothing

[Winston*]

Worst of lists are generally pretty pathetic anyway. Either redundant reiterations of earlier critical groupthink or masturbatory exercises in iconoclastery.

[Melville]

I just watched and didn't think much of To the Wonder, but to say it's about nothing is idiotic. It's manifestly about many things: romantic relationships, their connection to transcendence and the divine, their highs and lows, how they fall apart, how a person can be left defenceless in them and how a person can destroy them by refusing to be defenceless, refusing to give himself over to the other person and open himself up to her. Among other things.

[Izzy Black]

tbh i wish more films were about nothing

This is so true. That's why the question of value thing is important. Rarely do I see a film about nothing. Even the WORST movies tend to be about something (often something lame!). But you're so right here, I wish there were more films about - literally - nothing. I actually find that quite interesting and would probably be kind of hard to pull off.

[Izzy Black]

I just watched and didn't think much of To the Wonder, but to say it's about nothing is idiotic. It's manifestly about many things: romantic relationships, their connection to transcendence and the divine, their highs and lows, how they fall apart, how a person can be left defenceless in them and how a person can destroy them by refusing to be defenceless, refusing to give himself over to the other person and open himself up to her. Among other things.

Yes, yes, yes. Why didn't ya like TtW if you don't mind me asking? (If I remember correctly, you also didn't think much of Tree of Life?)

[Grouchy]

I never said To the Wonder was about nothing.

[Izzy Black]

I never said To the Wonder was about nothing.

It seemed like you were responding to me. You started with "I would never would say Bergman and Tarkovsky made films about nothing..." by illustrating their depth and density, but then seemed to position this point as a contrast to Malick's recent films. At minimum, it seemed like you were saying that if Malick's new films aren't about nothing, they're about close to nothing.

If that's not a fair reading of your post, OK, no problem. Ignore what I said, scratch it, delete it. Of course, it still applies to Rex, but you are absolved on all grounds.

[Qrazy]

By the way Izzy, in regards to our conversation a while back, where/what's your top 10 list?

[Izzy Black]

of all time?

[Qrazy]

of all time?

Yes.

[Izzy Black]

Here's 20 (the order is slightly arbitrary).

2001: A Space Odyssey (Kubrick, 1968)
L'avventura (Antonioni, 1960)
Andrei Rublev (Tarkovsky, 1966)
Jeanne Dielman, 23, quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles (Akerman, 1975)
The Cranes Are Flying (Kalatozov, 1957)
Sátántangó (Tarr, 1994)
Millenium Mambo (Hou, 2001)
Vivre sa vie: Film en douze tableaux (Godard, 1962)
The Intruder (Denis, 2004)
Three Days (Bartas, 1991)
Woman in the Dunes (Teshigahara, 1964)
La passion de Jeanne d’Arc (Carl Dreyer, 1928)
Last Year at Marienbad (Resnais, 1961)
L'eclisse (Antonioni, 1962)
Days of Heaven (Malick, 1978)
The Red Shoes (Powell, 1948)
Aguirre: The Wrath of God (Herzog, 1972)
In The Mood for Love (Wong, 2001)
La Strada (Fellini, 1954)
La Belle noiseuse (Rivette, 1991)

[Qrazy]

Nice, I don't really care for Rivette or Godard and not that keen on Millenium Mambo but I like/approve of all the rest. Haven't seen Three Days, Jeanne Dielman or The Intruder though.

[Izzy Black]

Godard and Rivette aren't among my ten favorite directors, for instance, but those two films are very special for me.

I adore Hou and I think MM is magical. Have you seen any other Denis, Bartas, or Akerman?

[Qrazy]

Godard and Rivette aren't among my ten favorite directors, for instance, but those two films are very special for me.

I adore Hou and I think MM is magical. Have you seen any other Denis, Bartas, or Akerman?

I've seen New from Home from Akerman which I found surprisingly very enjoyable given my usual lack of enthusiasm towards that brand of minimalism. From Denis I've seen Beau Travail and S'en fout la Mort. The latter I liked although I don't think it's great per se, the former had isolated moments but didn't do much for me as a whole. I've see no Bartas and no Hou other than MM.

[Izzy Black]

I've seen New from Home from Akerman which I found surprisingly very enjoyable given my usual lack of enthusiasm towards that brand of minimalism. From Denis I've seen Beau Travail and S'en fout la Mort. The latter I liked although I don't think it's great per se, the former had isolated moments but didn't do much for me as a whole. I've see no Bartas and no Hou other than MM.

I get the feeling you'll be bored to tears by Jeanne Dielman, but I'd still like to hear your thoughts when you get the chance to see it. As for Denis, I highly recommend 35 Shots of Rum. I really think you'll like it, although I could be wrong.

[Qrazy]

I get the feeling you'll be bored to tears by Jeanne Dielman, but I'd still like to hear your thoughts when you get the chance to see it. As for Denis, I highly recommend 35 Shots of Rum. I really think you'll like it, although I could be wrong.

I'll get on that, been mostly watching bad television lately. I could use a dive back into art cinema. Is Bartas great in general or just that film?

[Melville]

I never said To the Wonder was about nothing.

My comment was in response to the Rex Reed quote. Terrible review.

