The 7th MoFo Hall of Fame

[gbgoodies]

@GB-

Glad you liked a couple of these movies, and that Harakai rating is pretty good from you for a Japanese movie. The only thing I'll say about your write up for that is, I think honor and revenge often go hand in hand.

You said you're going to rewatch everything; Killer Joe too? With Hubby?:)


I think the honor/revenge customs are something that just confuse me in this type of movie.

It seems like he is being forced to commit suicide as a type of "honor code", and that seems to be the Japanese custom, but here in the U.S., suicide is actually illegal, and certainly not considered honorable. In fact, there are some religions that believe that if you commit suicide, you will go to Hell. I just can't seem to wrap my head around the idea of suicide being honorable.

And at the same time that he is doing the "honorable" thing by committing suicide, he's plotting revenge on the people who are watching him. :confused:


Yes, I'm going to re-watch Killer Joe, but it's up to Hubby if he wants to watch it or not. He's more into superhero movies, and action movies, (like Die Hard) type of stuff.

[seanc]

But the reason he is plotting revenge is because he sees the hypocrisy in the honor code your talking about. That gets pretty obvious pretty quick and he explicitly says that more then once towards the end when they are having a conversation about the facade of it. Then there is a line at the end that drives that point home again.

Others with more knowledge can correct me if I am wrong. It doesn't seem like the suicide in and of itself is honorable. It is more if yoh have become unproductive in society then they view you as making a brave choice for your people. Not saying that is sound thinking, it seems bat crazy to us as it should. I do think it is a distinction to make when watching the film and considering the culture though.

[cricket]

Inglourious Basterds

http://cdn.moviestillsdb.com/sm/466c3cb1b7a749791d3d656d5d597e13/inglourious-basterds.jpg

I was a little disappointed when I saw this nominated, because although I gave it a positive rating after my first viewing last year, my lasting impression has become somewhat unfavorable. I don't like to be a black cloud raining down on anyone's nomination, and I thought that would be what would happen after another viewing. I'm happy to say, that despite some problems I have with the film, my outlook on it has improved.

It's a very uneven movie for me. This could've been a strong favorite of mine with a more consistent tone. There are some great moments of tension, but then there are small parts that I found kind of silly, interrupting the flow a little bit for me. Any attempt at comedy in this movie simply did not work for me, and I did not like any of the little trademark Tarantino touches such as having an arrow on the screen, or being able to show through a character's pants to see explosives. I also did not like the soundtrack, not that the music wasn't good, but it just didn't fit to me.

My favorite Tarantino movies are without a doubt Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, and Jackie Brown. In those movies, every scene seems to have a character that stands out and demands attention. I thought that this movie lacked that at times. Waltz was unbelievable, and there's not a time when he's in the movie that it's not very enjoyable. I thought Pitt was mostly terrific, just not consistently so. *When neither of them are in the movie, I think there's a lack of spark. I thought Melanie Laurent was very good as Shosanna, but it's a serious performance, rather than the stand out character I'm accustomed to seeing in a Tarantino film. I think Fassbender is a terrific actor, but I thought he was mostly wasted here. My big problem with the cast is with the Basterds. I like Eli Roth in general a little bit because I like some trashy films, but in this particular film, he's completely outclassed and never should've had such a significant role. The rest of them are just there, not memorable or noteworthy.

Despite my many problems with this movie, there are plenty of great moments and great scenes. It starts great and ends great. Watching closely, I didn't think any other part of it was bad by any means, the lone exception being when Pitt and a couple of his boys were pretending to be Italian, but some of the scenes are so good, it's hard for the rest of the movie to keep up. I'm not super confident in my rating; it could be a little generous, but right now I feel very positive towards it.

4

[Daniel M]

Here's a fun fact for you Cricket. I think I read somewhere that Tarantino considered, or maybe even first approached Adam Sandler for Eli Roth's role.

[cricket]

Here's a fun fact for you Cricket. I think I read somewhere that Tarantino considered, or maybe even first approached Adam Sandler for Eli Roth's role.

That result would've been very interesting. I thought Roth looked right for the role, but it just turned me off when he had dialogue. I think I would've liked his character a lot more if he was a mute.

[Miss Vicky]

http://media1.giphy.com/media/220tONGhNLyZW/giphy.gif

Inglourious Basterds

As a fan of gratuitous violence and offbeat humor, this movie is right up my alley. But this movie has a lot more to offer than that, namely in the form of palpable tension and dread. The scenes of Christoph Waltz's character offer the most tension, and each time he appears on the screen my heart races a little. He is stunningly great in this movie, but I really enjoyed all of the performances, from Pitt's hilarious Aldo the Apache, to the Bear Jew, to Hitler, to Daniel Bruhl's Frederick Zoeller. Mostly, though, I really enjoy watching Nazis suffer and die.

4.5-

[MovieMeditation]

Here's a fun fact for you Cricket. I think I read somewhere that Tarantino considered, or maybe even first approached Adam Sandler for Eli Roth's role.
Jep that's indeed right.

I honestly can't imagine it, but if Sandler can let everything loose then maybe. I trust QT, but still. Freaking Adam Sandler. Very "off" role too, if he were to take it.

[Zotis]

Being John Malkovich

A solid movie with good acting and a bizarre series of events. I really enjoyed the sad weird portrayal of most of it's cast, especially Cameron Diaz and John Cusack. I'm not normally a fan of either of them as actors, but I thought their roles suited their acting styles perfectly here. Catherine Keener played the snob very well too. I think the weakest element of the movie is the strain it puts on it's central theme. It doesn't really deliver. The characters are so enthralled by their experience, but at least from my perspective the experience of being inside John Malkovich didn't actually seem that appealing. I'm just basing that on my feeling though, so I guess it's subjective. I thought the sexual themes were very strong though in contrast. Anyway, overall it's a good movie, but it won't contend for my vote.

3

[Miss Vicky]

:(

I think the appeal of being IN John Malkovich, at least for Craig and Lottie had less to do with John Malkovich and more to do with access to Maxine.

[seanc]

Looks like I am going to have trouble finding Festen, Platform, and Wolf Cildren through my normal means. If anyone could let me know some legal means of obtaining. I would appreciate it.

[Cole416]

Cricket, you and I basically have the same opinon on Basterds. Good movie, but if Tarantino cleaned some stuff up, it'd be a great one.

[MovieMeditation]

Looks like I am going to have trouble finding Festen, Platform, and Wolf Cildren through my normal means. If anyone could let me know some legal means of obtaining. I would appreciate it.
Here's a link to the movie, split in two parts. Both parts are on the site:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x109lem_the-celebration-1998-pt-1_creation

I have looked through it a little bit, but I don't know exactly how it will be in terms of being a great translation in the subtitles, or if there'll be any problems under way.

Hope this helps! :)

[gbgoodies]

Looks like I am going to have trouble finding Festen, Platform, and Wolf Cildren through my normal means. If anyone could let me know some legal means of obtaining. I would appreciate it.


Wolf Children is on DailyMotion in two parts:

Part 1:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2ifcwv_dual-audio-5-1-eng-jap-lkrg-000000-000-005959-000_tv

Part 2:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2iwuue_wolf-children-2012-brrip-720p-dual-audio-5-1-eng-jap-lkrg-005959-000-015700-000-000000-000-005611-84_shortfilms

[gbgoodies]

Looks like I am going to have trouble finding Festen, Platform, and Wolf Cildren through my normal means. If anyone could let me know some legal means of obtaining. I would appreciate it.


Platform is on YouTube, but it doesn't have subtitles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uK9jzak1Ck

[rauldc14]

Poker House- Potential Spoilers!

Jennifer Lawrence is a really great actress. She is probably one of my favorite. With that being said, I didn't fully enjoy this film. And that's not because of her, I thought the performance was excellent from her. Nothing near a Winters Bone, Silver Linings Playbook, or American Hustle level however. I thought the rest of the acting was mediocre to bad. I thought the movie was pretty bad until the last gun scene. The last 15-20 minutes were pretty good, but it didn't save the rest of the film for me. The one thing that I truly wonder about is just how real this actual story is, since it is supposedly based on the real life of the director herself. There were a couple of really upsetting scenes, but I really hated Agnes' Mom and her pimp. I'm glad I watched it as I've been meaning to get to all of Lawrence's filmography, but it's one of my least favorite of hers. Consider it Lawrence's version of Amy Adams Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day or Rachel McAdams Morning Glory. Just thought the story had a few two many holes and there should have been more character development. Even showing more of the sisters bond would have helped.

3-

[bluedeed]

Platform is on YouTube, but it doesn't have subtitles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uK9jzak1Ck

So you watched the version without subtitles? That explains your review of it :cool: ayyyy

[gbgoodies]

So you watched the version without subtitles? That explains your review of it :cool: ayyyy


I found subtitle files on the net that matched the video, but it was pain in the butt to get them to match up. The subtitles were in two parts, but the movie was in one part, so I had to download the video and split it into two parts to match the subtitles. (Unfortunately, it wasn't worth all the work. :shrug: )

[gbgoodies]

Poker House- Potential Spoilers!

Jennifer Lawrence is a really great actress. She is probably one of my favorite. With that being said, I didn't fully enjoy this film. And that's not because of her, I thought the performance was excellent from her. Nothing near a Winters Bone, Silver Linings Playbook, or American Hustle level however. I thought the rest of the acting was mediocre to bad. I thought the movie was pretty bad until the last gun scene. The last 15-20 minutes were pretty good, but it didn't save the rest of the film for me. The one thing that I truly wonder about is just how real this actual story is, since it is supposedly based on the real life of the director herself. There were a couple of really upsetting scenes, but I really hated Agnes' Mom and her pimp. I'm glad I watched it as I've been meaning to get to all of Lawrence's filmography, but it's one of my least favorite of hers. Consider it Lawrence's version of Amy Adams Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day or Rachel McAdams Morning Glory. Just thought the story had a few two many holes and there should have been more character development. Even showing more of the sisters bond would have helped.

3-


What did you think about what happened after the gun scene?

Did you think it made any sense that she could just drop the gun, walk away, and go to her basketball game like nothing happened?

[rauldc14]

I must say that I can't find an appropriate version of Platform either. I haven't looked too hard but hopefully I stumble across it.

[rauldc14]

What did you think about what happened after the gun scene?

Did you think it made any sense that she could just drop the gun, walk away, and go to her basketball game like nothing happened?

Well, if that really truly happened then that is that. If not then I thought that it was pretty laughable. I didn't find it insanely unbelievable, but I'm not fully bought in either.

