28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[Spinal]

No P.T. Anderson.
No Wes Anderson.
No Coen Brothers.

Yeah, that's not a Match Cut list.

[Irish]

Ace in the Hole feels "flavor of the month"? Or am I misunderstanding and you are juxtaposing it and Back to the Future together for how "serious artistic intent and real style [is] next to crowd pleasers"?

You didn't misunderstand. I called them flavor of the month because they're popular now in a way they weren't originally. Both of them got extra heapings of critical attention this year, and I suspect that attention lent more to their rankings than their actual quality as movies.

[Peng]

Really? Back to the Future has always been massively popular since its release, and the extra heaping this year might have come from the rather silly "oh it's 2015 now, just like in the film!" more than any renewed love or critical reappraisal. Also, the reason I feel like I misunderstood the first time is because the two films' receptions aren't remotely similar. Whereas Back to the Future has always been beloved, Ace in the Hole's relentlessly cynical depiction of the press and the mob make it a critical and commercial failure. It was so ahead of its time that it didn't sit well with both the audience and the critics then. The praises have caught up with the film long before now, specifically because its self-evident quality is now not obscured by some misplaced disdain. I am not aware that it has become any more popular in the past year than it was when the press and media are no longer viewed with dewy-eyed perspective.

[Irish]

Back to the Future strikes me as a generational thing. It idealizes boomer culture and it was made for gen-xers, but I've never heard anyone talk about in the slavishly devoted way that Millennials do. And not just the first film, but the whole series. (Also, this year marks the first film's 30th anniversary)

Ace in the Hole is a weird one. While I obviously haven't seen and read everything, I never came across a single critic or cinephile praising this movie until Criterion released it on DVD this year. This probably says much more about my own blind spots but I was struck over how many people felt the urge to write about it once Criterion gave it the nod. It's a solid movie & strong Wilder, but best American ever? That seems like a huge reach when other directors, genres, and films seem sorely underrepresented

[baby doll]

Back to the Future strikes me as a generational thing. It idealizes boomer culture and it was made for gen-xers, but I've never heard anyone talk about in the slavishly devoted way that Millennials do. And not just the first film, but the whole series. (Also, this year marks the first film's 30th anniversary)

Kristen Thompson praises it pretty highly in Storytelling in the New Hollywood, so I don't think it's entirely a generational thing. Plus, it's on TV like every weekend.

[Ezee E]

What's not to like about Back to the Future?

[Dukefrukem]

What's not to like about Back to the Future?

Nothing. It's a perfect movie. Masterpiece I say.

[Dukefrukem]

Movies I would remove from that list:
Taxi Driver
Deliverance (really?? Top 100?)
Tree of Life

Movies I would lower
Vertigo (Hitchock's best? No way)
Goodfellas

Movies I would raise
Lion King
West Side Story

Movies I would add
Rear Window
Shawshank
Life Aquatic (but really any Wes Anderson movie)

[D_Davis]

Hell yes on Deliverance.

It works as an outstanding American film in a number of ways.

[Spinal]

Critics were encouraged to submit lists of the 10 films they feel, on an emotional level, are the greatest in American cinema – not necessarily the most important, just the best.

And yet, Birth of a Nation still made it on there.

[Mysterious Dude]

I was surprised to see The Birth of a Nation. It was on AFI's list in '98, but it didn't make it in '07, and I've long assumed its status had fallen a bit in the interim. Intolerance is less controversial. I was surprised to see Greed, too. I don't hear it talked about much. It's never been released on DVD.

Some other strange choices: Thelma & Louise instead of Blade Runner; Heaven's Gate instead of The Deer Hunter.

Other notable omissions: The General, The Maltese Falcon, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, All About Eve, High Noon, On the Waterfront, Rear Window, Bonnie and Clyde, The Silence of the Lambs, Fargo

[Sven]

And yet, Birth of a Nation still made it on there.

Well, it's the politics that complicate that film. Its power to stir has never really been disputed.

[MadMan]

No P.T. Anderson.
No Wes Anderson.
No Coen Brothers.

Yeah, that's not a Match Cut list.

That's why we rock and they don't.

[MadMan]

I like Forrest Gump much better than The Tree of Life.

So do I.

