Rate The Last Movie You Saw

[Daniel M]

"The beauty also comes from that freakin cool cat bus" -Akira Kurosawa
Also, your TV channels seem way cooler than mine.

Yeh Film4 is the channel, it's pretty cool. They had a Studio Ghibli week last week so I recorded most of them :) They help produce a lot of English independent films and such too, which they show sometimes. We have TCM too, which doesn't have the same schedule as in the US, but does occasionally show good films, although mainly Westerns :p

Anyway...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a3/Lecerclerouge.jpg

Le Cercle Rouge (Jean-Pierre Melville, 1970) 4.5

Great film, one of the best crime films I have seen. Very stylish and cool, enjoable characters and story, and of course there's the fabulous famous heist scene. Only problem I had was I thought the lighting was a little too dark at times, but maybe it was just me.

[BlueLion]

http://i.imgur.com/g9etaEu.png
The Tree of Life (2011) - 4

Very good. I can see why it's such a polarizing movie, and I feel it's one of those films that after a rewatch you'll either appreciate a lot more or it will bore you to death. For about half an hour or so I actually felt pretty bored, and I almost disliked it, but then it just kept getting better.


http://i.imgur.com/wPVR9G1.png
Stand by Me (1986) - 4

The closing lines ("I never again had friends like the ones I had when I was 12. Jesus, does anyone?"), are so true. I was smiling as I was hearing the words, but really, I shouldn't have.

[Daniel M]

http://s3.amazonaws.com/criterion-production/shop_product_images/620-b9ee488e6ab8991f5f56f6f34bef0885/houseposter_w448.jpeg

House (Nobuhiko Ôbayashi, 1977) 4

This is one crazy ******* movie! But I loved every moment of it!

[LP Quagmire]

CLOSED CIRCUIT:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dDiMp-gTHA

Clever and involving political thriller starring the lovely Rebecca Hall.
(***1/4 out of ****)

[Mr Minio]

Glad to see people watching and liking good movies.

[jiraffejustin]

http://michaelgloversmith.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/olddarkhouse1.jpg

The Old Dark House (1932; James Whale)

4

[hell_storm2004]

I watched a few other the last few days:

Mr. Deeds - 6.1/10.

Cache (Hidden) 2005 - 6.2/10.

Battle Roayle (2000) - 7.1/10. Could have been a lot better if all those puppy love scenes were cut out and the last death scene of the class teacher. And what is with the Japanese actors, they all die like a cut off lizards tail?

Tokyo Story - 8.1/10. Still a great watch! A classic.

[Daniel M]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1a/Lost-Higway-01.jpg

Lost Highway (David Lynch, 1997) 4.5

Watched this quite soon after House and I am not sure which was more strange. I loved this though, up there with the very best Lynch in my opinion. Shame it didn't make the 90s list.

[bluedeed]

http://s3.amazonaws.com/criterion-production/shop_product_images/620-b9ee488e6ab8991f5f56f6f34bef0885/houseposter_w448.jpeg

House (Nobuhiko Ôbayashi, 1977) 4

This is one crazy ******* movie! But I loved every moment of it!

I really hope this film grows in popularity towards being a mandatory cult classic, it's wonderful. It also has one of the best establishing shots of all time:
http://25.media.tumblr.com/8243d58aba1dece0392aed0562be6f95/tumblr_mlo0o3uVOe1rpmitso1_500.png

http://31.media.tumblr.com/0ae67937fb03db45bed3e31e933b7a95/tumblr_mlo0o3uVOe1rpmitso2_500.png

[n3wt]

Jurassic Park 2 4

[ezetuw]

http://i.imgur.com/g9etaEu.png
The Tree of Life (2011) - 4

Very good. I can see why it's such a polarizing movie, and I feel it's one of those films that after a rewatch you'll either appreciate a lot more or it will bore you to death. For about half an hour or so I actually felt pretty bored, and I almost disliked it, but then it just kept getting better.


http://i.imgur.com/wPVR9G1.png
Stand by Me (1986) - 4

The closing lines ("I never again had friends like the ones I had when I was 12. Jesus, does anyone?"), are so true. I was smiling as I was hearing the words, but really, I shouldn't have.
Yes. Yes.
Jurassic Park 2 4
Glad to hear. How can people hate this movie?

[Lucas]

^ I don't hate Jurassic Park 2, but it's definitely my least favorite one though. There are some pretty epic scenes in that movie though, especially the scene with the T-Rex's and the cliff.

[Daniel M]

I really hope this film grows in popularity towards being a mandatory cult classic, it's wonderful. It also has one of the best establishing shots of all time:

Yeh it seems a few people have seen it recently. It was on Mr Minios recent top 150 and Skepsis saw it recently too I'm sure. I bought it on Criterion Blu-ray too, mainly for the crazy cover. But I fell in love with it from the very beginning, the awesome mixture of crazy editing and self-aware over the top parody in the school is great, the film overall is so hyper active and crazy, it feels like it never slows down to give you a minute to breath and take it all in :p

[ezetuw]

^ I don't hate Jurassic Park 2, but it's definitely my least favorite one though. There are some pretty epic scenes in that movie though, especially the scene with the T-Rex's and the cliff.
Yes. T-Rexes share the guy. It's a heartwarming scene. The movie is burned into my childhood memory. Watched it a million times. On VHS, ah, those days...

Wait you like 3 better?

[Memento Mori]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e5/Deliverance_poster.jpg

Deliverance
http://www.movieforums.com/images/popcorn/4box.gif

[bluedeed]

Been on a Kiarostami kick recently. Quickly blowing through everything of his that they have:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lZW5L2izHbA/URgBYX72sZI/AAAAAAAAPUI/03kx00UIQXI/s1600/FiveDedicatedtoOzu.jpg

[Lucas]

Yes. T-Rexes share the guy. It's a heartwarming scene. The movie is burned into my childhood memory. Watched it a million times. On VHS, ah, those days...

Wait you like 3 better?

Indeed I do. Strange I know, but I like 3 better. I literally grew up watching all the Jurassic Parks. I've seen each film at least 5x each. The Lost World was always the weakest for me, not quite sure why. Maybe it's the lack of Sam Neill.I still think it's pretty kick-ass though.

[Daniel M]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f2/Kuroran.jpg

Ran (Akira Kurosawa, 1985) 4

A great film, but a cold and pessimistic one focusing on the dark side of human nature. I prefer the more fun filled/optimistic action epic that is Seven Samurai, but both are great films.

[Mmmm Donuts]

Jiro Dreams of Sushi

http://i725.photobucket.com/albums/ww260/Think_Mcfly_Think/TMT%20New%20Album/jiro_poster_110928_magnolia_small-thumb.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1319409211964

9/10

I heard of this movie during its release in 2011, but forgot about it until I picked it up at the video store yesterday. I gotta say that it really is a great documentary. It's about one of Tokyo's most acclaimed sushi chefs, Jiro Ono, who makes some of the best food in the world, at the young age of 85 (at the time of the documentary). His past, daily life, and philosophies really make the movie so intriguing, and watching all the sushi made me hungry myself. I will say certain parts dragged on a bit too long, but a very well made doc nonethless.

If you're tired of documentaries that are depressing or biased, or both, give this one a try. It is neither.

[The Sci-Fi Slob]

G.I. Joe: Retaliation

Lots of CGI, the most diabolical plot ever, gallons of testosterone and baby oil, poorly cast British actors attempting American accents, and failing. And a 300 pound former pro wrestler who can't act - who also spent most of the films final battle driving around in a 'tank' - which was nothing more then a dune buggy with rockets taped on the side.:D http://www.movieforums.com/images/popcorn/1box.gif So bad it's funny.

[ezetuw]

Indeed I do. Strange I know, but I like 3 better. I literally grew up watching all the Jurassic Parks. I've seen each film at least 5x each. The Lost World was always the weakest for me, not quite sure why. Maybe it's the lack of Sam Neill.I still think it's pretty kick-ass though.
I liked Sam Neill's thing with the kids in the first one, but they just repeated the thing on the third one, and I wasn't happy. More importantly, Rexie dies in the beginning. I was not pleased :nope: But the most important one is actually the opposite to your argument. 3 has no Ian Malcom, the coolest mofo in these things! No! Don't do that to me, movie!

For me, the third one is just not only a retread of the previous two. It's a retread of the other two minus epic awesome moments. Still enjoyed it. And it's sadly the only one I got to watch on the big screen. It's the one I watched the least times obviously. Would need do a marathon to know exactly to what extent it's worse than the other two, but for me it definitely is.

[Guaporense]

On the Waterfront
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f4/On_the_Waterfront_poster.jpg/225px-On_the_Waterfront_poster.jpg
2_5 (new ratings scale, 2_5 means "very good", so I can distinguish between all my movies by ratings, bad movies are rather homogeneous so they don't need distinguishing)

[LP Quagmire]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1a/Lost-Higway-01.jpg

Lost Highway (David Lynch, 1997) 4.5

Watched this quite soon after House and I am not sure which was more strange. I loved this though, up there with the very best Lynch in my opinion. Shame it didn't make the 90s list.

As a longtime Lynch fan I can say that's the only time he's disappointed me. Oh well, it does have the last film performances of Richard Pryor and Lynch regular Jack Nance to commend it, I guess.

[the samoan lawyer]

http://www.horrordvds.com/reviews/a-m/manhunter/manhunter_fl.jpg

Manhunter (1986)

Much preferred this to the remakes. Could even feature on the upcoming 80's list.

8.5/10

[Daniel M]

As a longtime Lynch fan I can say that's the only time he's disappointed me. Oh well, it does have the last film performances of Richard Pryor and Lynch regular Jack Nance to commend it, I guess.

How come? What makes it worse than Mulholland Drive and Inland Empire then?

[honeykid]

Manhunter (1986)

Much preferred this to the remakes. Could even feature on the upcoming 80's list.

Manhunter should be a shoe-in for the list. Should be. Not will be.

[n3wt]

http://www.horrordvds.com/reviews/a-m/manhunter/manhunter_fl.jpg

Manhunter (1986)

Much preferred this to the remakes. Could even feature on the upcoming 80's list.

8.5/10

I havent seen this, I will have to keep an eye out for it :yup:

[Daniel M]

I will probably have Manhunter on my list HK, to help it get some points. It's a great film...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/15/1963_Le_mepris_1.jpg/220px-1963_Le_mepris_1.jpg

Le Mépris (Jean-Luc Godard, 1963) 4

A fascinating film with lots to say as ever with a Godard film. It's probably my favourite of his actually and will probably get a higher rating in the future. Lots to talk about when I expand on this in the Movie Tab.

[The Sci-Fi Slob]

http://www.impawards.com/2001/posters/joy_ride_ver1.jpg

Joy Ride (2001)
http://www.movieforums.com/images/popcorn/3box.gif

Not seen this one in a while. Its not bad, bit of a Hitcher rip off. Defiantly Paul Walker's career best performance.;)

[MovieGal]

The last film I watched was "The Unspeakable Act" (2012). I enjoy the film but if I was to rate it, it would be 6/10.

[MovieGal]

I just finished "Anima Persa" from 1977. This film from Italy was quite interesting. I give 7/10.

[the samoan lawyer]

I havent seen this, I will have to keep an eye out for it :yup:

I think you'll like it N3wt

[ozgen]

François Ozon's film 'Dans la maison' (In The House)

http://api.thumbr.it/fd706ce1965721851eb6871ea3e6a380/Kh6jxsgS1HctGNUvUU8b/userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/500/88433195.png/500c/thumb.png

4.5[/QUOTE]

when you watch this film you can feel like a pervert because of all voyeuristic desire :cool:

[n3wt]

I think you'll like it N3wt

Awesome! :up: HK is going to message me if he see's it coming on tv :cool:

[the samoan lawyer]

Awesome! :up: HK is going to message me if he see's it coming on tv :cool:

happy days. It'll probably be on itv2 or 4. Will keep an eye out for you myself.;)

[PHANTELM]

Ratatouille

9/10

As Animated films go I rate this as one of the top ones. I was actually about to download some music but caught this while passing the tv then was glued to the end.

Love the characters.

[Daniel M]

http://i2.listal.com/image/1584380/600full-fanny-and-alexander-(special-edition-two--disc-set)-(the-criterion-collection)-cover.jpg

Fanny and Alexander (Ingmar Bergman, 1982) 5

I watched the five hour television version of this uninterrupted last night, and I remained awake until almost 5am in the morning, so great it was. A truly magnificent film, by far Bergman's best. Everyone should watch this for the 80s list and for 'films in general', it is worth it it.

[Lucas]

You're Next-7/10 enjoyable horror flick. Gory,bloody, and fun.

[Mr Minio]

Glorious seance you had, Daniel M! I'm going to be watching Berlin Alexanderplatz soon, as recommended by Harry Lime. I already have watched 3 hours of it, but now I'm not at home, so I can't finish it. It's still 12 hours to the end, but I'm loving it so far.

[Daniel M]

Glorious seance you had, Daniel M! I'm going to be watching Berlin Alexanderplatz soon, as recommended by Harry Lime. I already have watched 3 hours of it, but now I'm not at home, so I can't finish it. It's still 12 hours to the end, but I'm loving it so far.

