Match Cut Madness 3: Best of the 00s

[StuSmallz]

Lost In Translation vs. Shaun of the Dead
Mulholland Drive vs. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
There Will Be Blood vs. Amelie
Zodiac vs. The Prestige
Children of Men vs. Ratatouille
Inglourious Basterds vs. Oldboy

[Peng]

No Country for Old Men vs. Requiem for a Dream
Dogtooth vs. Kill Bill Vol. 1
25th Hour vs. Almost Famous
Spirited Away vs. Punch-Drunk Love
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind vs. Finding Nemo
Lost In Translation vs. Shaun of the Dead
Mulholland Drive vs. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
Before Sunset vs. Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter… and Spring (My replacement keeps being brought up against (imo) stone-cold masterpieces lol)

There Will Be Blood vs. Amelie
In the Mood for Love vs. Memento (My Sophie's Choice this round)
Zodiac vs. The Prestige
Children of Men vs. Ratatouille
The Dark Knight vs. A Serious Man
Wall-E vs. Y Tu Mama Tambien
Inglourious Basterds vs. Oldboy
The Fellowship of the Ring vs. Yi Yi

[baby doll]

The fact that none of the women in LOTR are lead characters doesn't cause problems for analyzing their roles in the films, because Arwen, Galadriel and Eowyn still hold a significant presence and impact within the trilogy regardless (and an expanded one when compared to the books to boot), at least as much as male characters like Boromir, Elrond, or Denethor do, and in some cases even moreso, since none of those men were the ones that rescued "the ringbearer" when he was on the verge of death, which would've caused the failure of the quest to destroy the ring before they had even formed the fellowship (and that's without even going into the fact that the movies are all ensemble pieces anyway, so there are no "lead" characters in the trilogy in the first place, male or female).

And as for that second point, the trilogy portraying women being relatively bold or aggressive as an unambiguous positive isn't a problem, because again, given the specific contexts of those examples, why on (Middle) Earth would they not portray that in such terms? Like, when Eowyn slays one of Sauron's top subordinates in Return Of The King in the defense of Middle Earth, what sense would it make for the movie to have trepidation about her doing so just because of her gender? It's not neccessary for every film with a "strong woman" in it to hold a conflicted attitude about them, and in fact, doing so would be very regressive, and exactly the sort of thing that art should be criticized for encouraging, regardless of how "interesting" it is to study that in a critical fashion later on.

That the female characters are peripheral to the plot of Jackson's trilogy--at least in comparison with Frodo, his buddy (Sam?), Gandalf, and the skinny little junky dude (whose name I no longer recall)--doesn't pose a problem for analyzing their roles in the films (any role can be analyzed, no matter how small); it's just that, in this case, the analysis is unlikely to turn up anything very interesting. And of course there's no reason why a film begun in the late 1990s and released in the early 2000s should have a conflicted attitude about assertive women, especially when those women are largely asexual. (Cate Blanchett is so ethereal here she scarcely seems to have any corporeal existence whatsoever.) But that just goes to show my point that Jackson's trilogy was behind the culture rather than ahead of it, as Hollywood melodramas of the studio era were just ahead of what American society was willing to accept at the time--or, more precisely, by centring the figure of a transgressive woman, such films negotiated the outer-most limits of socially acceptable behaviour for a society that was rapidly being transformed by industrial capitalism. That's in part what made them exciting for spectators, and it's why they're still exciting today as contemporary attitudes towards women are not much more enlightened than they were in the 1930s. (It's one thing to recognize intellectually that pervasive misogynistic attitudes cost Hillary Clinton votes in the 2016 election and another thing altogether to actually find her likeable.) When Sharon Stone's character in Basic Instinct brazenly flouts social norms ("What are you gonna do, arrest me for smoking?"), the breaking of a taboo is both thrilling as a vicarious release for the spectator's repressed desires and anxiety-producing as it threatens the total breakdown of social order, causing the spectator to react with nervous laughter. When an ethereal elf-woman rescues a hobbit from the forces of darkness, the spectator can only feel relief. In short, The Lord of the Rings movies are fundamentally not sexy.