Yes, yes, yes. Why didn't ya like TtW if you don't mind me asking? (If I remember correctly, you also didn't think much of Tree of Life?)

I was conflicted on Tree of Life because I felt like the vignettes were too contrived to fit the film's thematic scheme. I didn't feel that way about To the Wonder, which was much looser, but I started to agree with the usual criticisms from Malick bashers: short on characterization, poetic voiceovers getting ridiculous, overly repetitive imagery, too much twirling. I did really like the framing, even beyond the beauty and lyricism that always comes with Malick. The story's dynamic was developed very well by keeping Kurylenko in the frame, involved and open in the world, while Affleck tended to be pacing in the distance or hovering almost menacingly over or in front of the image, his head outside the frame or only partially in the frame, an expression of his power-through-closedness and distance—he's always at a remove from her and she can't get inside him. The story also picked up a lot for me toward the end, when shit gets real, but I was pretty mixed on it overall.

Here's 20 (the order is slightly arbitrary).

Nice list. I haven't seen Satantango or Three Days.

[Izzy Black]

I'll get on that, been mostly watching bad television lately. I could use a dive back into art cinema. Is Bartas great in general or just that film?

I think Bartas is great in general, but I'm not sure he's quite your cup 'o tea. I'd recommend starting with Trys dienos, if you're interested, and then going from there if you like it. He's almost like a stripped down version of Tarr (if that's even possible). In some ways, his films can be very trying. There's rarely any dialogue in his films and virtually no story to speak of. There's also a lot of despair. In general, his approach is more associative than narrative driven. But I think there's a silent beauty and majesty to his films.

[Izzy Black]

I was conflicted on Tree of Life because I felt like the vignettes were too contrived to fit the film's thematic scheme. I didn't feel that way about To the Wonder, which was much looser, but I started to agree with the usual criticisms from Malick bashers: short on characterization, poetic voiceovers getting ridiculous, overly repetitive imagery, too much twirling. I did really like the framing, even beyond the beauty and lyricism that always comes with Malick. The story's dynamic was developed very well by keeping Kurylenko in the frame, involved and open in the world, while Affleck tended to be pacing in the distance or hovering almost menacingly over or in front of the image, his head outside the frame or only partially in the frame, an expression of his power-through-closedness and distance—he's always at a remove from her and she can't get inside him. The story also picked up a lot for me toward the end, when shit gets real, but I was pretty mixed on it overall.

Yes, yes, yes! I agree with this totally. I also think the film is more about her than it is about him.

I actually think this is one of Malick's best and most purest films. I share your complaints about Tree of Life, incidentally. To the Wonder is arguably my second or third favorite Malick, believe it or not. Best director in America.

Nice list. I haven't seen Satantango or Three Days.

Thanks! Now it's your turn! :lol:

[Melville]

Thanks! Now it's your turn! :lol:

Recently reworked top 50:

[

Show Spoiler

Edvard Munch (Watkins, 1974)
Solaris (Tarkovsky, 1972)
2001: A Space Odyssey (Kubrick, 1968)
Andrei Rublev (Tarkovsky, 1969)
Possession (Zulawski, 1981)
Ordet (Dreyer, 1955)
Vertigo (Hitchcock, 1958)
The Mirror (Tarkovsky, 1975)
Blue Velvet (Lynch, 1986)
The Son (Dardennes, 2002)
Persona (Bergman, 1966)
It’s a Wonderful Life (Capra, 1946)
Lawrence of Arabia (Lean, 1962)
Cries and Whispers (Bergman, 1972)
Lost Highway (Lynch, 1997)
Punch-Drunk Love (PT Anderson, 2002)
Ivan the Terrible Part II (Eisenstein, 1946)
Chinatown (Polanski, 1974)
In the Mood for Love (Wong Kar-Wai, 2000)
The Aviator (Scorsese, 2004)
In a Lonely Place (Nicholas Ray, 1950)
Schindler’s List (Spielberg, 1993)
Taxi Driver (Scorsese, 1976)
Diary of a Country Priest (Bresson, 1954)
Mulholland Dr. (Lynch, 2001)
Unforgiven (Eastwood, 1992)
The Grey (Carnahan, 2011)
Woman in the Dunes (Teshigahara, 1964)
Touch of Evil (Welles, 1958)
In a Year of 13 Moons (Fassbinder, 1978)
Fanny and Alexander (Bergman, 1982)
The Big Lebowski (Coens, 1998)
Titicut Follies (Wiseman, 1967)
There Will Be Blood (PT Anderson, 2007)
Dead Ringers (Cronenberg, 1988)
Two Lovers (Grey, 2009)
The Devil (Zulawski, 1972)
Hour of the Wolf (Bergman, 1968)
Rushmore (Wes Anderson, 1998)
Blood of the Beasts (Franju, 1949)
Scorpio Rising (Anger, 1964)
Emak-Bakia (Man Ray, 1926)
A Woman under the Influence (Cassavetes, 1974)
Serene Velocity (Gehr, 1970)
The Third Man (Reed, 1949)
Days of Heaven (Malick, 1978)
The New World (Malick, 2005)
Tale of Tales (Norshteyn, 1979)
Buffalo ’66 (Gallo, 1998)
The Gospel According to St. Matthew (Pasolini, 1964)

]

There's a longer list in the link in my sig.