Sometime I am going to try and watch Satantango in one sitting, but finding 7 hours is not easy. I will watch Berlin Alexanderplatz for the Eighties list too, but I might watch it in episodes. I am going to watch Histoire(s) du Cinéma soon too, although that is only 4 1/2hours I think :cool:

Anyway just finished watching this...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6a/Synecdoche%2C_New_York_poster.jpg

Right now I give it 2.5. It was weird, dark, depressing and too long I thought. I know a lot of people love it, but I didn't get anything, I didn't feel anything that the film was trying to say. I will have to watch it again sometime.

[Miss Vicky]

Anyway just finished watching this...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6a/Synecdoche%2C_New_York_poster.jpg

Right now I give it 2.5. It was weird, dark, depressing and too long I thought. I know a lot of people love it, but I didn't get anything, I didn't feel anything that the film was trying to say. I will have to watch it again sometime.

As much as I loved other Charlie Kaufman penned films, I had similar feelings about this one. Have you seen Being John Malkovich or Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind?

[Daniel M]

As much as I loved other Charlie Kaufman penned films, I had similar feelings about this one. Have you seen Being John Malkovich or Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind?

I have seen Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Adaptation which I thought were very good films, like 4 definitely. Being John Malkovich I have ready to watch too. I was expecting this film to be similar to the two I have watched, but I dunno, it was just too weird, I will definitely have to watch it again sometime to try and 'get it' like I have said. I think with Kaufman as a director he went extreme and created something more extreme, it's more weird, more dark, and more personal.

[Cinephile Society]

The Man who would be King
9/10
Such a great movie with such a great cast.

[WSSlover]

Jaws: 8/10

The Departed: 8/10

(last but not least!) West Side Story: 10/10

[bluedeed]

2_5 (new ratings scale, 2_5 means "very good", so I can distinguish between all my movies by ratings, bad movies are rather homogeneous so they don't need distinguishing)

To each his own rating system. I prefer to distinguish with words rather than numbers for the same reason that you changed your system. I don't like the ambiguity with numbers, I could recommend a 3 star to a person depending on the film but 3 stars might imply only better than average to some. It also brings up the case of, is a 5 only a film that could be considered one of the best of all time, or is it just a very good film relative to the current market or films of the same genre? Words express more.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6a/Synecdoche%2C_New_York_poster.jpg

Right now I give it 2.5. It was weird, dark, depressing and too long I thought. I know a lot of people love it, but I didn't get anything, I didn't feel anything that the film was trying to say. I will have to watch it again sometime.

I think I quoted the wrong post but I am too lazy to change. I think that SNY makes complete sense as a film and as a film in Charlie Kaufman's oeuvre (strange that he's considered an auteur as a screenwriter on his other films). The important things to consider with all of his films up until this most recent one are his status and directors. Before he could make a film like this, that stood no chance of being financially successful, he needed to accrue a sizable name for himself to secure funding. Film is the most costly of the arts it's sad to say. Being John Malkovich, weird as it is, is a more commercially viable product that was needed to establish Kaufman before he could be more daring. Also, SNY is the only film that he's directed, which makes a big difference. Directing a screenplay you didn't write is like translating the whole thing, and in Kaufman's case, the directors tended to normalize his films probably much more than the original screenplay was. When directing your own screenplay, the thoughts are directly onscreen and therefore more personal and more messy.

[Guaporense]

I don't like the ambiguity with numbers, I could recommend a 3 star to a person depending on the film but 3 stars might imply only better than average to some. It also brings up the case of, is a 5 only a film that could be considered one of the best of all time, or is it just a very good film relative to the current market or films of the same genre? Words express more.

True but ratings are easier.

[bluedeed]

True but ratings are easier.

True, but in rating films I'm usually unsure of the ratings and regret them eventually. They haunt me for years!!!!

[Daniel M]

I think I quoted the wrong post but I am too lazy to change. I think that SNY makes complete sense as a film and as a film in Charlie Kaufman's oeuvre (strange that he's considered an auteur as a screenwriter on his other films). The important things to consider with all of his films up until this most recent one are his status and directors. Before he could make a film like this, that stood no chance of being financially successful, he needed to accrue a sizable name for himself to secure funding. Film is the most costly of the arts it's sad to say. Being John Malkovich, weird as it is, is a more commercially viable product that was needed to establish Kaufman before he could be more daring. Also, SNY is the only film that he's directed, which makes a big difference. Directing a screenplay you didn't write is like translating the whole thing, and in Kaufman's case, the directors tended to normalize his films probably much more than the original screenplay was. When directing your own screenplay, the thoughts are directly onscreen and therefore more personal and more messy.

Here's what I posted that pretty much matches up with what you said:

I think with Kaufman as a director he went extreme and created something more extreme, it's more weird, more dark, and more personal.

I don't think it's a bad film, I just found it very difficult to enjoy or connect with in the strange way Kaufman would have intended, I know Ebert loved it and said it improved on repeat viewings as he attempted to 'master it', so maybe after more views, thinking and reading, I'll regard it as a better film.

It's kind of a fitting point that actually, when added to what you say about preference for words over rating. I think its harsh to give the film a low rating right now, it's a film much better built for discussion and analysis, hence why I just gave it the middle rating for now, I can't give it any less or any more :)

[Guaporense]

If you didn't like it you should give a bad rating. Giving it points only because it is artsy is nonsense.

[bluedeed]

If you didn't like it you should give a bad rating. Giving it points only because it is artsy is nonsense.

That's not what I mean, I have a difficult time quantifying how good I thought a movie was. Translating thoughts into numbers isn't instantaneous in this case (in my schoolwork it usually is though).

[Daniel M]

If you didn't like it you should give a bad rating. Giving it points only because it is artsy is nonsense.

Not true, reading over the last few posts should explain this. I didn't really dislike it, I just didn't get it and it felt cold to me. As said ratings don't always tell the full story when it comes to a film, with ratings I try to judge with a bit of objectivity and applaud it for its merits too, even if I wasn't able to connect with it. Like I said, I didn't dislike it to give it a bad rating, or like it to give it a good rating, what the hell, this is already explained in the last few posts really. :p

[The Sci-Fi Slob]

http://www.cinema-suicide.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Girl-Next-Door-Poster.jpg

The Girl Next Door (2007)
http://www.movieforums.com/images/popcorn/4box.gif

Stand By Me meets The Hills Have Eyes.

The family in this are seriously sick and depraved, a very shocking and powerful tale.

[Lucas]

http://www.cinema-suicide.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Girl-Next-Door-Poster.jpg

The Girl Next Door (2007)
http://www.movieforums.com/images/popcorn/4box.gif

Stand By Me meets The Hills Have Eyes.

The family in this are seriously sick and depraved, a very shocking and powerful tale.

Woah that sounds awesome. Might have to check this one out.

[Skepsis93]

The Girl Next Door is very loosely based on the Sylvia Likens murder case from Indiana in the 60s. Check out An American Crime for a much more disturbing, accurate depiction of the story.

[donniedarko]

The Girl Next Door is very loosely based on the Sylvia Likens murder case from Indiana in the 60s. Check out An American Crime for a much more disturbing, accurate depiction of the story.

I'll check that out, when I red the wiki page about the case I was literally shaking. Shame that the perpetrator is completely free

[ezetuw]

Red Lights AKA Psychic Busters AKA NOT

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/20/Red_Lights_FilmPoster.jpeg

Ok, here's a movie I didn't like. Nope. Not. No good.

Sort of horror film, sort of thriller, sort of mystery.

From scene one the acting was meh to bad. Cillian Murphy mostly did a basically decent job, but in a movie where scenes were so stupid there was just no way for it not to feel stagey. Sigourney Weaver, look, I love this woman. I had the biggest crush on Ellen Ripley, no joke. Still have it :D. But here, she didn't convince me, it was the kind of character I've seen her done before, and it's not her best either.

For Bobby, I'd have to get into spoiler territory. But without doing that, I think he was good. The first shot of him is ****ing stupid, but it gets better later. The thing is even though I liked him, he doesn't play the character he's supposed to play. Can't say more. Now, after seeing him in this, I wouldn't mind seeing him play something badass like a demon or the devil or something, because he gets a couple awesome scenes (in terms of him, not the rest of it) creepy and exhilarating. Loved to see him play this. But again, this is not his character. I was dissapointed once it was all said and done. Still, I was happy to see him doing those couple good scenes.

Sometimes it was trippy type horror, there were some failed attempts at jump scare horror, sometimes it went into a more Rosemary's Baby type horror, sometimes it was a mystery-thriller type movie. Not too good as any of them. Other than those couple scenes I mentioned, I thoroughly did not enjoy it. I already thought it was a bad movie, but I wasn't angry really, it was just a bad movie. And then I got to THE ****ING ENDING. Oh no. That ending, no, no, no, don't do this, movie. It cheated. It pissed me off. **** this movie.

Rating? 1.5? 2? I don't know, I don't do ratings well. ********, that's the rating I give it.

[Guaporense]

I didn't really dislike it, I just didn't get it and it felt cold to me.

That means you disliked it. Not "getting it" essentially means you liked it less than the people who praise the movie.

[bluedeed]

That means you disliked it. Not "getting it" essentially means you liked it less than the people who praise the movie.

Not necessarily. There's a distinct difference between disliking a film and not "getting it" (since that's the term we're using), and no, it's not pretentiousness. Doesn't this relate back to films you appreciated more after a second viewing? Not all films (or books or art) reveals itself entirely while you watch (or read or see) it. A lot of films (including your favorite by good old Terry Malick) don't obviously present to the audience a clear plot structure or guidelines to follow, why should they? Some films require thinking about them before you'll actually understand them, if films didn't cause you to think not only during, but after the film, it'd be a boring medium. Late Spring didnt hit me until 3 days after watching it. I hardly laughed at Playtime until my third viewing, and now I think it's one of the best comedies of all time. I watch every Wong Kar-Wai film twice, first for plot, then for style. I know you're on a crusade against pretentiousness, but your claims need more logical support and less logical fallacies. And please stop using the claim that people who like movies you don't are lying or are inherently malintentioned. Nobody's trying to mislead you, just trying to interest people in film as an art form.

[The Gunslinger45]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-nyzBB7zV4rw/T95Zo4GWQ_I/AAAAAAAAAfk/k4D4DKWWBU8/s1600/rock+of+ages.jpg

A movie that is a juke box musical (usually not my cup of tea), takes great liberties from it's original source material, replaces what it took out of the play with Hollywood cliches, and is very safe considering some of the topics and situations the film deals with. And ya know what? I LOVE EVERY MINUTE OF IT! A film that never fails to bring a smile to my face, and my guiltiest of guilty pleasures!

4

[MovieGal]

Disconnect (2012) ~ 8/10

This was a great film. I loved how the stories interwove with each other. Excellent performances by the actors. I wont give the details of the film out but it deals with real every day issues involving the internet.

http://www.adamgehrke.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Disconnect-poster.jpg

[MovieGal]

Kitchen Sink (1989) ~ 7/10

This is a very strange, creepy film.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-jVXUIc_xY3w/T22Y_noTonI/AAAAAAAAAsU/r7l3JHkDImM/s320/kitchen+sink.jpg

[dadgumblah]

Chronicle 7/10
Vampyr 8/10
Chitty Chitty Bang Bang 8/10
The Wolfman (2010) 7/10

[MovieGal]

Vampyr 8/10

The Wolfman (2010) 7/10

both are great films. I love the feel of "The Wolfman (2010)." It had the feel of a classic Monster film.

[MovieGal]

Meska Sprawa (2001) ~ 7.5/10 (Poland)

http://1.fwcdn.pl/po/26/68/32668/6900511.3.jpg

[MovieGal]

Salome (1978, Spain) ~ 6/10

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_yokOe6EL0is/StRJdcFTjsI/AAAAAAAAHtM/TtW2EVtlbyY/s320/Pedro+Almodovar+-+Salome+015_0001.jpg

[Daniel M]

That means you disliked it. Not "getting it" essentially means you liked it less than the people who praise the movie.

Well Bluedeed's response is spot on. But in simple terms I am a believer that there is a difference between a movie you didn't enjoy, and a bad movie. Movies deserve to be discussed and analysis on their merits regardless of whether you fully 'got' the experience, as you can't expect to fully understand or experience a film, and punish it because you didn't.

[Nausicaä]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fb/Les-levres-rouges.jpg
Daughters of Darkness

http://www.movieforums.com/images/popcorn/4box.gif



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/52/BloodSpatteredBride.jpg
The Blood Spattered Bride

http://www.movieforums.com/images/popcorn/2_5box.gif

[Daniel M]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2b/Side_by_side_2012.jpg

Side by Side (Christopher Keanneally, 2012) 3.5

A very interesting documentary to watch for anybody interested in films, it's interesting to hear what all different directors had to say about film, but it worked better as a history lesson rather than a debate/discussion over digital. It would of perhaps been more interesting to hear directors elaborate and discuss with others there opinions, instead it was a more factual presentation allowing you to make up your own mind.

[donniedarko]

The Wolfman (2010) 7/10

Ignore me

Can you expand on this?

For those who haven't seen it, it's a really ****ed up film, but well worth the watch, if you can stomach it.

[ezetuw]

Can you expand on this?

For those who haven't seen it, it's a really ****ed up film, but well worth the watch, if you can stomach it.
****ed up in what sense?

I didn't watch the original, but I'm not a big fan of this one.