[bluedeed]

I found subtitle files on the net that matched the video, but it was pain in the butt to get them to match up. The subtitles were in two parts, but the movie was in one part, so I had to download the video and split it into two parts to match the subtitles. (Unfortunately, it wasn't worth all the work. :shrug: )

Maybe if you put as much "work" into watching the movie as you did into getting the subtitles, you'd come out of it with more than just complaints about the (very purposeful and beautiful) cinematography

[rauldc14]

Freaks

Just watched this one this morning. Like the others who have seen it, I was particularly surprised and didn't know much about it going in. I thought it was a really well done and dark film. While it was hard to hear them communicate at times, it wasn't that big of an obstruction as it was pretty easy to tell what was going on. I thought the story was well thought out and I was surprised to hear that this was Brownings last successful film. I think the length of the film goes to show that a film doesn't need to be overly long to send its message. I'd like to get my hands on the original version as I hear it is even darker, such as Hercules being castrated. And what an unusual ending seeing the human duck :p

3.5+

[bluedeed]

Inglourious Basterds

The question always arises while watching Tarantino how seriously I'm supposed to take him. He's aided by the guise of mainstream entertainment, which has the luxury of choosing what it wants to be at any given moment. If I call Tarantino a fetishist entertainment filmmaker then I'll be overrun with arguments for the virtues of entertainment cinema (of which there are many) or (more foolishly) of claims that Tarantino is more than a popular entertainer and showman.

Inglourious Basters is in some senses, Tarantino's most radical film, radical though for Tarantino lies not in film art but economic art. The filmmaker who began as a so-called independent hero bobs and weaves more than even in Pulp Fiction, assembling an ensemble which, of course, leads to reductions. More than any of his other movies I found myself burdened with exposition, most significantly is the awkward and ill-conceived narrated flashbacks by Samuel L Jackson, as clear an example of a modernism misfire if there ever was one. This being a Hollywood film, there's no mistake about whether or not we're supposed to follow what's happening. This isn't history, a complex amalgam of events that extend beyond oneself; this is play, there's no pretense of fact, except a cinematic one, giddily and awkwardly crammed into as many inches as possible.

That there's a lack of pretense of fact is something that should make us happy, for the film's characterization history rewritten is a grotesque one, one that, as Daniel Mendelsohn says, turns Jews into Nazis. Now, I'm under no assumption that Tarantino believes this sort of equal malice is what Jews would do if given the chance, because this isn't a Jewish fiction, it's Tarantino's fiction. It's just that Tarantino seems incapable of exhibiting any emotion more complex than rage and revenge. This universe is so inconceivable to me as anything other than a fetishistic daydream, comparable to a hormonal teenager sitting in a high school history class, disengaged and taking turns daydreaming alternating between a 'fun' history and the girl two seats over.

America has a long history of rewriting our history for the sake of our personal reputation. From the hostile takeover and subsequent (and important to this day) occupation of the Kingdom of Hawaii to the of the present day attempt to annihilate any remnants of the existence of the Confederate Flag. In that sense, Tarantino's movie is the perfect representation of an American movie about the Holocaust, it's just that our understanding of it is not very complex or interesting.

Take Charlie Chaplin's The Great Dictator as an analogue to Inglourious Basterds. One could say that they are ostensibly about the same material, the fantastic overthrow of Nazi Germany. Significantly too, they both end in complete fantasy, where the impossible is accomplished and a group of small people (a single person mostly in the Chaplin case) yet the effect is entirely different. In Basterds, the ending is a fetishistic comedy, where the historical defeat of the Nazis allows for a disengagement and resolution at the conclusion. In other words, there is no political context for Tarantino's movie. On the other hand, The Great Dictator's ending, through its fantasy ending, is political and filmic tragedy. For the past 2 hours, arguably the most popular and influential artist of the 20th century was using everything he had ever learned to try to topple Hitler in the public eye. Chaplin (as appropriate for the role of Hitler as anyone ever was) gives a speech that has been mistakenly lauded and respected by many who watch the film. The true nature of this fantasy, heightened by historical hindsight, is its complete failure. Its failure to cause any change, to accomplish anything, to be of any political or intellectual use is one of the great tragedies of cinema. The speech is the summation of the futility of art in the face of waves of history, waves of politics. Chaplin's fantasy is one that wants to change the world, whereas Tarantino's is one that's content to sit back from its position of privilege and enjoy the sensual stimulation.

[Thursday Next]

I watched Letter From an Unknown Woman. It's certainly one of the saddest films I have ever seen, but very beautiful, I loved the setting and the train ride through all the fake countries. At first I thought Lisa was silly, but I sympathised with her more after she was abandoned by Stefan.

[rauldc14]

Glad you are playing along Thursday, even without a horse in the race :up:

[Thursday Next]

Well I won't have time to watch all of them, but a couple of them looked good so I thought I might as well watch along with the rest of you :)

[seanc]

Ready to hear what you thought of Before Sunrise Raul.

[gbgoodies]

Ready to hear what you thought of Before Sunrise Raul.


I'm not Raul, but I thought that Before Sunrise was possibly the most romantic movie ever made. It's wonderful how a movie that's basically about two people doing nothing but walking around, talking all night, and just getting to know each other, can be so amazing.

[Camo]

I'm not Raul, but I thought that Before Sunrise was possibly the most romantic movie ever made. It's wonderful how a movie that's basically about two people doing nothing but walking around, talking all night, and just getting to know each other, can be so amazing.

Have you watched either of the sequels GBG?

[seanc]

I'm not Raul, but I thought that Before Sunrise was possibly the most romantic movie ever made. It's wonderful how a movie that's basically about two people doing nothing but walking around, talking all night, and just getting to know each other, can be so amazing.

Yeah, I absolutely loved it. Sunset was a different story for me. Midnight was also amazing though, but the exact opposite of Sunrise.

[gbgoodies]

Have you watched either of the sequels GBG?


Yes. I watched all three movies about a year ago. When I first joined this site, someone nominated Before Sunrise in a Movie Tournament, so I watched it for that, and I loved it so much that I couldn't wait to watch the sequels. I liked the sequels, but I loved the first movie the most.

I re-watched Before Sunrise a couple of days ago, but I haven't had a chance to post about it yet. I was wondering if it would hold up on a re-watch, and it definitely did. I think I loved it even more this time than I did the first time I watched it.

[seanc]

Quite a write-up Bluedeed. Like you said, I don't think Tarantino is ever trying to change the world and I am not sure making entertaining films is the masturbation that you seem to be implying. I will certainly see The Great Dictator someday but I would guess making that type of film amidst the war is much different then making it fifty years later. You seem to think the two different styles are a reflection of the culture at large but I would say that our culture could use a little more of the levity that Tarantino provides. I love Tarantino. I love his characters and his dialogue. I have never looked to him for my world view, and I don't think he expects me to.

[Camo]

Yes. I watched all three movies about a year ago. When I first joined this site, someone nominated Before Sunrise in a Movie Tournament, so I watched it for that, and I loved it so much that I couldn't wait to watch the sequels. I liked the sequels, but I loved the first movie the most.

I re-watched Before Sunrise a couple of days ago, but I haven't had a chance to post about it yet. I was wondering if it would hold up on a re-watch, and it definitely did. I think I loved it even more this time than I did the first time I watched it.

I'm always surprised to hear that people like Sunrise most, I know HK does too actually I'm not even sure if HK likes either sequel. Personally I feel that Sunset and Midnight have a lot more to offer. Glad you liked it so much though :)

[seanc]

I'm always surprised to hear that people like Sunrise most, I know HK does too actually I'm not even sure if HK likes either sequel. Personally I feel that Sunset and Midnight have a lot more to offer. Glad you liked it so much though :)

I loved Midnight, but Sunset felt way too preachy compared to Sunrise for me.

[Camo]

I loved Midnight, but Sunset felt way too preachy compared to Sunrise for me.

I could see that actually. I myself never had that problem but I can see where you are coming from.

[gbgoodies]

I didn't think that either of the two sequels had the same almost magical feeling that the first movie had.

[rauldc14]

Before Sunrise

I wouldn't say that I completely loved the film but what I do love is the fact that Linklater is able to take such simple stories of realistic life and make them entertaining, as was really witnessed in this one. I hadn't seen any of the trilogy prior to this watch and this watch makes me want to see the other two. I was certainly astounded by Boyhood so I figured that this movie had a chance to be really favorable with me as well. I really thought the cinematography was top notch! and I really enjoyed the setting of Europe as a backdrop to the film. There's something that has always fascinated me about it. With the simpleness of its story, it really because a film with a high dependability on its performances, which I really thought Hawke and Delpy performed rather well. I sometimes wondered if there should have been a more dramatic scene in the film, but I think that Linklater was going after something different, trying to tug at the heartstrings of human emotions. However, that's why I probably prefer Boyhood. But it's not to say that I didn't like what this film had to offer either. I wouldn't call it a masterpiece but it is a simple story that becomes quite intricate due to its characters. It's certainly a worthy nominee for me.

3.5+

[Gatsby]

Watching Sunrise tonight. Time to get jealous of two fictional movie characters. :p

[Gatsby]

Before Sunrise (1995, Linklater)

http://i.imgur.com/qXdVZTL.jpg

Romance doesn't need comedy to keep things interesting, case in point: this film. The story is an everyday normal part of our lives, but told in the sweetest way possible and best of all, it doesn't value perfection. Except for Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy, who are nearly perfect in the film and make a wonderful couple.

I say this because the relationship between the two main characters is developed through viewing the minor, amateur parts of Austria, those areas are less clean and "romantic" than the popular destinations, but it fits the simple, charming, plain-like unfolding of emotions. There is nothing hidden in this film, nothing to think about, other than how the hell can such a drama with one direction can be so beautiful.

4+

[Miss Vicky]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Cesyf-SCoNQ/UgNMASEjKUI/AAAAAAAACQs/QFlDSdRx8n8/s1600/Bob+Le+Flambeur+-+Bob+The+Highroller+-+Acting+Madness.gif

Bob Le Flambeur

I'm not typically a fan of heist movies and for a good 2/3 of the movie, I wasn't a fan of this one either. It did have a certain air of cool to it but I didn't feel much for its characters and the acting left something to be desired. But that little twist at the end and the way things played out for Bob gave me just enough of a payoff. A decent film.

3.5-

[gbgoodies]

The Poker House is an interesting movie in that it held my attention, but it was also kind of slow and depressing. It has some humor to lighten the mood a bit, but it wasn't really enough to save the movie for me. The narration was kind of annoying at times. It seemed to be spoken with less emotion than the rest of the movie.

The ending made very little sense. She was so upset about being raped that she pulled a gun on her rapist, but then she just drops the gun, walks away, and goes to her basketball game?

For the most part, the acting was only okay, but Jennifer Lawrence was very good as the oldest sister.

3.0

[gbgoodies]

Before Sunrise

I saw this movie once before, about a year ago, and I loved it so much that it made me want to immediately watch the rest of the trilogy. I was curious if it would hold up on a re-watch. It did.

This movie is one of the best movies in which nothing major happens. What I mean is that there are no shootings, no chase scenes, no major conflicts, no special effects. It's just a simple story about two people who meet on a train, they walk around all night talking, and they fall in love. It's just an amazing movie about two people getting to know each other.

Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy have wonderful chemistry together. This is possibly the most romantic movie ever made.

4.5

[gbgoodies]

This was the second time that I watched Wolf Children (2012). I saw it once before, when Cricket recommended it to me, and I liked it, but I didn't love it, so I was curious if I would like it better after re-watching it.

The movie is very good, and I think it liked it a little bit more than the first time I watched it, but I still didn't quite love the movie. It's a great movie, but while it has some great moments, it's also kind of depressing at times. The movie is mostly about the woman struggling to take care of her two young werewolf children alone, and helping them figure out who they are in the world, but I would have liked to see a little bit more of the romance that brought her together with the children's father.