[Peng]

I have been watching all Wong Kar-Wai films for the first time (except for The Grandmaster, which I saw when it was released) over the first half of this year. Enjoyed the journey a lot, and here's how I would rank them:

1. In the Mood for Love (2000) - 10/10
2. Chungking Express (1994) - 9/10
3. Happy Together (1997) - 8.5/10
4. Days of Being Wild (1990) - 8/10
5. The Grandmaster (2013) - 8/10
6. 2046 (2004) - 6.5/10
7. As Tears Go By (1988) - 6.5/10
8. My Blueberry Nights (2007) - 6.5/10
9. Fallen Angels (1995) - 6/10
10. Ashes of Time Redux (2009) - 5.5/10

[dreamdead]

I rewatched Happy Together over the weekend, and my viewing would probably lead to me dropping the grade down a bit. It's still marvelously cinematic and uses its jumps in time effectively, so that we're never positive how the issues that Leung and Cheung endure impress themselves on the characters. That creates a sense of wonder, and it's one of Wong's best qualities. At the same time, Cheung's character is so critical and melancholy that there's a sense of inevitability, rather than possibility, as to the failure of their relationship. And that element is one that I question as its intentionality.

Better is the Chang Chen and Leung friendship. That forms the core of the second half of HT, and helps the euphoric sense that the film closes on. Cheung is doomed; they're the lifeblood of a better connection, one that looks after one another. Lovely cinematography by Doyle throughout--beautifully bleached and focused in reds and oranges.

It's been a few years since I've seen Fallen Angels, but I'd count that as among Wong's best works (for me, that includes FA, DoBW, ItMfL, and 2046).

[megladon8]

Jen and I watched the first Taken tonight. I'd only seen it once before, when it first came out.

There's a scene/shot that I distinctly remember from the first time I watched it, and it never happened in this viewing.

Neeson nonchalantly walks up behind someone standing in a doorway, and shoots them in the head.

Am I getting this mixed up with another movie? Anyone recall the scene I'm talking about?

[Winston*]

Well, it's the politics that complicate that film. Its power to stir has never really been disputed.

Would probably argue that it's technical impressiveness makes it more detestable.

[Dukefrukem]

Jen and I watched the first Taken tonight. I'd only seen it once before, when it first came out.

There's a scene/shot that I distinctly remember from the first time I watched it, and it never happened in this viewing.

Neeson nonchalantly walks up behind someone standing in a doorway, and shoots them in the head.

Am I getting this mixed up with another movie? Anyone recall the scene I'm talking about?

I don't recall Neeson assassinating anyone like that in the movie. I've seen Taken quite a few times. Do you recall what part of the film you remember it taking place in?

The most likely scenes would be; 1) the underground sex slave area 2) the sand pits / construction area 3) the black-market auction 4) the yacht

[Peng]

Maybe it was the US version? The one that had a few scenes cut in order for it to get PG-13 back when it was released?

[megladon8]

I could have sworn it took place in the part where he goes to the "house with the red door" and pretends to be a cop, then kills them all.

I remember it being a guy standing in a doorway facing out into a hallway, Neeson walking up behind him and shooting him in the back of the head.

Peng - I've seen the movie twice and both times were the Unrated version (the same DVD I own).

[dreamdead]

Mike Leigh's Mr. Turner might be the first of his where I felt myself straining to get more out of the film. It's utterly rapturous on a visual level, with evocative cinematography in nature sequence after sequence, but while Timothy Spall's character feels typically lived-in, there's little that's conveyed about why Leigh was drawn to the project or what we're meant to feel it's all about. That, for Leigh, is seldom an issue. Strange, this one.

[DavidSeven]

Running Scared (2006): In a sense, I respect its go-for-broke approach because it's really the only way to make a bare narrative like this feel alive at all. On the other hand, the technique often felt so conscious and put-on that it all became a little cheesy after a while. Walker and Farmiga are really good in this. Earnest feels like the right performance pitch to give contrast to the technique. Everyone else in the A Story plays it at cartoon level, and I'm not sure they all belong in the same movie. Also: the bizarrely random sequence of Farmiga taking on perverted married couple (also playing it earnest) -- totally unnecessary or best thing in the movie? I don't think either answer is wrong.

[Ezee E]

I haven't watched Schindler's List since high school, and recently rewetted a scene on Youtube, leading me to watching the full thing, and it worked far better now than it ever did in high school. Maybe it's the inner dilemma of each of the characters that I can understand more at this age.

I do like that there's really never a "breakthrough" moment. It's all very gradual. Spielberg's never hit notes like this since. It's just the tossup of his adventure movies that can be replayed an unlimited amount of times, or something like this that you may only want to watch once a decade, if that.

[Mara]

Someone (a "friend") convinced me I was really missing out by not having seen Starship Troopers and mannnnnnn that film is some bullshit. Sappy story, wooden performances, boring visuals, terrible dialogue, completely missed emotional beats and fascist as hell. What a steaming pile.