[donniedarko]

:facepalm: I thought it said The Woman (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1714208/)

[Guaporense]

Well Bluedeed's response is spot on. But in simple terms I am a believer that there is a difference between a movie you didn't enjoy, and a bad movie. Movies deserve to be discussed and analysis on their merits regardless of whether you fully 'got' the experience, as you can't expect to fully understand or experience a film, and punish it because you didn't.

I don't believe so because art is subjective. A good movie is a movie you enjoy or maybe a movie that many people enjoy.

I noticed that you rate movies in how much you might think other people or critics might enjoy the movie instead of you own tastes. I ask you, does your top 10 reflect your tastes or what you think are the movies that you guess other people like?

Also, people never fully get a movie because other people always will have a different subjective reaction to it. Whats trash to one person may be a treasure to another person.

[Guaporense]

Uncle Boonmee
http://www.criticker.com/img/films/posters/Uncle_Boonmee_Who_Can_Recall.jpg

Pros:
- some beautiful scenes
- some poignant moments
- also has some visually interesting things

Cons:
- boasts the ugliest actors in Thailand
- bad pacing and editing (just take too long and it isn't a Tarkovsky film that is actually a visual marvel to behold, but here most scenes are quite plain)

rating: 1_5 (decent)

[Miss Vicky]

I noticed that you rate movies in how much you might think other people or critics might enjoy the movie instead of you own tastes. I ask you, does your top 10 reflect your tastes or what you think are the movies that you guess other people like?

What the hell does that even mean?

If anybody around here seems to rate movies based on the opinions of other people, it's you Guapo. I've never gotten the impression that Daniel is trying to impress anybody. Can't say the same for you.

[Guaporense]

Not necessarily. There's a distinct difference between disliking a film and not "getting it" (since that's the term we're using), and no, it's not pretentiousness. Doesn't this relate back to films you appreciated more after a second viewing?

That means you liked the movie on the second viewing and disliked on the first viewing. So your ratings should reflect that.

Not all films (or books or art) reveals itself entirely while you watch (or read or see) it.

Almost all do for me. The few movies that I appreciated more on a second viewing are those that I watched when I was younger and my tastes changed over time or that I wasn't used to a certain style. For instance, I didn't like Tokyo Story that much on a first viewing because I actually couldn't watch it until the end due to the noise in my house after the first 90 minutes of the movie.

A lot of films (including your favorite by good old Terry Malick) don't obviously present to the audience a clear plot structure or guidelines to follow, why should they?

Because it lowers the costs of consumption. If entry costs are too high the net profit of consuming a movie may be negative. The best movies provide the greatest output for the smallest cost, in other words, the greatest surplus.

Some people like the pain, though, but I am not one of those.

Some films require thinking about them before you'll actually understand them, if films didn't cause you to think not only during, but after the film, it'd be a boring medium. Late Spring didnt hit me until 3 days after watching it.

Late Spring hit me almost instantaneously. I don't think you should force yourself to like what critics tell you to like.

I hardly laughed at Playtime until my third viewing, and now I think it's one of the best comedies of all time. I watch every Wong Kar-Wai film twice, first for plot, then for style.

Do you love (or at least lie to yourself that you love) every movie that film critics tell you to love? :D

I know you're on a crusade against pretentiousness, but your claims need more logical support and less logical fallacies.

Your own post lacks any logical rigor, so don't blame other people from using "logical fallacies".

If I am in any crusade is a crusade against people who think that some movies are objectively better than others and that some movies are sacred cows.

Art is subjective. For instance, this song is better than anything I ever listened from any classic rock or jazz musicians:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PyvU9iSq50

How many people would agree with me? Not most people but that is fundamentally meaningless since taste is subjective.

And please stop using the claim that people who like movies you don't are lying or are inherently malintentioned. Nobody's trying to mislead you, just trying to interest people in film as an art form.

I never said anything that implied in what you think I implied. However, the simple fact is that people shouldn't be forced to like what other people think they should like. So you are actually accusing me of doing what you are in fact doing.

I am only telling Daniel that he shouldn't force himself to like what other people think he should like.

And for the record, I LIKED Synedocke New York, it's a very interesting movie. I think it is about as good as the first Iron Man movie.

[bluedeed]

I don't believe so because art is subjective. A good movie is a movie you enjoy or maybe a movie that many people enjoy.

Also, people never fully get a movie because other people always will have a different subjective reaction to it. Whats trash to one person may be a treasure to another person.

I don't think enjoy is the right word for this. Do you think art is meant specifically to be enjoyed? If you don't enjoy art it's bad art? That's a capitalist or entertainment point of view, not an artistic view of cinema.

It's fair to say though, that some films objectively provide more indicators of plot development and action. There's the rule that you need to repeat something three times to the audience until they'll remember it, and a lot of Hollywood's more complex (plot-wise, such as Nolan's) films play into that very much, but other narrative filmmakers like Charlie Kaufman, give much less indication of what's ahead, or what's important to remember and not remember.

[Guaporense]

What the hell does that even mean?

It means what is written.

If anybody around here seems to rate movies based on the opinions of other people, it's you Guapo.

Give an example.

I've never gotten the impression that Daniel is trying to impress anybody. Can't say the same for you.

Give an example.

[Miss Vicky]

It means what is written.

Wow.

Give an example.

Your constant need to justify "your" opinions by pointing to statistics and critics polls.


Give an example.

An example of which - you being an ass or Daniel not trying to impress anybody?

[Guaporense]

I don't think enjoy is the right word for this. Do you think art is meant specifically to be enjoyed? If you don't enjoy art it's bad art?

Its bad for you. May be good art for others.

Dictionary definition:

Enjoy
1. To receive pleasure or satisfaction from.

I don't think we could call something art if nobody ever enjoyed it or at least the creator (s) did not plan for it to be enjoyable in some way.

That's a capitalist or entertainment point of view, not an artistic view of cinema.

No, all art is art because there exist people that enjoy those works of art. As incredible as may sound, each individual person has his own tastes and all people enjoy art, in various forms. All admired works of art are admired because there exists a significant number of people who actually enjoy those works of art.

Also, don't say you are a Marxist using phrases like "capitalist point of view"?

It's fair to say though, that some films objectively provide more indicators of plot development and action.

True but given your tastes the right amount may vary.

There's the rule that you need to repeat something three times to the audience until they'll remember it, and a lot of Hollywood's more complex (plot-wise, such as Nolan's) films play into that very much, but other narrative filmmakers like Charlie Kaufman, give much less indication of what's ahead, or what's important to remember and not remember.

Interestingly that I rate Charlie Kaufman's movies about the same as Nolan's. Both directors made some very good movies.

[Mmmm Donuts]

http://add-vodka.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/popcorn-gif.gif

[Guaporense]

Your constant need to justify "your" opinions by pointing to statistics and critics polls.

I was actually "advertising" the movies in a sense of trying to make people watch those movies more (saying: see, it's not only me that loves those movies, but other people as well so you should watch it). Though I may admit that I don't like the fact that Miyazaki's films are not ranked higher in the Sign and Sound poll or the IMDB top 250 (for instance).

I also use these rankings to find movies to watch, I discovered Miyazaki by watching the movies in the top 250 of the IMDB, I discovered Ozu by browsing through these critical lists. While there are some movies in the recent Sign and Sound top 250 poll that I hate (such as The Tree of Life, Nashville and Last Year in Marienbad) there are others that I love such as Tarkovsky's, Ozu's, Kurosawa's, Miyazaki's, Kubrick's, etc. So, overall, I think that these best movies lists can be useful also for people to find new movies to watch. What I don't like is that people should think: oohh, this movie is ranked high in the poll so it MUST be a masterpiece (an opinion that I also think you share).

Tarkovsky, for instance, though that Hithcock's films were trash, that 2001 and Apocalypse Now was trash, Bergman though that Orson Welles' movies were trash, etc. So you should also trust your own tastes a little bit more like they did.

An example of which - you being an ass or Daniel not trying to impress anybody?

No, I am just saying what Mark F had already said before: that people shouldn't be influenced so much by other people's opinions. My use of these rankings to advertise movies that I love actually shows how much I think other people are influenced by other's opinions here and not that I am influenced by these opinions.

Also it is my desire that general subjective perceptions should conform to my own perceptions to some degree. So the fact that some other people love the movies that I do comforts me to a certain extent. I think this applies to everyone.

[bluedeed]

That means you liked the movie on the second viewing and disliked on the first viewing. So your ratings should reflect that.
I'm not sure I understand your use of binaries here. Why is liking and disliking the only options for a movie? That sounds restrictive. What if I want to be indifferent, or like parts, or be aroused by a movie? Not everything fits.

The best movies provide the greatest output for the smallest cost, in other words, the greatest surplus.

Why?

Late Spring hit me almost instantaneously. I don't think you should force yourself to like what critics tell you to like.

Good for you. I'm not really sure how discovering its beauty later (I was new to Ozu's female protagonists, the film confused me slightly) makes me conforming to critics. I hadn't read anything, I had just been thinking about it, and it hit me, totally irrelevant to critical analysis or consensus

Do you love (or at least lie to yourself that you love) every movie that film critics tell you to love? :D

Now this is a bulls*** question. Similar to, "Are you a hipster?" my response is much more irrelevant than the question. Either way you've decided what you believe, otherwise the question wouldn't have been asked (not exactly what I meant to say, still not a real question though). It also assumes once again a collective group of film critics who are unanimous in opinion. I've read more negative writing on SNY or something like The Tree of Life than I have positive, so I'm not sure what you're really asking me? Do I trust certain critic's opinions? Of course. Do I have my own opinions? I forget

Your own post lacks any logical rigor, so don't blame other people from using "logical fallacies".

Sorry about that, it was more in regards to the way you handle statistics, which is irrelevant. My apologies.

If I am in any crusade is a crusade against people who think that some movies are objectively better than others. You appear to be one of those fools.

That's a very difficult claim to argue, I can't even think of a way to approach it. Do I think some films have more craft, innovation, style, and power than others? Of course, but I can't quantify that, and I wouldn't try.

Art is subjective.

I didn't know that.

I never said anything that implied in what you think I implied. However, the simple fact is that people shouldn't be forced to like what other people think they should like. So you are actually accusing me of doing what you are in fact doing.

k

And for the record, I LIKED Synedocke New York, it's a very interesting movie. I think it is about as good as the first Iron Man movie.

I don't understand that comment. And it's pretty irrelevant. I think that Un Chien Andalou is as good as the second Iron Man. How (besides your suggestion that everything is based on enjoyment) does that even make sense comparing those two? They're completely different films attempting completely different things. Do you think that Kaufman made SNY to be enjoyed? I don't.

[Miss Vicky]

You seem to like dictionary definitions, Guapo, so here's one for you:

Non sequitur. (Noun) Defined by The Oxford New Essential Dictionary as: A conclusion that does not logically follow from the premises.

[bluedeed]

Its bad for you. May be good art for others.

Dictionary definition:

Enjoy
1. To receive pleasure or satisfaction from.

I don't think we could call something art if nobody ever enjoyed it or at least the creator (s) did not plan for it to be enjoyable in some way.

Wait a minute!!! Which dictionary?

No, all art is art because there exist people that enjoy those works of art. As incredible as may sound, each individual person has his own tastes and all people enjoy art, in various forms. All admired works of art are admired because there exists a significant number of people who actually enjoy those works of art.

You're right, I forgot that people have opinions and whatnot and things. We'd be better off if everyone listened to the secret body of critics hiding behind door three manipulating fools like me into enjoying films that are bad because they are evil creatures. I'd enjoy that world. I wouldn't have to see all of those previews for John Carter that way.

Also, don't say you are a Marxist using phrases like "capitalist point of view"?

I'm not, and I won't get into why not. I think I addressed your rebuttal here. Successfully denied Marxism and avoided any tacked on criticism that could've been added by a false declaration

Interestingly that I rate Charlie Kaufman's movies about the same as Nolan's.

Again, k.

[Guaporense]

I'm not sure I understand your use of binaries here. Why is liking and disliking the only options for a movie? That sounds restrictive. What if I want to be indifferent, or like parts, or be aroused by a movie? Not everything fits.

I am not disagreeing with you here but you are in fact avoiding my comment. Trying to escape in some way from what I said: you can like a movie on a second viewing and not like on the first viewing. In a way you can say that you grasped the movie on a second viewing but essentially you never fully grasp a movie because there are always people that have a different perception of it. So, overall, you can only conclude that the movie "clicked" on a second viewing but

Why?

Because I don't like to spend effort trying to watch and understand a movie. A movie that takes too much effort to understand may not be better than an easier movie even if it yields slightly smaller returns afterwards. The objective is net pleasure maximization.

Good for you. I'm not really sure how discovering its beauty later (I was new to Ozu's female protagonists, the film confused me slightly) makes me conforming to critics. I hadn't read anything, I had just been thinking about it, and it hit me, totally irrelevant to critical analysis or consensus

I see. Spirited Away hit me fully 4-5 days after I watched it, but when I watching for for the first time I also though it was a masterpiece but it became an "uber masterpiece" for me only a few days later when it hit my on my subconscious. All movies in my top 10 (and most in my top 200) became members of among my favorites after I reflected a little about the experience of watching them.