The daughter was annoying when she was young, but as she got older, she also got less annoying. In contrast, the son was quiet and shy when he was young, but as he got older, he became more outgoing, and he eventually learned where he felt he belongs in the world. I liked that there seemed to be a feeling that the father was watching over them throughout the movie. It made it feel like the mother wasn't so alone all the time.

3.5

[Miss Vicky]

http://24.media.tumblr.com/b88d08f735cd582973cb9cc912ee2c10/tumblr_mngvh3Mxc71qbdajjo1_500.gif

Before Sunrise

This was a pretty sweet little romance, but not one that I really bought into. It certainly had its moments - the palm reader scene and the "telephone" conversation being standouts for me - but the whole premise of two strangers meeting and falling in love in less than 24 hours just doesn't work for me.

3.5-

[Friendly Mushroom!]

So Sean was wrong. :)

Prediction to be opened after your viewing.

You hate it

[Miss Vicky]

Yeah he was wrong, but not horribly wrong. I didn't love it or even like it very much. It was decent.

[Friendly Mushroom!]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MLry6Cn_D4
http://31.media.tumblr.com/bbc0d4744d25b689e457b4fbc4a440c7/tumblr_n1l2y8wzWu1rey868o2_500.gif
http://blog.chron.com/tubular/files/2015/03/inglourious-basterds-bingo.gif
http://media0.giphy.com/media/eiwauFJGF0hb2/giphy.gif
https://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lrjr0m39zE1qaeylxo3_500.gif

2.5-3


Extended thoughts soon hopefully.

[Miss Vicky]

2.5-3
Extended thoughts soon hopefully.

Damn, that's disappointing.

[seanc]

Yeah he was wrong, but not horribly wrong. I didn't love it or even like it very much. It was decent.

Glad you didn't hate it MV. Just didn't seem like your kind of movie to me.

[Gatsby]

Glad you didn't hate it MV. Just didn't seem like your kind of movie to me.
Let's make your prediciton next time correct by nominating Annie Hall. :p

[cricket]

Since it's hot, I'll force myself to watch Before Sunrise again soon.

[Miss Vicky]

Yeah he was wrong, but not horribly wrong. I didn't love it or even like it very much. It was decent.

Glad you didn't hate it MV. Just didn't seem like your kind of movie to me.
Yeah it isn't my kind of movie, but it was entertaining enough for one watch. I doubt I'll watch it again or either of the sequels.

[bluedeed]

Damn, that's disappointing.

Higher than my rating for it :cool:

[Miss Vicky]

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/AnimationCountdown/Gifs/71wolfchildren.gif

Wolf Children

When I first watched this movie (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1233810#post1233810), I had mixed feelings about it. I appreciated the quieter scenes between Hana and the children but found the romantic, puppyhood, and transformation scenes irritating. Six months later, nothing's changed.

I admire the beauty of the animation and appreciate certain aspects of the story it's trying to tell, but I'm not particularly enamored with the film as a whole.

3.5

[rauldc14]

Since you watched it yesterday, I'll watch it tonight.

[cricket]

I'm going to start hitting some of these now that I'm done focusing on the 60's; I've only watched 4 so far.

Where can I find Platform? It's not on Hulu, Netflix streaming or DVD, Amazon instant, or YouTube. Would Best Buy or Walmart sell it?

[Miss Vicky]

Where are people finding Festen and Letter From An Unknown Woman?

[Gatsby]

Where are people finding Festen and Letter From An Unknown Woman?
I got Festen from ITunes, but that was only because like you said, hard to find. Letter From an Unknown Woman I have not required yet.

[Camo]

GBG posted a link to Festen on Daily motion or something a few pages back.

[Camo]

Actually it was Moviemed.

Here - http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x109lem_the-celebration-1998-pt-1_creation

[cricket]

Letter From an Unknown Woman

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=S0R2STZUUNQ

[Miss Vicky]

Thanks, guys.

[rauldc14]

Letter from an Unknown Woman

This is an example of a film that is quite liked by everyone but just not suited for my own personal tastes. I think I would certainly benefit from a second watch, but the first watch had a lot of lulls to it for me. I thought Fontaine did a really good job in it, but her character and Stefan just weren't two people that I could really connect to. I couldn't much get into the style of film making of Ophuls on this w atch, but he does seem pretty talented behind the camera. I wish I liked it more, but it just didn't seem to connect with me all that well. Others may really enjoy it though, it is a well regarded film and I wouldn't say there is anything technically bad about it.

2.5

[Zotis]

Just finished The Hustler. A pretty solid movie. I liked it. I liked how it wasn't really about pool. It made me think a lot about the kind of messed up issues people have, and how we pursue things in life that aren't really of any value, like money. The acting was pretty decent. I really enjoyed the characters. I actually thought John Goodman was going to be in it. I wasn't really all that familiar with Paul Newman, and I got them confused. So when I saw a glimpse of the "Fat" man before I'd seen the movie, I thought that was him. I don't really have much else to say about it. Piper Laurie and George C. Scott were interesting.

3.5

[MovieMeditation]

When was the deadline again?

[Zotis]

Just saw Daniel M is in! Fantastic!

And I'm willing to give ample time this round. I figured until September 20th, may even extend to beginning of October.

I'm not sure what the final ruling on the deadline was, but I found this.

[MovieMeditation]

Great! Plenty of time then! :D And thanks for the help!

(I haven't even started yet, except for Harakiri, which I saw close to the start of this HoF) :p

I'm on Roskilde Festival right now, but when I return I'll dive into this HoF with grand style!!!

[rauldc14]

Yup! September 20th, maybe a week or two after if needs allow.

[cricket]

Wolf Children

This was my second time watching this movie. I had it on my lengthy watchlist for the animation countdown, but unfortunately it was one of about five movies that I didn't get to. I watched it shortly after the countdown as a New Year's challenge from MovieMed, and I loved it. I still love it. I feel that most importantly, the movie does a fantastic job setting up the story and getting the viewer to care about the characters. This is very important because it's an emotional story. Its captivating seeing the character's struggles and seeing them grow. I think it's a beautiful movie with just the right blend of the whimsical. Great animation, great musical score, I love it-one of my favorite animations.

4+

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--3exdvlTi--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636/17y19tyd2w690jpg.jpg

[cricket]

Freaks

This was a repeat viewing for me; I watched it for the first time last year and it became an instant favorite. This is a very unique movie, a movie that probably couldn't be made today, and a movie that destroyed the career of director Tod Browning. The subject matter is inherently upsetting, and the plot just adds to that. The close shots of the different character's faces are very effective at bringing out some emotion, and it's just a sad tale all the way around. The ending is one of the most terrifying sequences I've ever seen in a movie. I love it!

4.5-

http://cdn.moviestillsdb.com/sm/b891d0ebe0ab8797faf224ad8deebfb9/freaks.jpg

[edarsenal]

glad to hear you enjoyed Wolf Children, I echo everything you say about it

and I'm a big fan of Freaks "Gooble gobble, one of us! One of us!"


Oh, is it okay for me to remark since I'm not in this?? Forgive the faus pax if so

[gbgoodies]

Oh, is it okay for me to remark since I'm not in this?? Forgive the faus pax if so


Yes, of course it's okay for you to join in the conversation. :up:

[Miss Vicky]

http://media.tumblr.com/PrbyDnKQQgwje2wrRrzQY5U9o1_500.jpg

Platform

This film was absolutely impossible to connect with. The DVD case describes it as “beautifully shot,” but I found that to be far from the truth. The cinematography is downright ugly and distractingly so. The images are dark and blurry. The director seems not to have heard of doing close-ups. Worse still, he seems to think it’s a good idea to obstruct the audience’s view of key characters during conversations. At one point we’re left staring at a brick wall, unable to see either character in the scene. The soundtrack is virtually non-existent. I felt like I was watching a home movie, only I’ve seen crisper, more beautiful home movies than this and the film drags on endlessly. Ultimately I was left feeling completely bored and utterly disinterested in the fates of any of the characters.

1.5

[bluedeed]

http://media.tumblr.com/PrbyDnKQQgwje2wrRrzQY5U9o1_500.jpg

Platform

This film was absolutely impossible to connect with. The DVD case describes it as “beautifully shot,” but I found that to be far from the truth. The cinematography is downright ugly and distractingly so. The images are dark and blurry. The director seems not to have heard of doing close-ups. Worse still, he seems to think it’s a good idea to obstruct the audience’s view of key characters during conversations. At one point we’re left staring at a brick wall, unable to see either character in the scene. The soundtrack is virtually non-existent. I felt like I was watching a home movie, only I’ve seen crisper, more beautiful home movies than this and the film drags on endlessly. Ultimately I was left feeling completely bored and utterly disinterested in the fates of any of the characters.

1.5

Something should be said for the quality of the available versions of this, which are not that great and leave much, color contrast and picture quality, to be desired. The majority of your complaints seem to be about this though, I'm not sure how you're evaluating a movie based primarily on a distribution problem. Along with that you've completely missed the point of Jia's style, the great inheritor of Hou Hsiao-Hsien. Jia understands close-ups, the choice of an ascetic shooting style and soundtrack is key to the film, sorry that it's not conventional. You act as though the movie is some dude with a camera rather than a highly controlled and intimately detailed epic. Neither you nor gbg have mentioned anything about the plot whatsoever too...

[Miss Vicky]

Something should be said for the quality of the available versions of this, which are not that great and leave much, color contrast and picture quality, to be desired. The majority of your complaints seem to be about this though, I'm not sure how you're evaluating a movie based primarily on a distribution problem. Along with that you've completely missed the point of Jia's style, the great inheritor of Hou Hsiao-Hsien. Jia understands close-ups, the choice of an ascetic shooting style and soundtrack is key to the film, sorry that it's not conventional. You act as though the movie is some dude with a camera rather than a highly controlled and intimately detailed epic. Neither you nor gbg have mentioned anything about the plot whatsoever too...


I can only judge the film on what I'm given to watch. I purchased it on DVD and the movie looked horrible. I'm not going to spend time researching why it looked horrible. But even without the blurry and dark pictures, I'm left with long distance shots of what should be a fairly intimate scene or else a wall or some dude's back blocking all or most of the characters in the scene. I'm okay with unconventional shots if I can see that they serve some purpose, but in this case the physical distance and the objects obscuring my view do nothing but further distance me emotionally from the characters.

As to the plot, there's not a whole lot to speak of. It's centered around the relationships of a group of young people in an amateur theater troupe and how the political atmosphere of their country affects their daily lives. But that emotional distance I spoke of prevented me from caring much about the characters or plot.

[Pussy Galore]

I watched the blues brothers 2 days ago and I didn't really like it. First and foremost, it's a comedy and it simply didn't make me laugh. The only scene I found funny was the one in the southern bar when they started playing Rawhide's theme song, I admit I laughed at that. But overall I'd say it was too long, I hated the 2 main characters, I wasn't invested in the story, I didn't laugh. However, the music was very good so I can't say that the movie is not enjoyable as a whole since music is a huge part of it. I admit I had a pretty negative a priori I didn't thought I'd like it for reasons I ignore. So I can understand someone who enjoys the film, the humor, just not me.