[transmogrifier]

No Country for Old Men vs. Requiem for a Dream - seen both, but don't care
Dogtooth vs. Kill Bill Vol. 1 - seen both, but don't care

(I'll pretty much vote against any of these four films in the next round)

25th Hour vs. Almost Famous
Spirited Away vs. Punch-Drunk Love
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind vs. Finding Nemo
Lost In Translation vs. Shaun of the Dead
Mulholland Drive vs. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
Before Sunset vs. Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter… and Spring

There Will Be Blood vs. Amelie
In the Mood for Love vs. Memento
Zodiac vs. The Prestige
Children of Men vs. Ratatouille (grudgingly)
The Dark Knight vs. A Serious Man
Wall-E vs. Y Tu Mama Tambien
Inglourious Basterds vs. Oldboy
The Fellowship of the Ring vs. Yi Yi

[transmogrifier]

It's time to check in with transmogrifier's Sweet Sixteen predictions!

[

Show Spoiler

He lost!



It was that damned Tenenbaums movie.

]

I guessed 15 out of 16 (ish, not counting the two hedges)? Not bad, I would say

[quido8_5]

Hardest: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind vs. Finding Nemo

Easiest: In the Mood for Love vs. Memento. I'm surprised that Memento has taken such a dip in my estimation. Still a four-star movie, but I don't think it has aged well. Unfortunately it will forever be known for its gimmick structure, even though it serves the plot and the quality of film overcomes the "gimmick". Plus, In the Mood for Love is one of the few films from the last twenty years that I would consider a classic.

Who Give a Shit?: Zodiac vs. The Prestige

[StuSmallz]

Who Give a Shit?: Zodiac vs. The Prestige

I do; why do you ask?

[baby doll]

Who Give a Shit?: Zodiac vs. The Prestige

Both of these movies are, of course, wildly overrated in the way that only "dark," male-centred Hollywood prestige movies can be, but at least Fincher is a pretty good director, even if the script gets bogged down in uninteresting procedural minutia. (It was doubtlessly a mistake on my part to watch the director's cut instead of the theatrical release version.) On the other hand, watching The Prestige in a theatre was physically painful because there's so little variation in rhythm and shot scale. To paraphrase the opening paragraph of Ebert's review of the 2008 Death Race: Hitchcock said a movie should play the audience like a piano. The Prestige played me like a drum.

[Idioteque Stalker]

I'm surprised that Memento has taken such a dip in my estimation. Still a four-star movie, but I don't think it has aged well. Unfortunately it will forever be known for its gimmick structure, even though it serves the plot and the quality of film overcomes the "gimmick".

Gimmick implies more negativity than I think is warranted. The unique structure is central to the movie's narrative, themes, and overall appeal. It's been a while since I last saw it, so I can't get too deep into the weeds, but maybe my favorite Nolan moment is "Why am I running? Oh, I'm chasing this guy. Oh wait -- he's chasing me..." A rare, actually funny moment in his filmography -- though it should be noted I have a weakness for Guy Pearce.

[Skitch]

Gimmick implies more negativity than I think is warranted. The unique structure is central to the movie's narrative, themes, and overall appeal. It's been a while since I last saw it, so I can't get too deep into the weeds, but maybe my favorite Nolan moment is "Why am I running? Oh, I'm chasing this guy. Oh wait -- he's chasing me..." A rare, actually funny moment in his filmography -- though it should be noted I have a weakness for Guy Pearce.

I was reading your first sentence and thought: "I should comment that my favorite scene is the 'I'm chasing this guy' scene."

The film is still effective, imo. I would've easily voted for it but I have not seen its competitor. I think its also something to consider budgets at the time and the kind of budget Nolan could sway...at the time, probably not all that much? All he had before that was Following, right?