Now this is a bulls*** question. Similar to, "Are you a hipster?" my response is much more irrelevant than the question. Either way you've decided what you believe, otherwise the question wouldn't have been asked (not exactly what I meant to say, still not a real question though). It also assumes once again a collective group of film critics who are unanimous in opinion. I've read more negative writing on SNY or something like The Tree of Life than I have positive, so I'm not sure what you're really asking me? Do I trust certain critic's opinions? Of course. Do I have my own opinions? I forget

Well, there are movies that many critics love. SNY and The Tree of Life are among those movies. Some critics didn't like these movies, most say they loved these movies (http://www.metacritic.com/movie/the-tree-of-life/critic-reviews), only 1 out of 43 said he didn't really like it.


I am asking you, do you hate any movies in the Sign and Sound top 250? Here is the list in case you haven't read it: http://www.imdb.com/list/cblL2JQNPQs/

That's a very difficult claim to argue, I can't even think of a way to approach it. Do I think some films have more craft, innovation, style, and power than others? Of course, but I can't quantify that, and I wouldn't try.

Craft, innovation, style and power are all subjective.

It's true that there are some patterns, for instance, I found Late Spring to be very powerful and I read later that it is considered to be very powerful. But other movies considered to be very powerful did not hit me at all while movies not considered to be powerful by critics hit me much harder than anything.

I don't understand that comment. And it's pretty irrelevant.

If you didn't understand you cannot judge it's relevance. :D

Anyway, my point is that you though that I did not like Synecdoche New York so you though that I was saying to Daniel that he shouldn't like it as well. The fact is that I liked watching it and that I was telling Daniel that he shouldn't be forcing himself to like it if he didn't.

I think that Un Chien Andalou is as good as the second Iron Man. How (besides your suggestion that everything is based on enjoyment) does that even make sense comparing those two? They're completely different films attempting completely different things. Do you think that Kaufman made SNY to be enjoyed? I don't.

Well, your comment here makes sense. It's true that very different movies are very different but it stills makes sense to compare them at some level. I don't know what meaning you attach to the word enjoyment but it is probably much more restrictive than the meaning that I attach to it. For me enjoyment in relation to movies is any type of pleasure derived from watching the movie, either during or after.

[Guaporense]

Wait a minute!!! Which dictionary?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/enjoy

You're right, I forgot that people have opinions and whatnot and things. We'd be better off if everyone listened to the secret body of critics hiding behind door three manipulating fools like me into enjoying films that are bad because they are evil creatures. I'd enjoy that world. I wouldn't have to see all of those previews for John Carter that way.

I am only saying that you should trust your own tastes slightly more than you actually do. If you didn't like an art film that doesn't mean that you didn't "grasp it", it only means it did not fit into your tastes. It is less likely that an art film will be liked by you (or anybody else) than an commercial movie because the art film tries to be innovative many times at the cost of being actually a good movie, a commercial movie is conservative and so uses traditional methods that usually work and so tends to actually resonate better with most people. Few art movies are great and most are just trash like most normal movies.

For instance, you said that My Neighbor Totoro was the best Miyazaki movie, it's clear that you said that because it's is critically the best received Miyazaki movie among western film critics (who are ignorant of his earlier work), you said it was better in particular than Princess Mononoke, but notice that PM is just the type of movie that film critics in the West do not particularly love. In animation, personal family friendly films such as Totoro and Spirited Away are much more accepted and admired in the west by critics than a complex brutal action fantasy animated epic such as PM and you are actually reflecting those biases (derived from the western film critics own perception of animated molded by their more family friendly animation combined with their general bias against epic, fantasy and action oriented movies). Maybe your taste just fits very well with the western critical average, or maybe not, especially considering you did not appear to understand PM themes at any level beyond the most superficial.

I'm not, and I won't get into why not. I think I addressed your rebuttal here. Successfully denied Marxism and avoided any tacked on criticism that could've been added by a false declaration.

All right.

Again, k.

What k means?

[Proximity]

this is why i think The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is actually Fincher's best movie

[honeykid]

net pleasure maximization.
Worst. Band name. Ever. :D

[Mmmm Donuts]

Or the best sex ed lesson ever.

[bluedeed]

Trying to escape in some way from what I said: you can like a movie on a second viewing and not like on the first viewing. In a way you can say that you grasped the movie on a second viewing but essentially you never fully grasp a movie because there are always people that have a different perception of it. So, overall, you can only conclude that the movie "clicked" on a second viewing but

Gee, I'm not really sure about that ending of Mulholland Dr., but it's clear via the film's earlier carefully plotted acts and extended final act that there was something intentional going on that was meant to surprise me but also had substance, too bad I hate the movie because I don't get the ending even though I thought it had a great atmosphere and wonderful tone, and was thoroughly engrossed throughout. Maybe I'll like it later when I understand it.

Because I don't like to spend effort trying to watch and understand a movie. A movie that takes too much effort to understand may not be better than an easier movie even if it yields slightly smaller returns afterwards. The objective is net pleasure maximization.

Not sure if this is a joke, or serious rebuttal, for if it's rebuttal, it seems like a primitive and lazy way to view art, if it's a joke, I'm going to use "The objective is net pleasure maximum" in my next porno ("wait, bluedeed! You make pornos?!?!" "No, good citizen, I do not")

I see. Spirited Away hit me fully 4-5 days after I watched it, but when I watching for for the first time I also though it was a masterpiece but it became an "uber masterpiece" for me only a few days later when it hit my on my subconscious. All movies in my top 10 (and most in my top 200) became members of among my favorites after I reflected a little about the experience of watching them.

I don't see the difference between this and not comprehending or liking movie from the start. The only difference is a difference in the intensity of the initial reaction.

Well, there are movies that many critics love. SNY and The Tree of Life are among those movies. Some critics didn't like these movies, most say they loved these movies (http://www.metacritic.com/movie/the-tree-of-life/critic-reviews), only 1 out of 43 said he didn't really like it.

mildly: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/synecdoche_new_york/
They're polarizing movies but both have an increasing reputation.

I am asking you, do you hate any movies in the Sign and Sound top 250? Here is the list in case you haven't read it: http://www.imdb.com/list/cblL2JQNPQs/

Now, the question is do I respond to this loaded question in a mocking manner, or not at all? I think I already answered that.

It's true that there are some patterns, for instance, I found Late Spring to be very powerful and I read later that it is considered to be very powerful. But other movies considered to be very powerful did not hit me at all while movies not considered to be powerful by critics hit me much harder than anything.

That's really cool that you just happened upon Late Spring without knowing anything about it beforehand, pretty difficult, pretty inconceivable, but if you so insist.

If you didn't understand you cannot judge it's relevance. :D

I didn't enjoy it though...

Anyway, my point is that you though that I did not like Synecdoche New York so you though that I was saying to Daniel that he shouldn't like it as well. The fact is that I liked watching it and that I was telling Daniel that he shouldn't be forcing himself to like it if he didn't.

Never said or indicated that.

Well, your comment here makes sense. It's true that very different movies are very different but it stills makes sense to compare them at some level. I don't know what meaning you attach to the word enjoyment but it is probably much more restrictive than the meaning that I attach to it. For me enjoyment in relation to movies is any type of pleasure derived from watching the movie, either during or after.

So you're more of a coital and post-coital type of person instead of a foreplay guy? Cool, I can respect that.

[bluedeed]

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/enjoy

THE FREE DICTIONARY?!?! You need to OED that stuff or it isn't worth anything.

I am only saying that you should trust your own tastes slightly more than you actually do. If you didn't like an art film that doesn't mean that you didn't "grasp it", it only means it did not fit into your tastes. It is less likely that an art film will be liked by you (or anybody else) than an commercial movie because the art film tries to be innovative many times at the cost of being actually a good movie, a commercial movie is conservative and so uses traditional methods that usually work and so tends to actually resonate better with most people. Few art movies are great and most are just trash like most normal movies.

For instance, you said that My Neighbor Totoro was the best Miyazaki movie, it's clear that you said that because it's is critically the best received Miyazaki movie among western film critics (who are ignorant of his earlier work), you said it was better in particular than Princess Mononoke, but notice that PM is just the type of movie that film critics in the West do not particularly love. In animation, personal family friendly films such as Totoro and Spirited Away are much more accepted and admired in the west by critics than a complex brutal action fantasy animated epic such as PM and you are actually reflecting those biases (derived from the western film critics own perception of animated molded by their more family friendly animation combined with their general bias against epic, fantasy and action oriented movies). Maybe your taste just fits very well with the western critical average, or maybe not, especially considering you did not appear to understand PM themes at any level beyond the most superficial.

Thank you Guaporense, I now realize that I am not a thinking person. You have proven with hard evidence and facts that my feelings on films are not my own, but the product of y own lack of intelligence and striving thirst for acceptance. I didn't realized that my love for artistic movies came from pretension and counter culture conformity, I thought it was that I was interested in other people's worldview and interesting ways to express it, but I was foolish to think that I could enjoy a slower paced or more daring movie, I obviously hate them. I didn't know that art films sacrifice quality for innovation (hmm, this might contradict your previous statement about subjectivity, conditional arguments?), I thought I was surprised and fascinated by the unlike conventional or Hollywood cinema that bores me and rarely surprises, that was stupid of me.

You totally caught me about Totoro though, your hard evidence showed that I only like it because critics do, as I do with all movies. I love how you quoted my thoughts on the movie and really poked holes in my reasoning for thinking that film was better than the other Miyazaki films I've seen. Really cut through my lies and showed how much of a phony I am. You did a great job not generalizing my tastes and making me feel like you're looking at my views individually and not comparing them to the reaction of some unknown group of western critics. I like how you asked me meaningful questions this whole time and made this little debacle a showcase for proper condescension you miserable little a**hole. Oh God! What did I just do?

Also, for what I lack in understanding in Princess Mononoke, you lack double in understanding of Ozu.

What k means?

It means ok, but it's slightly more dismissive and passive aggressive, one of the great new words of the 21st century alongside redonculous and i(insert term here). k?

[cricket]

Zero Dark Thirty 4

[Daniel M]

What the hell does that even mean?

If anybody around here seems to rate movies based on the opinions of other people, it's you Guapo. I've never gotten the impression that Daniel is trying to impress anybody. Can't say the same for you.

Thanks. If I was trying to impress someone surely I'd write a review sized post analysing and breaking down Synecdoche, New York and telling everyone how awesome it was. Instead I simply said I didn't get it and need to watch it again but I can't rate it higher or lower. If I am basing my tastes off critics I would have given it a higher rating and not gone through this whole post a lower rating and argument stuff.

Also, and I know not everyone will agree with me here: A movie does not have to be enjoyable to be a good one.

And this idea of certain type of movies not 'fitting into your tastes is ridiculous', it's like your ratings for a film are already pre-determined based on whether they are made in a certain way or include certain things, and if they don't you don't like them as 'they don't fit your tastes', I like all type of movies, if they are good movies. Synecdoche, New York, I didn't enjoy it, but it's not a bad movie, in my opinion :)

The fact that you think I am forcing myself to like it is laughable.

Thank you Guaporense, I now realize that I am not a thinking person. You have proven with hard evidence and facts that my feelings on films are not my own, but the product of y own lack of intelligence and striving thirst for acceptance. I didn't realized that my love for artistic movies came from pretension and counter culture conformity, I thought it was that I was interested in other people's worldview and interesting ways to express it, but I was foolish to think that I could enjoy a slower paced or more daring movie, I obviously hate them. I didn't know that art films sacrifice quality for innovation (hmm, this might contradict your previous statement about subjectivity, conditional arguments?), I thought I was surprised and fascinated by the unlike conventional or Hollywood cinema that bores me and rarely surprises, that was stupid of me.

You totally caught me about Totoro though, your hard evidence showed that I only like it because critics do, as I do with all movies. I love how you quoted my thoughts on the movie and really poked holes in my reasoning for thinking that film was better than the other Miyazaki films I've seen. Really cut through my lies and showed how much of a phony I am. You did a great job not generalizing my tastes and making me feel like you're looking at my views individually and not comparing them to the reaction of some unknown group of western critics. I like how you asked me meaningful questions this whole time and made this little debacle a showcase for proper condescension you miserable little a**hole. Oh God! What did I just do?

Brilliant :up:

------

Anyway, this is going to wind up Guapo further but it's not even intentional, I just happened to watch it last night:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a5/Grave_of_the_Fireflies_Japanese_poster.jpg/220px-Grave_of_the_Fireflies_Japanese_poster.jpg

Grave of the Fireflies (Isao Takahata, 1988) 3.5

Wasn't the devastating emotional experience that I thought it was going to be. Call me a heartless bastard but I didn't cry or anything, although it is a sad film. Depressing for most of the part, I enjoyed it more as a childhood/family story, and found the young relationship between a brother and sister attempting to look out for each other more interesting/powerful than other elements of the film.

[Mmmm Donuts]

^I think if Guapo sees this, ***** will explode.

[ezetuw]

Holy crap! It appears that I'll have fun reading the last couple pages of this thread later! All hell broke loose!

[Guaporense]

Thanks. If I was trying to impress someone surely I'd write a review sized post analysing and breaking down Synecdoche, New York and telling everyone how awesome it was. Instead I simply said I didn't get it and need to watch it again but I can't rate it higher or lower. If I am basing my tastes off critics I would have given it a higher rating and not gone through this whole post a lower rating and argument stuff.