[bluedeed]

I can only judge the film on what I'm given to watch. I purchased it on DVD and the movie looked horrible. I'm not going to spend time researching why it looked horrible. But even without the blurry and dark pictures, I'm left with long distance shots of what should be a fairly intimate scene or else a wall or some dude's back blocking all or most of the characters in the scene. I'm okay with unconventional shots if I can see that they serve some purpose, but in this case the physical distance and the objects obscuring my view do nothing but further distance me emotionally from the characters.

As to the plot, there's not a whole lot to speak of. It's centered around the relationships of a group of young people in an amateur theater troupe and how the political atmosphere of their country affects their daily lives. But that emotional distance I spoke of prevented me from caring much about the characters or plot.


Now we're back to that whole "all art should be me caring about the characters, any distance is a bad thing" argument that's boring because everyone says "well that's what I want." I'm glad you know enough about the movie whose plot you didn't "care" about and whose characters you could barely see to know that the cinematography is arbitrary or just Brechtian for Brechtian's sake, instead of, you know, a personal aesthetic expression with complex meaning at every turn.

[Miss Vicky]

Now we're back to that whole "all art should be me caring about the characters, any distance is a bad thing" argument that's boring because everyone says "well that's what I want." I'm glad you know enough about the movie whose plot you didn't "care" about and whose characters you could barely see to know that the cinematography is arbitrary or just Brechtian for Brechtian's sake, instead of, you know, a personal aesthetic expression with complex meaning at every turn.

Art can and should be whatever the hell the artist wants it to be. But if I'm going to appreciate that art, then the artist needs to make me actually give a **** about what's going on. The director may have succeeded in his artistic vision and others may hail Platform as a masterpiece, but he failed to make me care so my rating stands.

[bluedeed]

Art can and should be whatever the hell the artist wants it to be. But if I'm going to appreciate that art, then the artist needs to make me actually give a **** about what's going on. The director may have succeeded in his artistic vision and others may hail Platform as a masterpiece, but he failed to make me care so my rating stands.

Like I said, your argument is one I've had here before, it's a boring and selfish one that discounts distanciation.

[Miss Vicky]

If you're so bored by it then stop starting arguments about it. Ignore comments (or people) that you don't like or don't agree with. My opinions aren't going to change.

[seanc]

Anybody else have to google distanciation. I'm not afraid to admit it, I did. Platform is proving hard to find and it sounds like it is pretty experimental and has bad transfers. Needless to say I'm pumped for it.

[Pussy Galore]

If you're so bored by it then stop starting arguments about it. Ignore comments (or people) that you don't like or don't agree with. My opinions aren't going to change.


Before you said that comment I kind of was on your side of the argument. However, I think that you should always be open to other people's arguments and if they are right you shouldn't be ashamed of change your opinions :)

[Miss Vicky]

I don't think he's right, obviously, or I wouldn't be opposing him in the first place. And regardless of whose "side" anybody is on, I stand by my rating.

Artists are free to express themselves in any way they so desire. But I'm not under any obligation to like it.

[Pussy Galore]

Yeah I agree with that, I thought that you meant that you never change your opinions whether or not the other person with whom your arguing is right.

[mark f]

Unless the writer/director provides a running commentary of everything in the film, one can't help but watch it through distanciation. This includes the experts who actually provide many DVD commentaries or those who write critical essays about films/directors. However, it would certainly make sense that the more one watches of a certain director or writes about his common themes and uses of form, the more one would understand the director's intentions and meaning. The problem is that you probably have to cherry pick the filmmakers you choose to study this way due to time constraints. It's worth it in that you'll feel closer to the film and the director, but whether it enhances your enjoyment in anything other than an intellectual manner is another story. Some people will avail themselves to this way of appreciating more "difficult" directors, others are automatically attracted to the offbeat and more unique auteurs, while some people find it not worth the "work" for the payback received. Everybody here should make an effort to meet a film halfway, especially if you're taking part in these group evaluations, but ultimately it's up to each watcher what they get out of each movie.

[Miss Vicky]

Yeah I agree with that, I thought that you meant that you never change your opinions whether or not the other person with whom your arguing is right.

The trouble is that this isn't the first time Bluedeed and I have had this argument. I don't know if he's just that stubborn, if he likes being frustrated or if he actually thinks that there's going to be a different outcome each time, but he keeps insisting on starting it up again.

[bluedeed]

The trouble is that this isn't the first time Bluedeed and I have had this argument. I don't know if he's just that stubborn, if he likes being frustrated or if he actually thinks that there's going to be a different outcome each time, but he keeps insisting on starting it up again.

Well, I didn't think that we were having that same argument originally, it was just that your review was particularly atrocious and I didn't think it was reducible to that argument.

[Miss Vicky]

Well, I didn't think that we were having that same argument originally, it was just that your review was particularly atrocious and I didn't think it was reducible to that argument.

My "atrocious" review started with me saying that I found it impossible to connect to. There are a lot of factors that affect my ability to connect to a film's characters. A big factor of that is being able to feel the characters' emotions - which are conveyed in large part via facial expressions. If I cannot make out a person's expression, whether it's due to a blurry image, a long distance camera angle or because there's something obstructing my view, I'm just left feeling cold. So the director's quite deliberate alienation of his audience ties directly into my emotional connection or lack thereof.

[Sane]

Anybody else have to google distanciation. I'm not afraid to admit it, I did. Platform is proving hard to find and it sounds like it is pretty experimental and has bad transfers. Needless to say I'm pumped for it.

It's not IMO. The director has made stylistic choices based on what the film is about. Needing close-ups is up to the viewer but IMO it's sometimes important to allow the director to tell the story their way. This is a movie that compares the lives of little people against big societal issues so shots from distance are always showing a context for the behaviour of the characters. Sure, a close up might show the emotions of that character but a long shot shows them against the backdrop of their society - in this case often drab communist era architecture. It also allows what the characters are wearing to form part of the story - because this is about changes post cultural revolution it shows the characters modernising against a backdrop that remains the same.

The long shots also allow the director to show real physical distance between the characters and uses their whole bodies rather than just their faces to show what they think and how they feel.

I'm all for close ups but it's not the only way to make a film and to show us what characters are thinking. The cinematography in this film is amazing and to me most of things MV mentioned as negatives are highlights. The director had great control over every shot and things like a wall obscuring or separating characters is extremely effective to show their distances or disconnect from each other and their society.

I'm halfway through my second watch and it is having much more of an effect on me than the first time I watched it - thanks in large part to the brilliant direction.

[Miss Vicky]

The long shots also allow the director to show real physical distance between the characters and uses their whole bodies rather than just their faces to show what they think and how they feel.

But this could just as easily be accomplished using a combination of the two.

[cricket]

I watched the trailer and read some reviews. It doesn't seem like the DVD is poor quality, but rather how it's intended to look.

[bluedeed]

My "atrocious" review started with me saying that I found it impossible to connect to. There are a lot of factors that affect my ability to connect to a film's characters. A big factor of that is being able to feel the characters' emotions - which are conveyed in large part via facial expressions. If I cannot make out a person's expression, whether it's due to a blurry image, a long distance camera angle or because there's something obstructing my view, I'm just left feeling cold. So the director's quite deliberate alienation of his audience ties directly into my emotional connection or lack thereof.

And I think that distancing or hiding emotions from us is exactly the point. Jia isn't trying to make everything simple and externalize psychology because none of this was simple and he doesn't know the psychology of this massive event's actors. The emotions I felt about Platform weren't that of a character dealing with a personal problem, but the overwhelming feeling of being swept up by something massive and yet not physically tangible. Platform is about global change slowly and subtly shaping lives, about large political unknowables seeping into daily lives. The slowness, the distance, the obstruction are all essential to this if you're willing to look for it

[Citizen Rules]

Like I said, your argument is one I've had here before, it's a boring and selfish one that discounts distanciation.Bluedeed, you're not the director of the film, so why take negative comments about it so personally? So what if another person doesn't find the same truth in the film that you do. Aren't we all entitled to discover our own truths?


(and yes, I had to google distanciation);)

[Miss Vicky]

http://www.anime.com/images/index_page/201504/princess-animation.gif

The Tale of Princess Kaguya

The artwork of this film was quite beautiful. The soft pastels and sparing use of color in many scenes add to the dreamlike and sort of wistful mood of the film. The intimate moments between the characters were quite moving and I think this tale of the disconnect between what others expect of or want for a person and of what that person wants for his or herself will resonate well with a lot of viewers. I felt very conflicted watching the father in particular, as he struggled to do for Kaguya what he thought would make her happy when really his efforts were only bringing her sorrow. And I felt pretty strongly for Kaguya herself as she tried to find a way to live the way she wanted, without completely disregarding her parents wishes.

But too often I found myself being brought out of the movie by its more fantastical elements. I realize that this is a folktale and that most of the Ghibli films have at least some degree of fantasy so these sorts of scenes are to be expected, but they just don't suit my personal tastes and lowered my overall enjoyment of the film, especially at the end.

Still, it's a strong film overall and will likely earn a respectable position on my ballot.

3.5

[Sane]

But this could just as easily be accomplished using a combination of the two.

He did use a combination as the film went on but I felt the scenes where body language expressed the characters thoughts and the wide shots gave context were much more effective.

I had the feeling early in the film Jia was specifically attempting to not create separate characters and as it went on he was slowly bringing out the individuals - mirroring the changes in China from "collectivism" to a more individualistic society. Hence the use of more wide, group shots early on and a more narrow focus as it progressed.

In terms of the the overall "look" of the film, I agree with Cricket - it was supposed to look drab and grainy. It was set 30-40 years ago in a third world country with huge social and economic problems and the way it looked helped to accentuate the time, place and atmosphere IMO.

[Gatsby]

Inglourious Basterds (Tarantino, 2009)

http://i.imgur.com/wcoDg6t.gif

As I mentioned before, this should have been made into a TV series instead of a single 2 hour 30 min movie. The world of the basterds is so large and interesting that it becomes its own weakness. It feels like something is missing, for example, the motives and origins of certain characters. Inglourious Basterds is a film that is very episodic, a film connected by the bloody highlights of a TV season, thankfully flowing well thanks to QT's writing, but nevertheless tends to have a pacing problem and is a bit spontaneous.

On the flip side, the acting shows immense flexibility and subtle comicness, whether it's the silly accent of Aldo Raine or the sly menace of Hans Landa. Speaking of Hans Landa, the first moment of flexibility in emotion is shown in the famous first scene, where a smoking of a pipe turns Landa into a true villain.

So the film starts of tremendously well, then starts to tumble down, but doesn't descend into a level of bad. It stays flat and has a few bounces due to some memorable conversations and actions. Overall a decent to good film that once again... should be made into a TV series, Please QT, I would watch every episode of it.

3.5-

[cricket]

That TV series idea is a great one, Gatsby.