[Skitch]

Wiki says Momento had 9 million. In 2001 (before digital really took over? again just spewing probably wrong facts everywhere), that would've maybe been mid-upper indy budget?

My gut thoughts and memory are just swinging for the fences tonight, first day of school and I've barely slept in three days, forgive me.

[quido8_5]

I do; why do you ask?

Just making sure... certainly not because Christopher Nolan wanted me to confirm that even his minor works are still relevant. This is not what Nolan does for karaoke every. single. time:
[

Show Spoiler

]

Gimmick implies more negativity than I think is warranted. The unique structure is central to the movie's narrative, themes, and overall appeal. It's been a while since I last saw it, so I can't get too deep into the weeds, but maybe my favorite Nolan moment is "Why am I running? Oh, I'm chasing this guy. Oh wait -- he's chasing me..." A rare, actually funny moment in his filmography -- though it should be noted I have a weakness for Guy Pearce.

I agree the structure fits the film, but it is also what has made it distinctive to so many people who want to see Nolan's "indie" stuff (in my experience, it is known less by the title than by the description: "that one that goes backward.") I think it is great, but not exceptional without its structure. Memento is of the same ilk as LA Confidential. Both are excellent crime films with lots of twists. The latter, though, has an entire ensemble of great performances and direction that is superb but never ostentatious-- best-of-genre level good. Memento is a great, but has some serious limitations. Guy Pierce gives the only performance that isn't perfunctory (I'm also operating off of a viewing over a decade ago, so may not be entirely accurate) and the script is good, but the flashbacks are kind of pedantic and reminiscent of a Lifetime movie about a tragic break in. The structure is not "gimmicky" inherently, but it could be construed as Nolan putting himself up as an iconoclastic director and auteur right out of the gate. It feels wrong to type this, but that's the thing: the more I think about Memento, the less I like it...even though I don't think it'll ever fall below **** because it is a great movie. At the same time there are limitations inherent to its inception*, that are only exacerbated by the high concept films he's released since.

* 8-)

[Skitch]

]
Memento is of the same ilk as LA Confidential.

LA Confidential had budget of 35 million, again from wiki.

Memento is a great, but has some serious limitations....and the script is good, but the flashbacks are kind of pedantic and reminiscent of a Lifetime movie about a tragic break in.

I don't disagree about the Lifetime comparison with the break-in, but that was a false constructed memory, so imo the Lifetime feel fits.

At the same time there are limitations inherent to its inception*, that are only exacerbated by the high concept films he's released since.

I don't think its fair to judge Momento on his following* films...or are you saying its an issue as a theme with the director?

[Yxklyx]

I didn't care that much for Zodiac the first time but on rewatch it has this relentless momentum that elevates it above most modern films.

[StuSmallz]

I didn't care that much for Zodiac the first time but on rewatch it has this relentless momentum that elevates it above most modern films.

While I loved it immediately back in '07 (which was reconfirmed upon a rewatch last year), I do agree about the overall momentum of the movie; I mean, the scene where Toschi and his partner are reconstructing the Stine murder is almost nothing but watching them talk about it, but it's still fascinating to watch just because it's so sharply written, and it has that odd pleasure of watching people who are just really smart and good at their jobs going about it (so "uninteresting", my kiester):

[DFA1979]

Wait we're already voting again? Whoa.