Maybe you shouldn't have given any rating at all.

Also, and I know not everyone will agree with me here: A movie does not have to be enjoyable to be a good one.

So you are a masochist. Well, even then it means you enjoy pain not that you enjoy what you don't enjoy (which would be a logical contradiction).

And this idea of certain type of movies not 'fitting into your tastes is ridiculous', it's like your ratings for a film are already pre-determined based on whether they are made in a certain way or include certain things, and if they don't you don't like them as 'they don't fit your tastes', I like all type of movies, if they are good movies. Synecdoche, New York, I didn't enjoy it, but it's not a bad movie, in my opinion :)

Well, that means that you have a very broad tastes. I don't have such extremely broad tastes as there are certain types of movies that I do not enjoy. There are also other types of movies that I may enjoy more than others, crazy science fiction concepts, for instance, are one thing that if added to a movie makes it better, for me.

The fact that you think I am forcing myself to like it is laughable.

Well, I have the impression that you may be trying to ignore your own personal tastes and instead you are torturing yourself to watch movies that you do not really enjoy and try to rate them based on how much you though the movie was good in "objective" terms. This is only an hypothesis, though and I am just saying for you to not do so.

Mark F already told you (and others) that in a less blunt way.

[Guaporense]

^I think if Guapo sees this, ***** will explode.

I didn't cry the first time I watched GotF as well. Though I rarely cry at movies and it was only on the second time when I had fully immersed myself into Takahata's style that I could fully engage GotF. Anyway, it is among the saddest stories ever told given it's actually a slightly modified true story written by the man who was the older brother in the movie, so it's supposed to be very realistic.

I am actually glad that Daniel wasn't influenced by others when writing his review of GotF and gave it a rather mediocre rating. Glad also that he is educating himself into the basics of animated cinema.

[Guaporense]

Thank you Guaporense, I now realize that I am not a thinking person. You have proven with hard evidence and facts that my feelings on films are not my own, but the product of y own lack of intelligence and striving thirst for acceptance. I didn't realized that my love for artistic movies came from pretension and counter culture conformity, I thought it was that I was interested in other people's worldview and interesting ways to express it, but I was foolish to think that I could enjoy a slower paced or more daring movie, I obviously hate them. I didn't know that art films sacrifice quality for innovation (hmm, this might contradict your previous statement about subjectivity, conditional arguments?), I thought I was surprised and fascinated by the unlike conventional or Hollywood cinema that bores me and rarely surprises, that was stupid of me.

You totally caught me about Totoro though, your hard evidence showed that I only like it because critics do, as I do with all movies. I love how you quoted my thoughts on the movie and really poked holes in my reasoning for thinking that film was better than the other Miyazaki films I've seen. Really cut through my lies and showed how much of a phony I am. You did a great job not generalizing my tastes and making me feel like you're looking at my views individually and not comparing them to the reaction of some unknown group of western critics. I like how you asked me meaningful questions this whole time and made this little debacle a showcase for proper condescension you miserable little a**hole. Oh God! What did I just do?

Calm down.

I wasn't trying to attack you, I was only being honest about my perception of your actions in this internet forum. I see that you have taken this personally but I wasn't taking it personally just being myself (a little autistic guy who analyses things objectively without caring about the emotions of others).

Also, for what I lack in understanding in Princess Mononoke, you lack double in understanding of Ozu.

I would love for you to argue that. Not that I care much about it. Anyway I haven't written much about Ozu in general and Late Spring here besides my short review in my old top 100 so there isn't anything that you could actually hold on and tell me it shows ignorance.

Anyway, I really do not care much about understanding the themes of a movie if I get my enjoyment but in your case you appeared to criticize the handling of the themes in PM in a way that showcased how little you actually understood it and it only showed how ignorant you are.

I would advise you to be more careful when you talk about things that you are not quite sure of knowing.

[bluedeed]

Calm down kiddo.

I wasn't trying to attack you, I was only being honest about my perception of your actions in this internet forum.

I would love for you to argue that. Not that I care much about it.

Anyway, I really do not care much about understanding the themes of a movie if I get my enjoyment but in your case you appeared to criticize the handling of the themes in PM in a way that showcased how little you actually understood it and it only showed how ignorant you are.

I would advise you to be more careful when you talk about things that you are not quite sure of knowing.

Says he's not trying to attack me, tells me how ignorant I am.

All of this, mind you, is clearly well founded and supported with evidence by the great Brazilian masturbator, Guaporense, and not founded on prejudice.

[Daniel M]

Maybe you shouldn't have given any rating at all.

No, I tried to give it a fair rating based on what I saw and thought of it as a film. But why are you taking a rating so seriously, it's a number, and as it has already been said, words say a lot more.

So you are a masochist. Well, even then it means you enjoy pain not that you enjoy what you don't enjoy (which would be a logical contradiction).

What?

Well, that means that you have a very broad tastes. I don't have such extremely broad tastes as there are certain types of movies that I do not enjoy. There are also other types of movies that I may enjoy more than others, crazy science fiction concepts, for instance, are one thing that if added to a movie makes it better, for me.

No it just means I approach every movie with an open mind and do not dislike films purely because of my prejudices towards a genre/actor.

Well, I have the impression that you may be trying to ignore your own personal tastes and instead you are torturing yourself to watch movies that you do not really enjoy and try to rate them based on how much you though the movie was good in "objective" terms. This is only an hypothesis, though and I am just saying for you to not do so.

Well I do not get where you get this impression from, I love watching all type of movies. Even if I don't enjoy a film I can appreciate and learn from it from other ways.

And yeh, I do try and rate movie from a critical/objective perspective when I can, that's correct, what is wrong with this?

Mark F already told you (and others) that in a less blunt way.

Mark has his own views when it comes to certain films that he is very loud/clear about, and I respect his opinion always, even though I disagree with him quite a lot too (Lynch! :p), but he can support and make me understanding his views without being a condescending arsehole :)

[Guaporense]

Says he's not trying to attack me, tells me how ignorant I am.

This is not an attack. I am telling you that you are ignorant about something to advise you because I want for you to not be ignorant about that subject. I was only talking honestly.

All of this, mind you, is clearly well founded and supported with evidence by the great Brazilian masturbator, Guaporense, and not founded on prejudice.

Now this is an attack. I am sorry that I hurt your feelings so that you have to degrade yourself in this way.

[Guaporense]

There you go.

You should edit that post.

[Daniel M]

You should edit that post.

What?

[Guaporense]

I can't quote it.

[bluedeed]

This is not an attack. I am telling you that you are ignorant about something to advise you because I want for you to not be ignorant about that subject. It's not an attack I was only offering help (I would admit in a rather rude way).

Dearest Guaporense, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by you were trying to help me. Do you have wisdom about Mononoke that you would like to share with me? Do you have a suggestion on how to watch movies or how to interpret Miyazaki, since you're more well versed than I am? Calling me ignorant without offering anything constructive (besides, you're ignorant, don't be ignorant, which isn't help as it's as desiring not to be ignorant isn't something anybody to my knowledge would attempt) isn't helping, it's insulting.

I am an opinionated man, Guaporense, and I'm willing to share these opinions with you. If you need any clarification from me about Mononoke, Totoro or any of the films I have watched really, I would love to elaborate to avoid miscommunicating something. I don't think it's just, however, for you to infer my stance on any particular film, or on my philosophy towards watching films, without directly consulting me, or offering direct evidence. Please, I am willing to listen and appropriately respond to your questions if you will have an open mind about my answers. I feel I have been your own version of Room 237 (the documentary film that is) in which you've been inferring my motivations without providing substantial grounds for doing so (the speakers in that offer support, but most of it was contrived), and I am unhappy about that. If you would please clarify, with reference, your thoughts toward me, or ask me worthwhile questions that aren't double edged, I think that this could actually be productive.

[Daniel M]

I can't quote it.

There you go, I await your insightful reply.

[Guaporense]

If you would please clarify, with reference, your thoughts toward me, or ask me worthwhile questions that aren't double edged, I think that this could actually be productive.

Forget it. Do you think I would harness my limited energies to talk to you now? Also, you should develop a thicker skin, if you cannot talk to somebody on the internet because that somebody called you an ignorant you clearly haven't had much experience in internet forums.

Mark has his own views when it comes to certain films that he is very loud/clear about, and I respect his opinion always, even though I disagree with him quite a lot too (Lynch! :p), but he can support and make me understanding his views without being a condescending arsehole :)

I think that you should try to be slightly less closed to my way of communicating.

[bluedeed]

Forget it. Do you think I would harness my limited energies to talk to you now? Also, you should develop a thicker skin.

Then I hope you will hold off on insult or a claim about my intentions or thoughts until you have. I'm sorry that we haven't communicated well here and that you have such limited energy, I do wish to hear why you have such hatred.

[Mr Minio]

Uncle Boonmee
http://www.criticker.com/img/films/posters/Uncle_Boonmee_Who_Can_Recall.jpg

Pros:
- some beautiful scenes
- some poignant moments
- also has some visually interesting things

Cons:
- boasts the ugliest actors in Thailand
- bad pacing and editing (just take too long and it isn't a Tarkovsky film that is actually a visual marvel to behold, but here most scenes are quite plain)

rating: 1_5 (decent)

I don't love you.

[Memento Mori]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/77/Depois-de-horas-poster01.jpg

After Hours
http://www.movieforums.com/images/popcorn/4box.gif

Very underrated movie by Martin Scorsese

[donniedarko]

Uncle Boonmee
http://www.criticker.com/img/films/posters/Uncle_Boonmee_Who_Can_Recall.jpg

Pros:
- some beautiful scenes
- some poignant moments
- also has some visually interesting things

Cons:
- boasts the ugliest actors in Thailand
- bad pacing and editing (just take too long and it isn't a Tarkovsky film that is actually a visual marvel to behold, but here most scenes are quite plain)

rating: 1_5 (decent)

Is it me, or does It sound like the pros outweigh the cons? Atleast for a 1.5




I noticed that you rate movies in how much you might think other people or critics might enjoy the movie instead of you own tastes. I ask you, does your top 10 reflect your tastes or what you think are the movies that you guess other people like?


I truly feel Daniel loves the movies on his top ten and expresses it fine, what are you even talking about? This post is so stupid

[Daniel M]

Is it me, or does It sound like the pros outweigh the cons? Atleast for a 1.5




I truly feel Daniel loves the movies on his top ten and expresses it fine, what are you even talking about? This post is so stupid

And since when did the visual appearance of actors factor in to the rating of a film, at least when it does not effect the film in any way, seems a bit odd to me :p But he's doing this weird new rating thing now, on his old ratings it might have been quite a high number, I'm not sure.

And cheers by the way, I don't know what he's on about. He seems to be judging me on a single post where I actually gave a relatively low score for a film and all I said was I wanted to watch it again to try to connect to it like I know some people/critics have. Also have you noticed I changed my top 10 to an all Lynch one as my old top 10 was a bit out of date but I am not changing until I do my next top 100! :p

[Skepsis93]

Is it me, or does It sound like the pros outweigh the cons? Atleast for a 1.5

Puzzling. Tries to present himself as deep and intellectual then comes out with such a vapid and completely superficial "criticism" as "ugly actors". It all seems so very, very fake and altogether insincere from where I'm standing.

[donniedarko]

Ya I saw in another thread he said 1.5 is average, which I don't get at all. I didn't notice your top ten, but you can never have to much David Lynch :yup: reminds me of how many more I still have to see. Have you seen any of his short films? A couple are worth watching

[Mr Minio]

http://i40.tinypic.com/2iw9kc4.jpg

[Pussy Galore]

I watched 3 great movie recently

For a Few Dollars More 9/10 (2nd viewing)

Strangers on a Train 9/10

Departures 9/10

[Daniel M]

Ya I saw in another thread he said 1.5 is average, which I don't get at all. I didn't notice your top ten, but you can never have to much David Lynch :yup: reminds me of how many more I still have to see. Have you seen any of his short films? A couple are worth watching

I haven't actually seen Dune, but it completes the 10 nicely, although I have it recorded and will watch it in the next few days :) And I think I have seena couple on youtube, they are strange, but in an awesome Lynch way. I've seen that one with the men being sick, it's called something like that, one of the weirdest things I have ever seen! :p

[BlueLion]

I haven't actually seen Dune, but it completes the 10 nicely, although I have it recorded and will watch it in the next few days :) And I think I have seena couple on youtube, they are strange, but in an awesome Lynch way. I've seen that one with the men being sick, it's called something like that, one of the weirdest things I have ever seen! :p

If you haven't seen it then why is it in your Favorite Films list? Makes no sense at all...

[Daniel M]

If you haven't seen it then why is it in your Favorite Films list? Makes no sense at all...

This is either:

a) A serious post

or

b) You have completely ignored the post(s) and completely missed the point of the top 10.

[BlueLion]

This is either:

a) A serious post

or

b) You have completely ignored the post(s) and completely missed the point of the top 10.

it's both

[MovieGal]

Insidious Chapter 2 ~ 8.5/10 (directed by James Wan)

I loved it. I thought it complemented the first film. It was highly entertaining and there were many jump scares to get the adrenaline flowing. It gave you clues to explain things properly.