[Miss Vicky]

http://38.media.tumblr.com/1c243fc3f1a7bfbd3c688024193e53b4/tumblr_mzpcq1x0lD1qcgwn4o1_500.gif

Letter From An Unknown Woman

I really liked that there was no clear hero or villain in this film, but I found the central character exasperating and found it a little hard to have sympathy for her. Lisa's tenacious hold on her girlish infatuation with Stefan struck me as being so ridiculously naive that it must have been a deliberate act of her blinding herself to reality. It was clear from the start that Stefan was a womanizer, though I suppose the very young Lisa can be forgiven for her crush, given her inexperience. Plus Louis Jourdan was quite a handsome man. But as a grown woman she should have known better. (This is not really a criticism of the film, though. There are definitely women like her IRL.)

I felt quite badly for Johann, who obviously cared for her. I even felt a little bad for Stefan, who, even if he had remembered Lisa, had no way of knowing the truth of their history together. And, of course, I felt for little Stefan who had no control over anything.

The performances were all quite good. One of the reasons why I'm generally not a big fan of older films is that too often the acting is overly theatrical. That really wasn't the case with this and the film was much better for it. Taking into account the film's age and the fact that I watched it on YouTube, I thought it looked really good as well. Overall, I can't say that I loved it, but it was solid film and I enjoyed it.

4-

[Zotis]

Art can and should be whatever the hell the artist wants it to be. But if I'm going to appreciate that art, then the artist needs to make me actually give a **** about what's going on. The director may have succeeded in his artistic vision and others may hail Platform as a masterpiece, but he failed to make me care so my rating stands.

Vicky, I think your feelings about the movie are valid, and bluedeed also makes valid counterpoints explaining the purposes behind the movie's style (I haven't seen it, but he seems to know what he's talking about). You're right that you don't have to like the movie, but I think your wrong when you say the artist needs to make you care. If the artist is trying to make you care, and fails, then that's one thing. But can you expect people who don't even know you to cater to your personal taste? Or can you say that all art needs to be created with the intention of making people care? Can art be made for the sole purpose of expressing something the artist wants to express for their self?

Hypathetically I think it's valid to say, I didn't like the cinematography, therefore I didn't enjoy the movie. But I don't think it's valid to say I didn't like the cinematography, therefore the cinematography was bad.

[MovieMeditation]

Watched Before Sunrise today, and made a review in my Cinema Review thread:

Before Sunrise Review (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1347876#post1347876)

It become much longer than anticipated, but it was fun writing about it! :) Hope you'll check it out!

[Miss Vicky]

Vicky, I think your feelings about the movie are valid, and bluedeed also makes valid counterpoints explaining the purposes behind the movie's style (I haven't seen it, but he seems to know what he's talking about). You're right that you don't have to like the movie, but I think your wrong when you say the artist needs to make you care. If the artist is trying to make you care, and fails, then that's one thing. But can you expect people who don't even know you to cater to your personal taste? Or can you say that all art needs to be created with the intention of making people care? Can art be made for the sole purpose of expressing something the artist wants to express for their self?

Hypathetically I think it's valid to say, I didn't like the cinematography, therefore I didn't enjoy the movie. But I don't think it's valid to say I didn't like the cinematography, therefore the cinematography was bad.

I really don't want to get into this argument again, but I'm not "wrong" to say that the artist needs to make me care, because by that I mean that the artist needs to make me care if I'm going to like the movie. And I said I thought that the cinematography was ugly, which is why I didn't like it.

As I already said - in the post you quoted - art can and should be whatever the hell the artist wants it to be. Artists have the right to express themselves in any way they choose. But their right to express themselves does not nullify my right to like or not like their art and to feel that way for whatever reason I choose. I'm not expecting any artist to "cater to" anything, but neither can anyone expect me to like the artist's choices when those choices go directly against my personal taste.

[cricket]

That's an interesting argument, Zotis, assuming you basically mean being able to give a film credit for being a success, even if a person doesn't like it. It just seems that this argument only comes up with movies that are somewhat obscure, foreign, or arthouse. There have been quite a few people who have disliked The Blues Brothers, even though I would say the director accomplished everything he set out for, yet it doesn't get credit for that here. It's important that a filmmaker makes himself happy, but there comes a point when it's their responsibility to the people who are paying them to make a movie that people want to see, and the majority of people want a nice story and performances. You can have all the nice lighting and framing and things like that in the world, but most people just don't care about that. Most people want emotion or entertainment.

[cricket]

That's not directed at Platform btw, just something I often see around the forum.

[rauldc14]

That was a great write up Meds! I wouldn't say I'm 100% with you on how you felt aboutBefore Sunrise, buti still thought it was pretty good.

[cricket]

I didn't realize Before Sunrise was so beloved. I think I'll watch it this weekend for my second viewing.

[Zotis]

I really don't want to get into this argument again, but I'm not "wrong" to say that the artist needs to make me care, because by that I mean that the artist needs to make me care if I'm going to like the movie. And I said I thought that the cinematography was ugly, which is why I didn't like it.

As I already said - in the post you quoted - art can and should be whatever the hell the artist wants it to be. Artists have the right to express themselves in any way they choose. But their right to express themselves does not nullify my right to like or not like their art and to feel that way for whatever reason I choose. I'm not expecting any artist to "cater to" anything, but neither can anyone expect me to like the artist's choices when those choices go directly against my personal taste.

Alright, I think I get you. Sometimes it's just tricky decyphering the ideas people are trying to communicate through their choice of words.

[bluedeed]

I think the interesting thing at play is the relationship of the audience to the art, basically where the audience places itself in comparison to the art and vice versa. The most common relationship is people judge art, putting themselves above the art and deciding they have the right/ability to judge it, we do it all the time. Then there's the situation where the art appears either to put itself above the audience or seems to simply not care for it, when this happens, people see the movies as pretentious, as if a work of art can assert itself above something real. Then there's the rare dialectical relationship where the audience and art interact as equals, the art provides as the audience supplies it. Hopefully this simplification makes sense but the idea is that where you see yourself in relation to a movie you watch will define a lot about how that movie affects or doesn't affect you. As Mark said, you get out what you put in.

[MovieMeditation]

That was a great write up Meds! I wouldn't say I'm 100% with you on how you felt about Before Sunrise, but I still thought it was pretty good.
This viewing didn't match how I felt after the first viewing, obviously, but I still think it is masterful filmmaking and works way better than it should. Thanks for reading my write-up, raul, I appreciate it a whole lot!!

I didn't realize Before Sunrise was so beloved. I think I'll watch it this weekend for my second viewing.
I hope it'll be a good watch for you, cricket! :up:

[rauldc14]

So what's everyone's progress report thus far? I've seen 9 of the 18. I was going to watch Take Shelter on Saturday but I never got around to it. I'm moving pretty slow but no worries for me (other than the obtaining of Platform).

[MovieMeditation]

You're moving slow? I've seen 2 out of 18 so far! :laugh:

Haha, but of course, there are plenty I've already seen prior to this list, which I will leave for last. But don't worry, I will finish, I've just been so busy, but as y'all have seen I'm slowly getting back into it all again. ;)

[rauldc14]

Well technically I've only seen seven. Still have to rewatch You Can't Take it With You and Shawshank.

[Miss Vicky]

I still have to watch Festen, The Poker House and You Can't Take It With You and rewatch The Shawshank Redemption.

So I guess that puts me at 14/18 watched.

[seanc]

I have 8 watches to go after watching Wolf Children last night. I will probably give Take Shelter another look as well. I have only seen it once and it was about two years ago.

I don't have much to say about Wolf Children. It is a well told fairy tale. I just like my dialouge more "written", if that makes sense. The visuals here didn't do much for me either. I like the house and farm but past that I thought they were very bland. I hated how when the children changed only their shirt would stay on, and it would be tied neatly around their neck Carlton style. This movie was not made for me, sometimes that's just the case.

[rauldc14]

Killer Joe Potential Spoilers

It's ok. I mean, it's very well acted certainly. Matthew McConnaughey is tremendous in the lead role and the simple sight of Juno Temple makes it an entertaining watch. I think the story was a bit far fetched, I'm not going to say it shouldn't be but I usually enjoy films liked his more when they seem more realistic.

What I didn't like was the ending. Seems strange that Sharla and Ansel would turn on Chris. I know that their lives are certainly in jeopardy but for the torture that they had been through it was just a strange ending to me. It was entertaining, but not an all time great for me. Now I finally have gotten to see where Crickets avatar came from, and that scene was rather strange as well. Killer Joe was certainly a nut job, and McConnaughey played it well.

But the main thing that creeped me out was Chris' affection for Dottie. It was a little too much for me. Perhaps the trailer park stereotype was trying to be put in place, but it seemed rather awkward to put this sort of swing onto a film.

The performances overall hold the piece together to make it a semi-respectable, yet rather flawed film for me.

3+

[Sane]

I've watched all of them but will probably rewatch Being John Malkovich.

This an extremely high quality HoF with seven films that I rated 4.5 or better. My own nomination may not even make my top 4.

[Zotis]

That's an interesting argument, Zotis, assuming you basically mean being able to give a film credit for being a success, even if a person doesn't like it. It just seems that this argument only comes up with movies that are somewhat obscure, foreign, or arthouse. There have been quite a few people who have disliked The Blues Brothers, even though I would say the director accomplished everything he set out for, yet it doesn't get credit for that here. It's important that a filmmaker makes himself happy, but there comes a point when it's their responsibility to the people who are paying them to make a movie that people want to see, and the majority of people want a nice story and performances. You can have all the nice lighting and framing and things like that in the world, but most people just don't care about that. Most people want emotion or entertainment.

Well, being a success doesn't necessarily deserve much credit. It depends on what it succeeds at. I'm not exactly sure how to respond to your comment about the argument only coming up with movies that are obscure, foreign, or arthouse. Do you understand why movies made primarily for money, or entertainment don't get as much praise as movies that are made for passion and art? I think the motivation behind a movie has a lot to do with the quality of the end product. I try to appreciate quality objectively when I see it. I can't give movies that are superficial as much credit as movies that are deep. The Blues Brothers is one of those movies that I see as being fun and enjoyable for people who's taste it appeals to, but quality wise I can find a lot of faults with it, and that's why I didn't praise it despite not liking it. I'm not trying to say there's anything necessarily wrong with making movies just for fun, but it's certainly not as impressive as making movies for art.

I could care less about what most people want.

[Captain Spaulding]

Lots of great films in this Hall of Fame. A very diverse selection as well. It was fun to go back and read all the discussion so far, especially the discourse revolving around Inglourious Basterds. Here's my two cents on the nominees I've seen:

The Blues Brothers is a recent watch for me. I saw several people complain that the humor is lacking, which is considered a major shortcoming since the film is technically a comedy. I'll admit, I didn't laugh much either, but I did find the movie highly amusing. I think most comedies peak with a first viewing. Unexpected punchlines might make you laugh, but once you've heard the jokes a couple of times, the movies don't typically hold much replay value. The humor in The Blues Brothers, however, is the type that traditionally has more staying power. You might not laugh out loud with every joke, but the movie should at least continue to put a smile on your face and brighten your mood. I can see why it's so beloved. My favorite sequence was at Bob's Country Bunker. I also got a kick out of Carrie Fisher randomly showing up at different times to try to kill them. The car chases were excellent and comically over the top. And it was fun seeing musical legends like James Brown and Aretha Franklin play actual characters instead of themselves. My biggest problem with the film was the length. This is the type of film that should ideally fall in the 90-100-minute range, yet it's 133 minutes. I definitely felt that length. Overall, I was a little disappointed with The Blues Brothers. I was hoping to love it, but I merely liked it instead. At the very least I thought The Blues Brothers would be the best SNL film I've seen, but I still prefer Wayne's World. Maybe that's just age playing a factor since the latter is much more my generation. ("A sphincter says what?")