No Country for Old Men vs. Requiem for a Dream-Salty trans is hilarious
Dogtooth vs. Kill Bill Vol. 1-Only seem Bill
25th Hour vs. Almost Famous-N/A
Spirited Away vs. Punch-Drunk Love-Only seen SA
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind vs. Finding Nemo-Nemo shouldn't even be here I love it but better than Brokeback Mountain? LOL.
Lost In Translation vs. Shaun of the Dead
Mulholland Drive vs. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
Before Sunset vs. Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter… and Spring-Um maybe I'll get to these some day

There Will Be Blood vs. Amelie-Only seen Amelie *whistles*
In the Mood for Love vs. Memento
Zodiac vs. The Prestige-Never saw The Prestige and I don't know if I ever will
Children of Men vs. Ratatouille
The Dark Knight vs. A Serious Man
Wall-E vs. Y Tu Mama Tambien-Only seen Wall-E
Inglourious Basterds vs. Oldboy
The Fellowship of the Ring vs. Yi Y-Never seen Yi Yi or even heard of it until this year streaming really often sucks at enabling people in the US to view foreign cinema save for maybe Criterion channel and a few others.

[quido8_5]

LA Confidential had budget of 35 million, again from wiki.

Nolan's use of a scant budget to create something that could even be compared to LA Confidential is a feat. Wish he could exercise some of that restraint instead blowing up some of the biggest budgets in modern Hollywood history.

I don't disagree about the Lifetime comparison with the break-in, but that was a false constructed memory, so imo the Lifetime feel fits.

I had not thought about it this way. Very good take and I can see it maybe being intentional on Nolan's part.

I don't think its fair to judge Momento on his following* films...or are you saying its an issue as a theme with the director?

It's not fair. It's certainly more of a Nolan issue for me than a Memento issue. At the same time, the structure is also what makes Dunkirk exceptional. I guess I'm honestly trying to figure out how Memento lost its luster for me. Ten years ago, Memento going up against anything would have been an epic battle. Now, I didn't even hesitate.

* lol

[Dukefrukem]

I didn't care that much for Zodiac the first time but on rewatch it has this relentless momentum that elevates it above most modern films.

This was my experience. I didn't think it held a candle to Fincher's other stuff.

[Gizmo]

No Country for Old Men vs. Requiem for a Dream
Dogtooth vs. Kill Bill Vol. 1
25th Hour vs. Almost Famous
Spirited Away vs. Punch-Drunk Love
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind vs. Finding Nemo
Lost In Translation vs. Shaun of the Dead
Mulholland Drive vs. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
Before Sunset vs. Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter… and Spring

There Will Be Blood vs. Amelie
In the Mood for Love vs. Memento
Zodiac vs. The Prestige
Children of Men vs. Ratatouille
The Dark Knight vs. A Serious Man
Wall-E vs. Y Tu Mama Tambien
Inglourious Basterds vs. Oldboy
The Fellowship of the Ring vs. Yi Yi

Only 4 left I haven't seen. Dogtooth, which I really want to, 25th Hour, A Serious Man, and Yi Yi, all of which I've never been too concerned with, but may have to look into now.

[Spun Lepton]

There Will Be Blood vs. Amelie

Either one of these could win and I'd be fine with that.

The Dark Knight vs. A Serious Man

I'll be pissed if Nolan's over-complicated superhero movie wins over the Coens' magnum opus. I swear, I'll take my toys and go home, MC.

[megladon8]

I hated A Serious Man. Did absolutely zilch for me.

But it has also been 10 years. I'd be open to giving it another shot.

Also, side note (not directed at any specific person, and I'm just being nitpicky) I feel like refusing to vote for 2 films just because you don't like either of them is kinda...why bother voting at all then?

[DFA1979]

Well I haven't seen all the films and I vote when I can so I think that cancels out someone who refuses to vote on a match.

[transmogrifier]

...why bother voting at all then?

Um.... exactly? That's why I didn't vote for them. Why bother if I don't care about them in equal amounts?

[DFA1979]

I for one support trans letting the hate flow. And I'm not gonna let Brokeback Mountain losing to Finding Nemo go either.

[quido8_5]

Um.... exactly? That's why I didn't vote for them. Why bother if I don't care about them in equal amounts?

What's the opposite of Sophie's Choice?

If we're all forced to vote for two films we care about deeply in equal amounts, we also have to vote for things we don't care about in equal amounts.