[honeykid]

I watched 3 great movie recently

For a Few Dollars More 9/10 (2nd viewing)

Strangers on a Train 9/10

Departures 9/10
That's nice, PG. Care to list them? :p:D

[Pussy Galore]

I'd say

1 Departures
2 For a Few Dollars More
3 Strangers on a Train

Departures there was some really intense quiet moments that I would rate 10/10, but there is some little cliche parts that I liked less.

Strangers on a Train was still a masterpiece.

[MovieGal]

Harjunpää ja pahan pappi (2010) ~ 8/10

Every time I talk about films from Northern Europe, I get the urge to watch this.. hell anymore I dont need subs... I know whats going on.. and what is being said... LOL

http://s.cdon.com/media-dynamic/images/product/digitalmovie/digitalmovie/image0/harjunpaa_ja_pahan_pappi_hd-17386276-frnt.jpg

[Guaporense]

Is it me, or does It sound like the pros outweigh the cons? Atleast for a 1.5

Nah, it's average now. My rating system has been revamped, it would be a 2_5 movie in my old rating system.

[Guaporense]

Puzzling. Tries to present himself as deep and intellectual then comes out with such a vapid and completely superficial "criticism" as "ugly actors". It all seems so very, very fake and altogether insincere from where I'm standing.

First, I never tried to present myself as deep and intellectual, if you think so you have been doing your own interpretation of my posts. I am quite laid back in this forum.

Second, ugly actors is a superficial criticism? Well, the fact is that you are looking at these people for two hours. If they are hideously ugly, as in this movie, is it definitely a con.

Directors loved to cast beautiful actresses: Hitchcock and his blondes, Tarantino and his muses, Bergman's, Lynch's girls in Mulholland Drive etc. Though in this case the director is gay but he even didn't cast any handsome male actor as well.

http://i40.tinypic.com/2iw9kc4.jpg

They certainly look better than the cast of Uncle Boonmee, as almost any cast in any movie. It is almost as if the director was aiming at the worst looking cast ever. And since I have to look at that cast for over 100 minutes, it's a con.

Also, your post shows some idiotic prejudice.

Anyway, it now appears that I have managed to antagonize almost the whole population of this forum. :)

[bluedeed]

Directors loved to cast beautiful actresses: Hitchcock and his blondes, Tarantino and his muses, Bergman's, Lynch's girls in Mulholland Drive etc. Though in this case the director is gay but he even didn't cast any handsome male actor as well.

Attractiveness is subjective. It's obvious from his works that he finds Sakda Kaewbuadee attractive. He's Joe's Anna Karina (though they're not together like Godard and Karina were). I don't think that unless you are gay (or bisexual or pansexual or any other inclusive group), that you're a good judge of the attractiveness of your same sex, because you're not attracted to the opposite sex generally, though this isn't firm and it's possible that you may know exactly what is and isn't attractive to Joe.

Anyway, it now appears that I have managed to antagonize almost the whole population of this forum. :)

It must be us then, right?

[Godoggo]

First, I never tried to present myself as deep and intellectual, if you think so you have been doing your own interpretations of my posts.

I think many people feel that about you, Guap. Instead of it being a lot of people misinterpreting you, maybe that's just the impression you give. Honestly, when you have conversations with people it comes across that you're trying to school them rather than having a conversation of equals.

[Mmmm Donuts]

Directors loved to cast beautiful actresses: Hitchcock and his blondes, Tarantino and his muses, Bergman's, Lynch's girls in Mulholland Drive etc. Though in this case the director is gay but he even didn't cast any handsome male actor as well.

I actually get what you're saying with this. Even though it comes off as superficial, the fact of the matter is that appearance is so important in films, because it is visual media. I haven't seen the movie being discussed, but I think I prefer actresses, and even actors, to look reasonably good. Again, it sounds really judgemental and b!tchy, but it's a sad truth, at least for me.

Anyway, it now appears that I have managed to antagonize almost the whole population of this forum. :)

Not yet. This thread has been pretty sketchy lately, but I still respect and listen to your take on anime :D

[bluedeed]

I actually get what you're saying with this. Even though it comes off as superficial, the fact of the matter is that appearance is so important in films, because it is visual media.

It's an audio-visual medium, and I think that Weerasethakul is master of beautiful and intricate sound in his films, and the way his characters speak make Thai sound like the most beautiful language I've heard.

[Skepsis93]

First, I never tried to present myself as deep and intellectual, if you think so you have been doing your own interpretation of my posts. I am quite laid back in this forum.

Well that's on you, not me. Like godoggo says, maybe you need to look at how you're coming across to others.

Second, ugly actors is a superficial criticism? Well, the fact is that you are looking at these people for two hours. If they are hideously ugly, as in this movie, is it definitely a con.

Directors loved to cast beautiful actresses: Hitchcock and his blondes, Tarantino and his muses, Bergman's, Lynch's girls in Mulholland Drive etc. Though in this case the director is gay but he even didn't cast any handsome male actor as well.

It's all about context. Is The Elephant Man bad because the guy is crazy ugly? No, the film hinges on it. Hitchcock's roles often called for a naive or mysterious women and femme fatales as objects of male desire, thus he would cast Kelly, Bergman, Marie Saint (etc). Is there anything in Uncle Boonmee that suggests that the actors should be pretty?

[mark f]

These are the "ugly actors".
http://www.slantmagazine.com/assets/house/film/us73.jpg
http://woub.org/sites/default/files/uncleboonme.jpg
http://cdn.theguardian.tv/bc/281851582/281851582_679507192001_101118UncleBoonmee-4051622.jpg?pubId=281851582
http://assets.digi.persgroep.be/event_photo/w468/77/E_0000162977.jpg

[Godoggo]

I've seen the movie. The actors look like normal Thai people to me. To call them hideously ugly is a gross overstatement. I'm not one who needs actors to be "pretty" though. I would rather they can act.

[Mmmm Donuts]

Hmmm, well I definitely wouldn't call them ugly or even displeasing to the eye by any stretch...I guess Guapo saw something else, because I thought he meant REALLY ugly.

[the samoan lawyer]

http://watuzee.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/El-Topo.jpg

El Topo - 6/10

[the samoan lawyer]

http://www.its.caltech.edu/~ifilm/IMG-Kes.jpg

Kes - 6/10

[Daniel M]

Appearance should only matter if the it holds an importance to the film/character, like so it's realistic, if you get me.

Anyway.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2f/Amadeusmov.jpg/220px-Amadeusmov.jpg

Amadeus (Milos Forman, 1984) 4.5-

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e5/Heavenly_Creatures_Poster.jpg/220px-Heavenly_Creatures_Poster.jpg

Heavenly Creatures (Peter Jackson, 1994) 3

[The Sci-Fi Slob]

http://www.impawards.com/1999/posters/virus_ver3.jpg

Virus (1999) http://www.movieforums.com/images/popcorn/3box.gif

[BlueLion]

http://i.imgur.com/sH24vGu.png
Mulholland Dr. (2001) - 5
rewatch

Perfection. I can't find the words to describe how great it is. I almost cried during the Club Silencio scene. Naomi Watts' performance is the best I've ever seen from an actress. There is one scene when (as Diane) she's in the kitchen and says "Camilla, you've come back!", and then starts to shiver. She looked as if she wasn't even acting in that scene. The soundtrack is one of the greatest ever. Lynch is a genius.

http://i.imgur.com/Ssg5cJC.png
The Straight Story (1999) - 4

So, you're trying to tell me this movie was directed by the same man who made Eraserhead? I smell bullsh*t.

http://i.imgur.com/5tobVfH.png
The Others (2001) - 3.5

I saw the twist coming from a mile away, honestly. Just kidding.

[Lucas]

http://i.imgur.com/sH24vGu.png
Mulholland Dr. (2001) - 5
rewatch

Perfection. I can't find the words to describe how great it is. I almost cried during the Club Silencio scene. Naomi Watts' performance is the best I've ever seen from an actress. There is one scene when (as Diane) she's in the kitchen and says "Camilla, you've come back!", and then starts to shiver. She looked as if she wasn't even acting in that scene. The soundtrack is one of the greatest ever. Lynch is a genius.

http://i.imgur.com/Ssg5cJC.png
The Straight Story (1999) - 4

So, you're trying to tell me this movie was directed by the same man who made Eraserhead? I smell bullsh*t.

http://i.imgur.com/5tobVfH.png
The Others (2001) - 3.5

I saw the twist coming from a mile away, honestly. Just kidding.


Mulholland Drive is one of those rare films that one always holds in a very high regard. It truly is a masterpiece. I've seen the Club Silencio scene like 15 times and each time it gives me chills.

[MovieGal]

http://i.imgur.com/Ssg5cJC.png
The Straight Story (1999) - 4

So, you're trying to tell me this movie was directed by the same man who made Eraserhead? I smell bullsh*t.



Yes. David Lynch created "Eraserhead" as his University project.

Many directors University projects are not like some of their other films.

"Following" is Christopher Nolan's Uni film and it did not have the same feel as his other "popular" films but it wasnt horrible.

"Cronos" was de Torro's Uni film and its not like the rest of directed by him.

Its interesting to see the director's early work and compare to the work they do now.

[MovieGal]

http://i.imgur.com/Ssg5cJC.png
The Straight Story (1999) - 4

So, you're trying to tell me this movie was directed by the same man who made Eraserhead? I smell bullsh*t.



Yes. David Lynch created "Eraserhead" as his University project.

Many directors University projects are not like some of their other films.

"Following" is Christopher Nolan's Uni film and it did not have the same feel as his other "popular" films but it wasnt horrible.

"Cronos" was de Torro's Uni film and its not like the rest of directed by him.

"THX1138" was Lucas' Uni film and yes its sci fi like most of his other work.

Its interesting to see the director's early work and compare to the work they do now. To see how they grow with the market today. What will attract people.

[Mr Minio]

The Big Lebowski

http://clothesonfilm.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/The-Big-Lebowski_Sam-Elliot_mid.bmp.jpg

Well, I admit I enjoyed it and although I wanted to hate this movie so much, I didn't. I even giggled in some places. Bridges was cool as Lebowski and I finally know what half of the quotations you guys, well, quote come from. I'm not that hot on it as you, though, so I'd rather stand in my arthouse camp, but I can't say it wasn't entertaining.

3.5

[Daniel M]

With Lynch though Eraserhead isn't a case of being a one off earlier film and actually has a lot of elements and similar style to most of his films, even his more ordinary works like The Elephant Man and to a lesser degree The Straight Story.

The Big Lebowski

Well, I admit I enjoyed it and although I wanted to hate this movie so much, I didn't. I even giggled in some places. Bridges was cool as Lebowski and I finally know what half of the quotations you guys, well, quote come from. I'm not that hot on it as you, though, so I'd rather stand in my arthouse camp, but I can't say it wasn't entertaining.

3.5

Mr Minio watched and enjoyed The Big Lebowski! There is a god after all! :p

[BlueLion]

Does anybody else think he kinda looks like Plainview from There Will Be Blood?

[Lucas]

Does anybody else think he kinda looks like Plainview from There Will Be Blood?

There is a resemblance now that you mention it. Speaking of There Will Be Blood, that's an amazing character study film.

[BlueLion]

There is a resemblance now that you mention it. Speaking of There Will Be Blood, that's an amazing character study film.

True. I love it.

[nebbit]

Behind the Candelabra :) loved it :yup:

http://www.impawards.com/tv/thumbs/sq_behind_the_candelabra_ver2.jpg

4

[McConnaughay]

I watched Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind and I have to say that I really enjoyed the movie. The cinematography felt almost refreshingly psychedelic and I found the story to be depressingly beautiful. A very good movie.

[Daniel M]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/82/Elmer_Gantry_poster.jpg

Elmer Gantry (Richard Brooks, 1960)

4.5

[The Sci-Fi Slob]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/__7if4bcmbWE/TC0vUltUrsI/AAAAAAAAANA/AUP8yrT1mg0/s400/Suspiria3.jpg

Suspiria (1977) http://www.movieforums.com/images/popcorn/5box.gif

[honeykid]

Behind the Candelabra :) loved it :yup:

http://www.impawards.com/tv/thumbs/sq_behind_the_candelabra_ver2.jpg

4
I've still not seen it, but I'm looking forward to it. It picked up a bunch of awards at the Creative Arts Emmy's over the weekend. It's a shame it was considered 'too gay' for the US as, from what I've heard, I think Oscar acting noms would've been heading towards both Douglas and Damon, as well as Costume, Art Direction and Script.

[Pussy Galore]

Downfall 8/10 really good movie about the end of the second world war from the german perspective

Persona 5/10 :S I didn't get it. If someone could explain it to me I could rate it higher, but for now it was weird and kind of boring.

[bluedeed]

Downfall 8/10 really good movie about the end of the second world war from the german perspective

Persona 5/10 :S I didn't get it. If someone could explain it to me I could rate it higher, but for now it was weird and kind of boring.

Guap's going to be all over this, watch out!

[Guaporense]

The Big Lebowski

http://clothesonfilm.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/The-Big-Lebowski_Sam-Elliot_mid.bmp.jpg

Well, I admit I enjoyed it and although I wanted to hate this movie so much, I didn't. I even giggled in some places. Bridges was cool as Lebowski and I finally know what half of the quotations you guys, well, quote come from. I'm not that hot on it as you, though, so I'd rather stand in my arthouse camp, but I can't say it wasn't entertaining.