The Shawshank Redemption is another recent watch for me. I'd seen it before -- I own it, actually -- but several years had passed since my last viewing. I still find it ridiculous that this is the highest rated film on IMDB, but I guess I shouldn't find the film's overwhelming popularity all that surprising. After all, it's hard to imagine anyone outright hating this film. It checks every box that appeals to a wide audience: likable characters with whom you can relate, great old-fashioned storytelling, humor, pathos, comeuppance for the bad guys, a happy ending, clever twists, a theme about the resiliency of the human spirit. Unlike many other films with a similar arc, The Shawshank Redemption is an inspiring film that doesn't feel cheap and manipulative. It teaches to never give up hope even in the most hopeless situations. Sometimes, like Andy Dufresne, we have to crawl through ***** to come out clean on the other side. The one thing I dislike about The Shawshank Redemption is that it flinches and looks away anytime the film veers too closely to dark, uncomfortable subject matter. We know that Andy's butthole is in danger and we know that the guards are abusing and mistreating the prisoners, but the camera only lingers long enough to garner sympathy for its characters without risking the alienation of its audience by making them too uncomfortable.

Killer Joe, on the other hand, wallows in its depravity like a pig in *****. And I love it for it. The movie is unapologetically lurid, pulpy, trashy, sleazy, disturbing and, because of all those traits, unforgettable. If I live to be a hundred and I never watch Killer Joe again, I will still remember that infamous chicken leg blowjob. This is the movie that allowed me to forgive Matthew McConaughey for all those years of horrible romantic comedies. Everyone in the cast seemed to relish the opportunity to get down and dirty. Juno Temple deserves special praise for going full-frontal. Usually when a movie is this lewd, the talent in front and behind the camera is lacking, but here you've got an Academy Award-winning director, a Pulitzer prize-winning playwright, and a leading man in the midst of the greatest career renaissance I've ever seen. All of this helps separate Killer Joe from the pack, turning the trailer park noir into one of my favorite movies of the decade. It's not a movie for everyone, but the best movies often aren't.

I've read Swan's heartfelt review of Take Shelter. Any movie capable of delivering that level of profound impact is obviously doing something right. I haven't seen Take Shelter since it first came out, but it's a movie that has mostly stuck with me, even if some of the details are now hazy. Michael Shannon is an actor who I will watch in anything. In Take Shelter, he delivers one of the biggest powerhouse performance in recent memory. I think the biggest strength of the movie lies in its ambiguity. When I first watched the movie, I took a more literal approach, wanting to believe that Shannon's character isn't actually crazy -- that his visions are prophetic and not a side-effect of mental illness. After thinking about the movie afterwards and listening to other interpretations, I changed my opinion. There's no right or wrong analysis. That's the beauty of it. Sometimes a film aims for ambiguity and only results in being overly vague. Take Shelter, on the other hand, is beautiful and powerful and capable of impacting viewers on an emotional and intellectual level. I love movies that encourage discussion on the ride home from the cinema, which Take Shelter did for me and my friends. Jeff Nichols is one of the most promising directors working today. His most recent film, Mud, is also fantastic and highly recommended.

Being John Malkovich is one of the most original and bizarre films I've seen -- the kind of premise that is so out there that you know mind-altering substances must have been involved during the creative process. And mind-altering substances were often involved when I watched this movie too. I used to get high all the time and ramble on about how we're all puppets. I don't remember if I was talking about a lack of free will or just the effect of the drugs, since I was often surprised by the things I would say and do, as if someone else had stepped into my mind for awhile and taken over the controls. So when my college roommate showed me Being John Malkovich and the whole premise revolved around puppetry, it blew my mind. This was some next level *****. Being John Malkovich, along with movies like Eraserhead and Performance, became one of my go-to movies to watch while high. With each viewing I seemed to find some new meaning hidden in the film -- some new revelation about life or the soul. The movie always seemed very profound to me. Unfortunately, as soon as the high wore off, I'd usually forget about whatever deep, profound thought process I had just experienced. Back then this would've made my top 100, but I haven't watched it in a few years so I don't know what kind of impact it would leave on me now. Chances are I'd still love it, regardless of my mental state.

Before Sunrise is my least favorite entry in my favorite trilogy. I think which one you prefer in the series probably says something about your own romanticism (or lack thereof). With three movies to their name, Jesse and Céline are the most realistic, fully rendered on-screen couple in movie history. They've ceased to be fictional characters to me but actual human beings. Seeing their journey as a whole makes each individual movie even stronger, so even if you're not head-over-heels for this first movie, give the next two a shot. Most will say that Before Sunrise is the most romantic of the trilogy, but to me the characters are still too young and naive and foolish. I prefer Before Sunset, when the characters are calloused and regretful and no longer drunk on ideology. To me, that makes their connection so much more powerful because it has weight behind it instead of being built on airy, fluffy clouds like in the first movie. Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy have amazing chemistry together. They feel like a real-life couple. The dialogue in each movie is stellar. It's fascinating to watch the evolution of their relationship over a two-decade span. Before Sunrise is about what could be, Before Sunset is about what could've been, and Before Midnight is about the here and now, where the past has repercussions and the future is still uncertain. Taken as a whole, they constitute cinema's greatest, most believable romance.

Freaks is fascinating and unforgettable. As a horror fan, it's interesting to read about the controversy surrounding this film's release and how it essentially destroyed Tod Browning's career. It seems some things never change. Look at what happened to Michael Powell after Peeping Tom. Or the hoopla surrounding the "video nasties." Look at all the horror films that have been censored or banned at one point or another. I contribute that to the intentions of horror, which, unlike other genres, seek to purposefully provoke negative emotional responses from the viewer. Judging by the reception of Freaks, I'd say it is a very effective horror film in that regard. Casting actual freaks was a stroke or genius. (Or, for Browning, a death knell.) I think a lot of people have a morbid fascination with physical deformities and abnormalities, and Browning takes full advantage of that. The usage of such "freaks" in the film is certainly exploitative, but it's still more honorable than simply gawking at them as a side-show attraction. At least here they are presented as actual human beings. They may look strange or frightening, but as the movie progresses, you begin to see past their deformities. You become "one of them," as the chant goes, while the characters who appeared normal on the outside are revealed to be monstrous and cruel, transforming them into the true freaks.

Inglourious Basterds is an excellent film that contains many brilliant scenes and shows glimpses of the masterpiece QT intended it to be, yet ultimately it never quite comes together as it should, making it a frustrating film overall. I've seen several members say that they would've preferred if QT had turned the story into a miniseries rather than trying to condense the six-hour script (or however long it was) into a full-length feature film. Personally, I would've preferred if he had split the script into companion pieces that tell the story from two perspectives, much like Eastwood did with Flags of Our Fathers and Letters From Iwo Jima. Inglourious Basterds already feels like two different films with disparate tones forcibly mashed together as one. We've got the story of Shosanna and the story of the Basterds. The latter is the most entertaining aspect of the film with Brad Pitt's ridiculous accent and the gleeful violence and humor (an underrated component in all of QT's films). The scenes spent with the Basterds is typical Tarantino. I don't mean that as a bad thing -- he's my favorite director, after all -- but every time I re-watch the film, I find myself wishing that we spent a lot more time with Shosanna. I feel like her half of the film is Tarantino stepping farther outside of his comfort zone than he's ever been. There's a maturity and sophistication and restraint in those scenes that is atypical of Tarantino. But it's as if he feels too naked without the crutch of genre, so we get this jarring back-and-forth switch from vulnerable, unfiltered Tarantino to fanboy Tarantino playing in the kitchen with Dirty Dozen. Having said all that, I still love the film. Waltz is amazing. Much like Samuel L. Jackson, he brings out the poetry in QT's dialogue. For a film that rewrites history, giving Nazis a taste of their own medicine, I think it's appropriate that so much of the story revolves around the film industry. To me, that's ultimately what the film is about, not the death of Hitler or WWII, but the power of cinema.

The Hustler is a favorite of mine, but I'll wait and share my thoughts on it when it shows up on the 60's Countdown since it was on my list. I haven't seen any of the other nominees. Some look more interesting than others. I know I'm probably going to kick myself for not watching Harakiri in preparation for the 60's Countdown. It looks to be a leading candidate to win this Hall of Fame. It's also nice to see Guap nominate a real movie for once instead of episodes 27-30 of some random obscure anime series about giggling schoolgirls flashing their panties.

[Gatsby]

I'm really sad that so many people expected The Blues Brothers to be one of the funniest movies they had ever seen, just because it has a cult reputation and based off SNL and it's two early legends. For me, it's no more than possibly the most energetic, passionate, and happy-go-lucky film ever made. It's also very over the top, surreal, and extremely off-beat sometimes just for a couple of amusing moments, and you just gotta appreciate that. Alright, everything is indeed a bit bloated, too expensive and destructive for it's own good, but has there ever been a film that did anything similar to the 1980 classic? Not only should The Blues Brothers should be innocently and mindlessly enjoyed, it should be a mandatory watch for anyone who wants to study film. If maybe I'm going too far, I blame Captain's influence on me, since he posted right above. :p

[cricket]

Platform

I like watching movies blindly, but I'll read up on them a little if I think they're going to be a challenge, so that's what I did here. I think that helps me to prepare for the movie, and helps to prevent me from playing catch up. I didn't read much about Platform, just what was written in this thread, and it's Wikipedia page.

http://deeperintomovies.net/journal/image10/platform3.jpg

After hearing how it was filmed, with many shots of the characters in the distance, and not being able to see their expressions, I tried to look at the group of characters as a whole as one single character, and the environment that they were in as another character. This worked pretty well for me at the start, but it proved somewhat unnecessary as I was able to connect with the individual character's interpersonal struggles. It's not like I was totally gripped by their situations, but I did have feeling for them. The other side of that with the original way I was looking at is was everyone in the film living a dead-end life, and that was certainly the big picture here. I was thinking that, if these people had been a part of a gang rather than a performance troupe, that the overall theme wouldn't be dissimilar to City of God, albeit with a much different style. This movie is a lot more subtle. We know these people don't have much, but it's not like they're filthy and haggard.

I actually loved the way this movie was filmed. I thought the long shots were effective, while the interior shots reminded me of an Ozu film. Some of the exterior shots were breathtakingly beautiful, and I just loved the overall look of the film. I think another thing the long shots can do is make the acting better. The acting appeared to be very good, but not focusing up close on their faces can cover up flaws. Another huge plus was the music. As far as I'm concerned, there wasn't enough of it. It was both very nice to listen to, and relevant to the story. If anything, maybe the movie could've been edited by about 15 minutes to make it a little crisper, although I understand that there's a director's cut that is longer.