3.5

The Big Lebowski is art!

[mark f]

Persona 5/10 :S I didn't get it. If someone could explain it to me I could rate it higher, but for now it was weird and kind of boring.
This (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=17362) might help. It's OK not to like it, but a road map might be of assistance. :)

[Guaporense]

Persona 5/10 :S I didn't get it. If someone could explain it to me I could rate it higher, but for now it was weird and kind of boring.

I liked Persona because it is extremely weird and it shows a rather exotic relationship between the two female characters (which may be a single character) and has some very interesting stuff going on. It's my favorite Bergman movie and that's because it's his craziest one.

[Pussy Galore]

Well I'm new for those kind of weird movies. I've seen very few Lynch (Elephant Man and Blue Velvet) and I don't think I've ever seen any other weird movies like that.

Mark thanks I read it and it helped me understand some part of it. An other important part of the film is the seduction between the 2 women. There's some part where they're really close to kissing, but I don't know what it means. It's a really interesting weird movie. Maybe later in my life I'll be interested in those weird movies, but for now I'm not really into it

[MovieGal]

I liked Persona because it is extremely weird and it shows a rather exotic relationship between the two female characters (which may be a single character) and has some very interesting stuff going on. It's my favorite Bergman movie and that's because it's his craziest one.

I think the nurse had an obsession to be the actress. She heard so much about the actress's life that she wanted to be her. Hence "her persona".

[Pussy Galore]

I can see that, but what's good about it? I mean ok she wants to be the actress, but it doesn't makes the film interesting.

(That's my opinion I'm not saying it's bad I'm speaking for my personal taste)

[Pussy Galore]

I can see that, but what's good about it? I mean ok she wants to be the actress, but it doesn't makes the film interesting.

(That's my opinion I'm not saying it's bad I'm speaking for my personal taste)

[thisistheend]

Yesterday I watched "Once upon a time in the west" : an amazing blu-ray with a great cast, a great direction, a great editing and a wonderful soundtrack.
5

[earlsmoviepicks]

Girl With the Dragon Tattoo.

I've been on complete media blackout on these films, so I recently watched the Swedish version on Netflix thinking it was the one everyone was talking about.

I googled Rooney Mara I wondered how she looked so damn different in the movie from the web photos. DUH.

Then I watched the 2011 version. So that being said...

2009 GWTDT 4.2 (great female lead, average male lead)

2011 GWTDT 4.1 (good female lead, overkill male lead)

[cricket]

Once Upon A Time in America 1

I couldn't finish it; what a piece if shite.

[Pussy Galore]

I was bored in the first 30 minutes, but I kept on watching it and I ended up liking it. You should give it another try. I especially like the part when they are teenagers.

[Daniel M]

Once Upon A Time in America 1

I couldn't finish it; what a piece if shite.

What? :(

---


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d9/Lethal_weapon1.jpg

Lethal Weapon (Richard Donner, 1987) 3

[cricket]

I was bored in the first 30 minutes, but I kept on watching it and I ended up liking it. You should give it another try. I especially like the part when they are teenagers.

I actually loved the first 30 minutes. The next 2 hours I watched were awful; ridiculous and disgusting.

[Mr Minio]

The scenes at the beginning belong to my least favourites of the whole movie. I even wanted to stop watching it, but then it turns into a true masterpiece. cricket what exactly did you find ridiculous or disgusting?

[Daniel M]

I actually loved the first 30 minutes. The next 2 hours I watched were awful; ridiculous and disgusting.

In what way?

[cricket]

When it gets to the part of the movie where they are teenagers, I thought I was watching Bugsy Malone. There was nothing realistic about this part of the movie. Children shaking down a cop? Come on. And as far as disgusting, I bet this movie is very popular with women haters and pedophiles. And that goofy inconsistent score; some of the music was more suited to a comedy. Using The Beatle's classic Yesterday was a joke. This movie rubbed me the wrong way like no other.

[Mr Minio]

Wow, simmer down, dude! It's only a movie and you're behaving like Leone came to your house and strangled your wife. What's wrong with a bunch of teenagers shaking down a cop? A Clockwork Orange, one of your favorite films, can also be considered disgusting, but you don't complain about it. What scenes were disgusting? Rape scene? And then you say it's not realistic. Rape scene was. And therefore was 'disgusting' and shocking. Do you want it to be realistic or not after all? The score belongs to my favourite Morricone soundtracks and is nothing short of a genius, but then again there comes subjectivity. The use of Yesterday in the scene was a genius thing to me. A glorious use of this classic tune that I'm not crazy about, but juxtaposed to this scene it becomes a masterpiece.

Well, from now on I am a pedophile and woman hater and therefore rape small boys. Yay!

[Daniel M]

I don't understand people who criticise movies like this for things like misogyny, paedophilia and rape. It's a movie, and a movie's job is in realistically portraying it's characters, and I would rather it be honest and paint these characters as who they should be than shy away from doing so. The scenes are meant to be shocking and disgusting, but you should be angry at the characters, not the film, and that's the film doing a good job.

The score is amazing and I loved the music they included too, I don't see what was wrong with 'Yesterday', a song I love, but I guess that's more down to the fact you disliked the movie as a whole.

[Mr Minio]

Now that I think of it maybe it's because the protagonists were killers that I disliked Goodfellas, you know. :D

No, not really. A movie portraying a pedophile would be the worst film ever to you?

[cricket]

Portraying a pedophile is a different scenario for me. Was it really necessary to show the baby in the hospital that way? To me, that's disgusting. I love disturbing movies but obviously I didn't like this one. And I like unrealistic, stupid movies. But this is a serious gangster movie; I think it could have done without the completely unrealistic parts. The part where they were kids was absurd. And every female character was there to be spied on or raped, unless of course she was a prostitute. I thought some of it was pointless.

[Mr Minio]

What are you refering to when talking about the tag switching scene in the hospital? It's neither disgusting nor absurd. From what you're saying gangster films can't be unrealistic. Whatever it means, because you still didn't say what do you think was unrealistic. And every female was either raped or spied on as it shows the time when females had it a lot more rough than today.

[cricket]

What part when they were kids did you think was realistic? Kids making deals with the mob? And the mob trusting the kids to go out on the boat to get their goods? That's ludicrous. And I don't need to see a naked baby in that way. An image like that on your computer will get you arrested. And I know women had it tougher back then but I felt in this movie it was getting a little monotonous.

[Lucas]

I respect your opinion Cricket, but I for one love this movie to death. The phrase to "each his own" is extremely appropriate in this situation.

[Mr Minio]

I saw some naked babies in various films so I'm probably a serious criminal, but I wonder why I'm still free. Have you seen City of God? Watch it to find out what kids are capable of. Now you say it's monotonous. It feels like you're forcing yourself to finding something about the movie you didn't like.

[MovieGal]

I can see that, but what's good about it? I mean ok she wants to be the actress, but it doesn't makes the film interesting.

(That's my opinion I'm not saying it's bad I'm speaking for my personal taste)


Its as if she is obsessed with being that person.. not being just an actress.. but being Liv Ullmann's character overall.

I think its a great film by Bergman. Just my opinion as well.

[cricket]

I saw some naked babies in various films so I'm probably a serious criminal, but I wonder why I'm still free. Have you seen City of God? Watch it to find out what kids are capable of. Now you say it's monotonous. It feels like you're forcing yourself to finding something about the movie you didn't like.

City of God is one of my favorite movies. Of course I know what kids are capable of; I did a lot of things as a kid that were crazy. But gangsters and cops do not make deals with children.

[cricket]

I respect your opinion Cricket, but I for one love this movie to death. The phrase to "each his own" is extremely appropriate in this situation.

You're so right. It was frustrating because I thought parts of it were fantastic. The things I personally didn't like just ruined it for me.

[Mr Minio]

City of God is one of my favorite movies.
But gangsters and cops do not make deals with children.

Hmm....

To me 'to each his own' is indeed true, but kind of cowardly, as it's very often used to slip away from the discussion.

[Mr Minio]

Spring Breakers

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ia5UBkUycjc/UWWfKv3fZnI/AAAAAAAAGnU/mcqiPlreiNw/s1600/600full-spring-breakers-screenshot+%283%29.jpg

4

Great satire on everything + exploitation elements + Franco = pretty good film

Take it, haters!

[Lucas]

^You convinced me to check this movie out Mr. Minio. I heard it's rather polarizing.

[Mr Minio]

Well, it's offbeat and nothing like I expected it to be. It mocks nearly everything about the MTV generation. American Dream and contemporary teenagers' behavior. Protagonists are dumb as hell, but it's one of those movies, in which I didn't find it annoying or a flaw, as it was used to show their personalities, even if in an over-the-top way.

[Nausicaä]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f6/Antiviral_%28film%29.jpg


http://www.movieforums.com/images/popcorn/3box.gif

[The Rodent]

Currently watching Replicant (2001). Saw it years ago and wasn't keen but now I'm a bit older it's an interesting concept.

Kinda low key and well executed.

Van Damme is good as the simpleton Replicant too... and keeping the killer Van Damme hidden in the background was a good move, makes it more of a personal film between Michael Rooker and the Replicant.

3.5

[Daniel M]

Should have posted this before Lethal Weapon, I liked it a tiny bit less, but preferred it to Heavenly Creatures.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d4/The_Ladykillers_poster.jpg/220px-The_Ladykillers_poster.jpg

The Ladykillers (Alexander Mackendrick, 1955) 3

[lokier01]

Just saw Upstream Color. 9/10.

Great follow up to Primer. Exactly what I expected. The attempt to be like Terrence Malick was a bit heavy, but still a great movie.

[bluedeed]

Just saw Upstream Color. 9/10.

Great follow up to Primer. Exactly what I expected. The attempt to be like Terrence Malick was a bit heavy, but still a great movie.

I'm not sure it was Terrence Malick impersonation so much as Soviet Montage and French New Wave influences.

[cricket]

Hmm....

To me 'to each his own' is indeed true, but kind of cowardly, as it's very often used to slip away from the discussion.

I don't even know what that means. You're asking me what part of a movie is not realistic, and I'm giving you an example. I'm not sure what other movies have to do with it, when I'm giving an opinion on one specific movie. I didn't believe it and I didn't like it. My feelings are not something that can be disputed.

[nebbit]

I've still not seen it, but I'm looking forward to it. It picked up a bunch of awards at the Creative Arts Emmy's over the weekend. It's a shame it was considered 'too gay' for the US as, from what I've heard, I think Oscar acting noms would've been heading towards both Douglas and Damon, as well as Costume, Art Direction and Script.
It was 2 hrs long and i wasn't bored once :nope:

[The Sci-Fi Slob]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PxgL7dAstNw/UhfRCgD0CZI/AAAAAAAA5kk/CEi2QP75Mm8/s1600/The_Dyatlov_Pass_Incident_PosterUK.jpg

Devils Pass (2013)
http://www.movieforums.com/images/popcorn/2box.gif

What starts off as an interesting Blair Witch style mystery soon turns into a bargain basement CGI festival. It's such a shame because the first half was quite good.:rolleyes:

[Lucas]

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQufNnav1q1WiynDljd9FSkQMavM610gf3l4f6b3-LfkZuP7xCN2g9Y5cqN

6.3/10. It's filled with stunning visuals, and it's rather hypnotic and interesting. Watch but with caution. It's rather polarizing. It reminds me alot of Only God Forgives.

[cricket]

Felon 7/10 Effective prison film, although not a pleasant watch.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/95/Felonposter08.jpg

[Mr Minio]

It reminds me alot of Only God Forgives. Yeah, Only God Forgives and even Malick-type movie for the offscreen commentary thingy.

[hell_storm2004]

Blazing Saddle (1974) - 6.8/10. Was brilliantly funny. Except the slapstick ending.

The Castle (1997) - 7.2/10. Was really impressed by this one. Quite a good movie and is quite under-rated and not mentioned too much!

The Jerk (1979) - 6.5/10. The movie had its moments, sometimes felt just too silly. But a decent watch.

[teeter_g]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/d8/The_World%27s_End_poster.jpg/220px-The_World%27s_End_poster.jpg
3

[Sane]

The Castle (1997) - 7.2/10. Was really impressed by this one. Quite a good movie and is quite under-rated and not mentioned too much!

Nice :) Iconic Australian movie. My brother still quotes it at every opportunity: "Teel him he's dreaming" and "how's the serenity?".

[The Sci-Fi Slob]

http://www.dlfyou.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/es.png

Empire State (2013)
http://www.movieforums.com/images/popcorn/1box.gif:down:

[BlueLion]

jesus, how many movies has The Rock been in this year?

[Mmmm Donuts]

jesus, how many movies has The Rock been in this year?

I rather he just stick to wrestling, where he's an icon and a legend. In the acting world, I don't see anything there for him.

Is there more money in acting or what?

[cricket]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9f/Bad_lieutenant.jpeg

8/10

Nic Cage lunacy at it's finest.

[Pussy Galore]

I rather he just stick to wrestling, where he's an icon and a legend. In the acting world, I don't see anything there for him.

Is there more money in acting or what?

As a huge wrestling fan I prefer him as an actor than in a wrestling ring haha

[hell_storm2004]

Nice :) Iconic Australian movie. My brother still quotes it at every opportunity: "Teel him he's dreaming" and "how's the serenity?".

My god... I loved it!