I'm going to rate this movie because that's what we do, but it's almost meaningless for me to do so. If someone calls this a great movie, I would tend to agree. I also think it's easily understandable how someone wouldn't get into it. I respect and admire the movie more than I enjoyed it, but I did enjoy it. I think it was a great nomination, and I think it's the kind of movie that makes the viewer a better movie watcher.

3.5+

[Gatsby]

I'm kinda amazed right now. From the brief descriptions of the film I heard I thought you would hate it, but the 3.5+ you gave it gives me a lot of hope for it, since I love lack of close-ups. :p Everyone had their taste film expanded since the mere first few days they were active on MoFo, especially thanks to Hall of Fames (who knew MV would become a Bergman fan?), but from what I see the member who has seen the most development is without a doubt cricket. :up:

[cricket]

I'm kinda amazed right now. From the brief descriptions of the film I heard I thought you would hate it, but the 3.5+ you gave it gives me a lot of hope for it, since I love lack of close-ups. :p Everyone had their taste film expanded since the mere first few days they were active on MoFo, especially thanks to Hall of Fames (who knew MV would become a Bergman fan?), but from what I see the member who has seen the most development is without a doubt cricket. :up:

There's no doubt that these Hall of Fames have helped me dramatically, because I started watching these types of films with a stronger purpose.

[Miss Vicky]

I'm glad you liked it, Cricket, and that my decision to buy the DVD wasn't a complete waste. :laugh:

[Zotis]

The video store didn't have Festen or You Can't Take It With You, so I rented Before Sunrise. Going to watch it tonight or tomorrow.

[rauldc14]

Festen

To be short and brief I really didn't care for this movie much at all. The problem for me was sympathizing with the characters. There wasn't a character that I truly cared for enough to connect with. I really disliked the apology speech by Helge at the end too. It was too dismal a film for me. I didn't have a problem with the whole setting of the film taking place in the same location, but the. I need interesting characters and dialogue. It could have simply been another cultural barrier film for me. I'm interested to see what others think of this film as maybe I needed to look at it from a different perspective.

1.5

[Gatsby]

Why do you think you quite often need to relate to character to like a film?

[rauldc14]

For me Gats, I need one or two things usually to enjoy a film. The first would be interesting characters or great performances. If that isn't available I need an interesting storyline. If none of the two are present, I will usually not care much for that film. If I can't care for the people or what is going on with the film, why would I like it? There can sometimes be exceptions created for things such as cinematography and camerawork, but not all too often.

[seanc]

Why do you think you quite often need to relate to character to like a film?

I think most of us treat characters as an entry point into a film. It is certainly not the be all end all for me. If a movie leaves me cold it seems like that is usually one of the main reasons.

[Thursday Next]

In what way did you dislike the apology speech? Do you think we are meant to like it, or accept it? Do you think the other characters do?

[rauldc14]

I don't think it was warranted. He would have been better off saying nothing because it wasn't heartfelt.

[Thursday Next]

But there's nothing he could say that would make everything alright again. You could be right that it's not heartfelt, that it's just a last ditch attempt to manipulate his family. I don't feel like we're supposed to like it, or agree with it necessarily.

[Gatsby]

For me Gats, I need one or two things usually to enjoy a film. The first would be interesting characters or great performances.
Yes, but do you dislike films for charactes not being "relatable", or instead just being not interesting, and do you think the two are separate things?

[Thursday Next]

I think it depends on the film. Some films everybody involved is clearly supposed to be despicable and that's part of the fun. Or they just aren't character driven. But sometimes the drama seems to depend on caring what happens to the characters and if you don't it becomes a problem. I'm surprised that raul feels that there's nobody to relate to in Festen, though - what about Christian?

[rauldc14]

They have to be interesting, not relatable in most cases. Probably why I don't care for Christian either.

[MovieMeditation]

I think all the characters in Festen are great. Not neccesairly relatable, but I think it's part of the reason I like it. One big family crumbling to pieces more than they already was. I think it's fun to see the characters evovle and honestly, though not neccesairly a character I care for, I do want Christian to win and succeed in what he's trying to do. And I love the scene at the table next morning. The ultimate humilation for Helge.

[mark f]

The film obviously has great characters and acting. If it didn't, raul wouldn't hate it and them so much. The only thing I can see Festen bothering someone about is the Dogme 95 crap, but I think the "rules" actually help here by making the shocking story more immediate and matter-of-fact.

[Miss Vicky]

https://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mccembEwYt1qibxw9o1_500.gif

The Poker House

Overall I thought this was a decent movie with some strong performances. Jennifer Lawrence in particular really stood out with her emotionally charged turn as Agnes. However, many of the film's characters just seemed pointless and weird for the sake of being weird, including both younger sisters. This weirdness left me feeling a bit unattached and kept me from truly connecting with the story.

The only sympathetic character for me was Agnes and even then I struggled to feel too sorry for what happened to her. I know she was only fourteen and I'm not saying it's totally her fault, but she was truly playing with fire in her interactions with Duval.

3.5-

[Gatsby]

They have to be interesting, not relatable in most cases. Probably why I don't care for Christian either.
Okay better than I expected. I tend to dislike people who don't like a movie solely because they can't "connect" with the characters, not finding them interesting is understandable. But I don't know how you can find the characters of Festen not interesting. ;)

[Sane]

The Celebration

Will be pushing for my number one spot in this HoF - an incredibly well written and acted, complex movie. I can understand what Raul is saying about needing interesting characters but for me a movie has seldom had more interesting characters - perhaps the issue is with their motivations and decisions? There is 40 years of complex emotions going into everything that everyone does which leads to some bad, but understandable, choices. Overall this is a masterpiece IMO.

The Poker House

Zotis asked what I thought but I was waiting until someone else discussed it. I agree with much of what Miss Vicky said. Lawrence was great and it is an interesting complex story but in some ways it was let down by some very insecure writing and direction. It become too self conscious without actually dealing with Petty's need to portray herself, in the end, as awesome. The basketball scenes were just really uncomfortable and I disliked the pat on the back she gives herself just before the credits. Not a bad film but I feel like a different director could have done a lot more with what was a very interesting story - Petty was too keen to portray herself as a hero. Still, a really interesting nomination and a film that never lost my interest.

[MovieMeditation]

I'm sad raul wasn't a fan of Festen, but on the other hand it seems to be doing really well in general. I'm so glad I ended up picking it, even though I debated for so long on what to pick. It's great to see people are mostly responding very positively to it! :up:

I look forward to be watching the rest of the nominations, generally I think the noms are strong with this HoF and I look forward to each and every one of them!

[rauldc14]

Id be really surprised if Miss Vicky likes Festen. Which probably means she will love it.

[seanc]

I watched Festen tonight. I am very disappointed at the transfer I had to watch, streaming site on-line, add that to the shaky cam and the visuals were wonky for me. Besides that the movie kind of kicked my ass. I was surprised at Christian's first speech, and from then on I just had a rock in my stomach watching this film. This is a good thing by the way, the story was very effective for me. I do question the way that everyone responds to the reveal. I don't know that the movie is going for realistic though. It feels more like the party is supposed to represent the emotional torture that these children have been going through their whole life. I think on that level it works very well. Very interesting movie. Hopefully I will get to see it again with a better transfer someday.

[cricket]

I'm looking forward to Festen quite a bit, but I'm mostly trying to watch movies I've already seen first. I'll be watching Before Sunrise within the next 24 hours, and that will put me at 8 watched.

[rauldc14]

Updated List

Seen:
Freaks
Letters from an Unknown Woman
The Hustler
Harakiri
The Blues Brothers
Before Sunrise
Festen
The Poker House
Killer Joe

Not seen:
Bob Le Flambeour
Being John Malkovich
Platform
Inglorious Basterds
Take Shelter
Wolf Children
Tale of Princess Kaguya

Need to REWATCH:
You Can't Take it With You
Shawshank Redemption

[Zotis]

Is it okay if I don't rewatch Shawshank Redemption? I've seen it over ten times.

[cricket]

Is it okay if I don't rewatch Shawshank Redemption? I've seen it over ten times.

You don't have to if you know it well enough and can rank it accordingly.

[Zotis]

I have the film practically memorised.

[cricket]

I have the film practically memorised.

No need then, I rewatch all of them because I'm nuts.

[Gatsby]

I have the film practically memorised.
You should create a Shawshank Redemption quiz. :cool:

[Thursday Next]

I do question the way that everyone responds to the reveal. I don't know that the movie is going for realistic though. It feels more like the party is supposed to represent the emotional torture that these children have been going through their whole life. I think on that level it works very well.

I questioned it as well, at first. But then I thought of just how often in real life people have been not believed by their families, police and the world in general and it made more sense. The party is representing an ugly truth of society, of people with every outward appearance of respectability and success who carry on carousing and pretending everything is okay and ignoring the dark secrets underneath.

[seanc]

I questioned it as well, at first. But then I thought of just how often in real life people have been not believed by their families, police and the world in general and it made more sense. The party is representing an ugly truth of society, of people with every outward appearance of respectability and success who carry on carousing and pretending everything is okay and ignoring the dark secrets underneath.

Yeah, I think that approach can let you just respond to the story instead of nit picking. I was having a physical reaction when they start the conga line and are singing a song about daddy. So sickening.

[MovieMeditation]

@seanc - even though you might be able to find a "good transfer", the film is made with the dogme rules and therefore filmed with DV cameras and hand-held with no fake lighting or whatever. So obviously it isn't going to look the greatest, but I think it adds to the intensity and realism of it all and makes it an unique experience overall. But I'm glad you liked it!

[neiba]

Freaks (Tod Brownin, 1932)

It's an impressive movie considering when it was done!
There's a couple of good scenes and I'd like to see much more from some of the characters! The siamese twins and their husbands were hilarious, too bad they were not more in this, and I really liked the clown too! I didn't care for the dwarves and the main story line though!
A good film overall!

rating_2_5+

[cricket]

Before Sunrise

http://cdn.moviestillsdb.com/sm/574f91bc2ee10dbc947e3efef967fae4/before-sunrise.jpg

This was my second viewing of this movie after watching it last year with my wife, and I feel about the same. I dislike most of this movie, but I do like the premise, the setting, and then the last 15 minutes saves it for me. I don't like the characters or find them interesting; they both annoy me. I don't like looking at Julie Delpy, or listening to her. I really like Ethan Hawke in general, but if I only knew him from this, I wouldn't. I also think most of the dialogue is lame. It would surprise some that I really love a good romance movie. I believe that love is probably the most intense thing in the world, but until the last 15 minutes of this movie, I felt no passion. For most of the movie, I felt like I was watching two teenage slackers in puppy love, and I just didn't care. I prefer a love story in which something deeper brings the couple together, not just a chance encounter. Just as an aside, something similar happened to me in my early 20's. I met a French girl on the subway in Toronto, and we were with each other for about 15 hours. That would make a completely different kind of movie though, a more entertaining one for sure. This movie looks good, and as I said before, there are a couple other things I like, but barely enough to give me a positive feeling.

2.5+

[Derek Vinyard]

I really like Ethan Hawke in general, but if I only knew him from this

Sinister !!!!!! :D

[MovieMeditation]

I'm sad that you didn't like it more obviously, cricket, but it's a fine review and you get your point across to why you weren't captured by it. After all, this movie is definitely not for everybody and if you don't like the characters you're pretty much doomed during a watch of it. :p

But if you haven't seen the other two, I would still say check em out, since they are definitely "more grown up" than the first one - espcially 'Midnight'.