You dont have ________ in bankok!

Forgot the name of lakeside home!

[s1n1st3r]

My god... I loved it!

You dont have ________ in bankok!

Forgot the name of lakeside home!

Bonnie Dune

[lokier01]

I'm not sure it was Terrence Malick impersonation so much as Soviet Montage and French New Wave influences.

Maybe, but the pseudo-religious tones and that quiet meandering camerawork was pure Malick. I mean, Upstream and tree of life would make a perfect double feature, if not a bit redundant.

[The Sci-Fi Slob]

http://pic.myegy.com/images_orginal/2013/Aug/10/32189934414991990939-1376134850.jpg

Scenic Route (2013)
http://www.movieforums.com/images/popcorn/3box.gif

[bluedeed]

Maybe, but the pseudo-religious tones and that quiet meandering camerawork was pure Malick. I mean, Upstream and tree of life would make a perfect double feature, if not a bit redundant.

It's possible that I associate Carruth as being more of the rigid intellectual, which makes sense with his past film and his past work as an engineer (I forget what kind) like Eisenstein and the likes of montage and Godard and the New Wave's critics turned filmmakers. He's also said that in preparation he did what he called "the really pretentious thing, which was to watch a bunch of French New Wave." Malick seems to have disorienting films because he's looking for something in them while making them, trying to find some truth in the raw footage he's captured, whereas Carruth's seem to be confusing by design.

[kronan06]

Side Effects=C+

[Camo]

The Nightmare Before Christmas - 7.5/10

Good movie, that i imagine i would've liked alot more at a younger age.

http://i42.tinypic.com/8ze51t.jpg

The Return of the Living Dead - 8.5/10

Great film. I should've watched this sooner.

http://i41.tinypic.com/x440ig.jpg

Hoosiers - 7/10

http://i41.tinypic.com/bhpo1.jpg

[Mmmm Donuts]

+1 for Nightmare Before Christmas. One of the childhood movies for me!

[Gabrielle947]

Diner 3

[MovieGal]

Ondskan (2003) ~ 6.5

http://www.ysal.it/angie/ondskan0.jpg

[The Sci-Fi Slob]

http://cdn.bloody-disgusting.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/under-the-bed-poster.jpg

Under the Bed (2012)
http://www.movieforums.com/images/popcorn/1.5box.gif

[cricket]

Winter's Bone 7/10

[PeterVincent]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Cwi4RwLGkNQ/UdIIslWm7qI/AAAAAAAAFYY/ze4jDNk4XC4/s400/PERCY-JACKSON-SEA-OF-MONSTERS-Poster.jpg

4.5

...I'm stupid.

[Pronstar]

Me too. But the movie is lot of fun.

[Lucas]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_hgArvKqmxrQ/TMQkzneM5oI/AAAAAAAABl0/V_1F4Kd021I/s1600/rashomon_sp2.jpg

7.8/10. It's a good movie yes and thought-provoking but it's not what I'd call an entertaining movie if that makes sense. I mean I respect it's place in history and how deep the message is, but this isn't a movie you'd watch for entertainment or rewatch.

[ezetuw]

jesus, how many movies has The Rock been in this year?
Hey man, watch it. He's Dwayne Johnson now. Don't wanna piss him off.

[BlueLion]

http://www.criticker.com/img/films/posters/World_War_Z.jpg
3.5+

Pretty darn good.

[Mr Minio]

Berlin Alexanderplatz - a monumental ~15h - twice as long as Satantango - masterpiece.

http://www.wdr.de/bilder/mediendb/Fotostrecken/wdr2/gottfriedjohn/Gottfried_John_Alexanderplatz_pa_990x660_m.jpg

4.5

[MovieGal]

A Film Unfinished (2010) ~ 8/10

So I love Nazi Propaganda films. I have seen "Der Ewige Jude" (The Eternal Jew) and it was one of the most horrified films I have seen. I watched "Night and Fog" which was filmed 10 years after WWII and it was in regards to the concentration camps. There were scenes in that film that made my stomach cringe more than things in "Der Ewige Jude". "A Film Unfinished" was a documentary in regards to the finding of another Nazi Propaganda film called "The Ghetto". This "film" was never finished. They found footage on the "cutting room" floor where the Nazis had staged everything in the film. Both "Der Ewige Jude" and "The Ghetto" reflect that the Jews seem to live better than the Germans, which we know is very untrue. The conditions that the Jews lived in were horrible and they were starved before taken to concentration camps to live what seemed to be their short life. Overall this film was good but the first two films are better. I'm glad I bought it. It will be part of the treasure of my collection.

Prisoners (2013) ~ 9/10

I do not give high ratings to many films. I'm a hard cinematic critic but this film was awesome. My daughter and I would try to figure out the plot and at ever twist and turn of the film, we were proved wrong. This is actually a very "cinematic art" style film as well. Great performances overall and I could actually feel how they were in the film, as I am a parent. I would do anything to search for my child. I was amazed and left the theatre in awe. The ending was not what you expected as well.

[Guaporense]

Berlin Alexanderplatz - a monumental ~15h - twice as long as Satantango - masterpiece.

That's because it's a TV series. :D

Simpsons is about 20 times longer than Satantango. Some soap operas are like 100 times longer.

[bluedeed]

That's because it's a TV series. :D

Simpsons is about 20 times longer than Satantango. Some soap operas are like 100 times longer.

And I voted for all of them in the 80s poll...

[Guaporense]

Simpsons? Berlin Alexanderplatz has received theatrical release so it can be regarded as a movie.

[ezetuw]

RocknRolla
http://www3.terra.com.co/addon/img/cine/2fa358rock335p.jpg

Oh god. This was so much ****ing fun! Fight Club/Trainspotting styled quick editing-dialogue-exposition, Pulp Fiction levels of coincidence rate and general ****edupness, solid, hilarious acting, lots of quirks, fast paced twisty crooks-playing-crooks plot...

Gotta rewatch it to get a couple details down, there might be a couple loopholes, but I might have missed the info, with the rollercoaster pace and all. It's not an "intelligent" movie, but it's smart junk food, ya' know?

All in all, a bloody good time! 4 sounds about right? For fast dumb movie standards, a real RocknRolla!

[MovieGal]

RocknRolla
http://www3.terra.com.co/addon/img/cine/2fa358rock335p.jpg

Oh god. This was so much ****ing fun! Fight Club/Trainspotting styled quick editing-dialogue-exposition, Pulp Fiction levels of coincidence rate and general ****edupness, solid, hilarious acting, lots of quirks, fast paced twisty crooks-playing-crooks plot...

Gotta rewatch it to get a couple details down, there might be a couple loopholes, but I might have missed the info, with the rollercoaster pace and all. It's not an "intelligent" movie, but it's smart junk food, ya' know?

All in all, a bloody good time! 4 sounds about right? For fast dumb movie standards, a real RocknRolla!



I love this film. For being a female, Im a fan of Guy Richie films. I love roughness of his films

and well this is something I enjoy as well...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbPRGDwlfqs
This song is featured in the film... :)

[MovieGal]

Moebius (2013) ~ 7/10

One f*cked up story. It touches on so many taboo topics...

http://mn.kobiz.or.kr/cheditor/attach/VQorDzRBuIwvbTEKlKvo.jpg

[Sane]

Moebius (2013) ~ 7/10



One f*cked up story. It touches on so many taboo topics...

Sums up much of KKD's catalogue :)

[MovieGal]

Tesis (1996) ~ 6.5/10

This was the last film for me to see that was directed by Alejandro Amenabar. I really enjoyed the story and the twist and turns but it was not my favorite by this director. Near the end of the list.
http://gestioncultura.cervantes.es/COMUNES/5065_I_V_Tesis%20Cartel.jpg

My rating of his films
1. Agora ~7.5/10
2. The Others ~ 7/10
3. The Sea Inside ~ 6.75/10
4. Tesis ~ 6.5/10
5. Open Your Eyes ~ 6.5/10

[the samoan lawyer]

http://www.awardscircuit.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Dead_ringers_poster.jpg

Dead Ringers.

Jeremy Irons gives a great performance in this drama/thriller. Another film in with a shout on the 80's list.

8/10

[n3wt]

Bone Collector 4
Red Dawn (remake) 3

[Mr Minio]

Moebius (2013) ~ 7/10

One f*cked up story. It touches on so many taboo topics...

http://mn.kobiz.or.kr/cheditor/attach/VQorDzRBuIwvbTEKlKvo.jpg


New Kim Ki-Duk film?! How come I don't know about it?! Thanks a bunch for mentioning it. I have to watch it now.

[honeykid]

Red Dawn (remake) 3
It's so bad even n3wt could only give it 3/5. :D

[Nausicaä]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/94/ScaryMovie5.jpg


:bored:

However, I did like the Evil Dead spoof part of the film.

You can see it here if you don't want to sit through the whole film, for some reason I just couldn't stop laughing when the girl tries to speak after cutting her tongue. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHEdyFpdJSo

[ezetuw]

and well this is something I enjoy as well...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbPRGDwlfqs
This song is featured in the film... :)
Yup, that song got me exhilarated from second one :yup:

[ezetuw]

Bone Collector 4
Yeah, I thought it was a good thriller. Not that good though.

[cricket]

Red Eye 3/4

Kind of reminded me of an 80's movie; good, dumb fun.

[McConnaughay]

I watched Prisoners in theaters, and I have to say that it was really good. I remember coming out of the theaters after seeing the second Insidious movie and being the oddball of my friends, I ranted and raved about the movie, however, with Prisoners, neither of them praised it more. I loved seeing Jake Gyllenhaal and Hugh Jackman's exchanges, and the concept was actually done very well.

[The Sci-Fi Slob]

http://www.jack-nicholson.info/images/movies/as-good-as-it-gets.jpg

As good as it gets (1997)
http://www.movieforums.com/images/popcorn/4.5box.gif

[LP Quagmire]

http://www.jack-nicholson.info/images/movies/as-good-as-it-gets.jpg

As good as it gets (1997)
http://www.movieforums.com/images/popcorn/4.5box.gif

Enjoyed that one, too. ***1/2 / ****

[Pussy Galore]

Au Hasard Balthazar 4/10 I hated it

Harold and Maud 8/10 really really good !

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest 9,5/10 I rewatched it to make a proper review for my top 100 and it was even better than I remembered

[Mr Minio]

Au Hasard Balthazar 4/10 I hated it

An ass!

Look how sad it is:

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRQGP_ydLZeZ_8a3u1Z3ZuejXPkJY4GIvZxhUhacCdf_0abswKR

[Mmmm Donuts]

Spider-Man

http://www.dan-dare.org/FreeFun/Images/Archive/Spider-Man2Wallpaper800.jpg

I won't give a rating this time, because of the MoFo Comic Book Movie List, but I'll point the good and the bad. Next up: The Amazing Spiderman.

The Good:

-It brought back a lot of memories for me. This was my first comic book movie, and I was already a fan of Spider-Man, so it was great.

-I still really loved the fighting scenes in this, much more so than in Nolan’s trilogy. It was so satisfying to see Spider-Man just punch Green Goblin through walls and such.

-Toby Maguire played the nerd Parker really well. He was believable as this guy who was socially awkward, especially around girls, and had his fair share of bullies, too.

-Willem Dafoe was quite good in this. I love the scenes where he just talks to himself. Stupid, yes, but hilarious.

-James Franco did really good in this. I was conflicted over liking or hating his character.

-Loved the ending scene. For once, it actually tied to something earlier in the movie.

The Bad:

-Maguire’s Parker voice kind of annoyed me. It was really soft and kind of weak, even after he “transformed”.

-Kirsten Dunst did barely decent, with what she was given. I don’t know who her character was, but I know it wasn't Mary Jane, because that’s not her personality at all. Raimi essentially created a stock character and love interest.

-I didn't really like the Green Goblin, either. I don't get why he wanted Spider-Man to join him in the first place, when he really is a greedy bastard. Besides, I kind of felt bad for Osborn, because even when things went well, people still tried to screw him over.

-Like, 3 people acknowledged the death of Ben Parker: Peter, Aunt May, and MJ. No one else gave 2 sh!ts or even talked about it throughout the whole movie. That kind of bothered me.

[Pussy Galore]

An ass!

Look how sad it is:

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRQGP_ydLZeZ_8a3u1Z3ZuejXPkJY4GIvZxhUhacCdf_0abswKR


I don't really react to those kind of things to be honest haha. I find it boring and the acting was HORRIBLE

[mark f]

Balthazar gave a crummy rendition of a donkey? :)

[Pussy Galore]

The donkey was allright it's the movie that I disliked

[Guaporense]

Au Hasard Balthazar 4/10 I hated it

Its a rather "cold" movie, like Bresson's other movies. But behind it's cold facade it's a great movie. Though the director's style may not be everyone's cup of tea. And yes, the acting is horrible compared to hollywood standards since Bresson's style is different from the standard (Ozu's style is also very different: his actors look stiff if compared to hollywood actors).

[the samoan lawyer]

http://www.themovies.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/insidious.jpg

Insidious

It was alright, nothing special. I actually really enjoyed the first half of the film, then whenever the 'ghostbusters' arrived in kinda went downhill from there. Same thing as jeepers creepers back in the day, started off great then all the good work was ruined by what i'll call silliness. Although i will admit i thought the very end was actually decent.

6.5/10