[cricket]

I don't think I'd like the sequels much either, but they do have me curious. Sunrise does end with a nice cliffhanger.

[MovieMeditation]

I don't think I'd like the sequels much either, but they do have me curious. Sunrise does end with a nice cliffhanger.
Yeah, again if you are annoyed by the characters then maybe not. :D but I'm still sure you would think more of them then the first one. They each cover different periods of love, and I would guess Midnight is easier to relate to for you than two "teenage love puppies" going on a trip to nowhere. :p

[Guaporense]

The Tale of The Princess Kaguya (2013) - (For those people who want to know, I watched the dubbed version.)

I kind of had mixed feelings about this movie. The animation was nice, but the story was kind of depressing. She is the most unhappy princess ever. The more she "trains" to become a princess, the unhappier she gets. It just seems like she wasted her life being unhappy.

My favorite scene was when she finally got together with Sutemaru again, but sadly, that turned out to be a dream.

3.0

Takahata is an old master of animated depression, since Horus 1968 and Heidi (1974) he depicts sadness with great poignancy in animation. Since I guess I value greatly art that evokes negative sentiments I love his work.

[Miss Vicky]

Id be really surprised if Miss Vicky likes Festen. Which probably means she will love it.

I tried watching Festen online but it was super blurry and laggy. I bought a super cheap DVD copy on eBay but it won't be here until at least Monday, so I'll give it another try then.

If anybody in the states is having trouble getting a hold of it or The Poker House, let me know. I can pass them on to you.

[gbgoodies]

I'm dropping out of this HoF. Please remove my nomination.

Thank You.

[neiba]

Is everything alright gbg?

[rauldc14]

I'm dropping out of this HoF. Please remove my nomination.

Thank You.


The movie is staying in.

Just FYI to everyone, mainly because I'm sick of nominees being removed. If anyone has an issue with this let me know, but people have already seen it.

[Sexy Celebrity]

You're breaking the rules, Raul. That's not supposed to happen in these Hall of Fames!

[Miss Vicky]

I have a problem with that. It's still pretty early. Not everyone has watched it. Not only that, GBG asked for its removal. But the committee has had their say and the host gets to dictate.

I said I'd see this through, so I'll watch it but it's getting an automatic last place finish on my ballot.

[Guaporense]

I'm dropping out of this HoF. Please remove my nomination.

Thank You.


You are quoting me? :D

[gbgoodies]

I'm dropping out of this HoF. Please remove my nomination.

Thank You.


Is everything alright gbg?


I'm surprised nobody replied to this, but if you still haven't gotten an answer to this, you can read what happened starting here:

http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1352211#post1352211

WARNING: It's a very long read, so make sure you have a lot of time to kill.

[rauldc14]

But to me, this has nothing to do with the 7th HOF :)

[Miss Vicky]

Well crap. The Festen DVD is a bust. Should've known the price was too good to be true, but not much money wasted and I've requested a refund.

There's nothing technically wrong with the DVD and it's not a counterfeit, but it's also not Region 1 - which was not specified in the listing, nor was a photo of the cover provided, and the seller is in the U.S. I guess I'll see if I can get a R1 copy cheap or just suffer through that horribly blurry and laggy stream.

[rauldc14]

Take Shelter-Potential Spoilers

Every Hall of Fame that I have participated in has brought me a new favorite that I can watch over and over again. From Late Spring to After Hours to Ed Wood to Sideways. And now we have Take Shelter. Take Shelter is an incredible moving force full of two very powerful performances. The first is by the male lead, Michael Shannon, who seems to portray schizophrenia to a T. Every scene he is in is memorable and there may be no scene more powerful this decade than his Lions Club scene shouting there is a storm coming. I can't relate to the character itself at all, but I could feel what he is going through and he made it feel very real. Also there was Jessica Chastain who also had an astounding performance. I love how she is always by his side and even though he has nearly tore their family apart with his condition she is there to forgive him. I can't think off of the top of my head a better female performance this decade. What was most impressive to me is how well the two worked in the scenes in which they were together. The problems and the tension and struggle felt very real.

The film was shot beautifully. When we see the storm clouds it is almost majestic looking. The swarm of bird scenes are also very beautifully shot. And the direction here by Jeff Nichols is superb. A lot of people will criticize the ending, but for me it was one of the strong points of the film in that it doesn't give you a direct answer to what is happening. Is it a literal storm? Is it a metaphor? Is it a dream? You can make a case for any of the three options and it still works as a great ending for me. I'm surprised that others don't feel the same way. I need to see some other Nochols work after seeing this one.

Overall, one of the strongest films of this decade. I feel like I'm under rating it a bit but it is certain to go up with another watch I would assume. After 10 films I can say this will be a high threat on my list.

4+

https://33.media.tumblr.com/b3fa79f18448f46b1ae5670075e76844/tumblr_mewwa9kDke1qbvaudo2_500.gif

[Swan]

Glad you liked it dude. :up: Makes me happy.

[rauldc14]

It will be Basterds, Malkovich, or Wolf Children next.

[cricket]

Glad you liked Take Shelter so much, Raul. It only takes one person finding a new favorite to truly justify a nomination-it makes it all worth it.

[MovieMeditation]

I'm surprised nobody replied to this, but if you still haven't gotten an answer to this, you can read what happened starting here:

http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1352211#post1352211
But why drop out of this HoF? To make a point?

This HoF doesn't have anything overly offensive especially not in terms of extreme gore. So why exclude yourself from a Hall of Fame, which happens to be just about what you want in terms of participating? A HoF that is pretty much free from what you don't like, and then you drop out? Hm.

[rauldc14]

Glad you liked Take Shelter so much, Raul. It only takes one person finding a new favorite to truly justify a nomination-it makes it all worth it.

That's what I love about the Hall of Fame. Between that and getting to REWATCH favorites and masterpieces from a critical eye.

[seanc]

Very nice Raul. Definitely going to get a re-watch from me.

[Zotis]

The movie is staying in.

Just FYI to everyone, mainly because I'm sick of nominees being removed. If anyone has an issue with this let me know, but people have already seen it.

I'm fine with the movie staying on.

On another note...

Before Sunrise

I was very dissapointed with this one. I like Ethan Hunt, but I didn't enjoy his performance here, or any of the acting performances for that matter. The movie overall felt cliche, typical, and mediocre. I found myself bored listening to two ignorant, opinionated people talk too much about things they didn't understand. It felt like two 20-somethings were going through phases they should have gone through in their teens. It wasn't unrealistic, but I found it very boring.

[neiba]

I'm surprised nobody replied to this, but if you still haven't gotten an answer to this, you can read what happened starting here:

http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1352211#post1352211

WARNING: It's a very long read, so make sure you have a lot of time to kill.

I understand your point but, as MM said, why give up of this HoF?

[Zotis]

Yeah, I don't see what that post has to do with this HoF.

[christine]

This is annoying. I watched Take Shelter at the cinema when it came out and thought it was good. Reading Rauld's review made me want to see it again, but honestly Netflix in Britain is a pile of rubbish. Amazon online is just as bad, it's not available here on itunes download, really is it any wonder people get films illegally? :(

[cricket]

I'm fine with the movie staying on.

On another note...

Before Sunrise

I was very dissapointed with this one. I like Ethan Hunt, but I didn't enjoy his performance here, or any of the acting performances for that matter. The movie overall felt cliche, typical, and mediocre. I found myself bored listening to two ignorant, opinionated people talk too much about things they didn't understand. It felt like two 20-somethings were going through phases they should have gone through in their teens. It wasn't unrealistic, but I found it very boring.

It's too bad you felt that way, but I feel better knowing that I'm not alone.

[seanc]

I'm fine with the movie staying on.

On another note...

Before Sunrise

I was very dissapointed with this one. I likeEthan Hunt, but I didn't enjoy his performance here, or any of the acting performances for that matter. The movie overall felt cliche, typical, and mediocre. I found myself bored listening to two ignorant, opinionated people talk too much about things they didn't understand. It felt like two 20-somethings were going through phases they should have gone through in their teens. It wasn't unrealistic, but I found it very boring.

What about when he jumped on a plane, you had to enjoy that.;)

[rauldc14]

I'm on Roskilde Festival right now, but when I return I'll dive into this HoF with grand style!!!

I'm still waiting :p

[MovieMeditation]

I'm still waiting :p
Diving in today! :D

OKAY!?? HAPPY OR WHAT?!

[rauldc14]

I am enthralled! Look forward to your thoughts sir!

[gbgoodies]

I'm tired of people sending me messages trying to convince me not to drop out of the HoFs, so I sent in a list. You can accept it if you want to include it, or ignore it if you don't want to include it.

[rauldc14]

FYI to participants, I have included it.

[MovieMeditation]

FYI to participants, I have included it.
Which you should. :)

And GB, you shouldn't make such a fuss about Hall of Fames, especially not that of which you were already participating in and not really having problems with - only causing them. Although I kind of see your point in that major discussion you were a part of about nominations and what should be included/excluded, I don't feel like it is something that can be changed. As soon as you begin to make certain rules, other than the obvious ones, about what people can nominate, you begin to lessen the actual meaning and fun within a HoF. Especially when a movie is widely accepted as a certain genre, and you don't agree, then you're obviously in the minority, unfortunately, and there's nothing you can do about it.

I was ready to drop out of the Horror HoF because of MovieGal's nomination and I would've done so if she hadn't pulled out herself. But that's how it is. If you don't like what you see, bad luck. I don't see how it solves anything that you choose to just stay away from HoF's forever, though. That just seems dumb to me. I understand if you have lost a bit of interest as of lately, but with that I hope to see you come back in the future! :)


Anyways, I watched The Tale of Princess Kaguya today. I will post my thoughts tomorrow...

[gbgoodies]

Which you should. :)

And GB, you shouldn't make such a fuss about Hall of Fames, especially not that of which you were already participating in and not really having problems with - only causing them. Although I kind of see your point in that major discussion you were a part of about nominations and what should be included/excluded, I don't feel like it is something that can be changed. As soon as you begin to make certain rules, other than the obvious ones, about what people can nominate, you begin to lessen the actual meaning and fun within a HoF. Especially when a movie is widely accepted as a certain genre, and you don't agree, then you're obviously in the minority, unfortunately, and there's nothing you can do about it.

I was ready to drop out of the Horror HoF because of MovieGal's nomination and I would've done so if she hadn't pulled out herself. But that's how it is. If you don't like what you see, bad luck. I don't see how it solves anything that you choose to just stay away from HoF's forever, though. That just seems dumb to me. I understand if you have lost a bit of interest as of lately, but with that I hope to see you come back in the future! :)


Anyways, I watched The Tale of Princess Kaguya today. I will post my thoughts tomorrow...


The problem is that most people won't even try to understand the problem. It's not just about the issue with the nominations. It's about the way that I was treated in that thread. Some people are so concerned about allowing anything and everything into these HoFs, even movies that shouldn't be in a general HoF, that they just became nasty trying to defend their opinions.

People seem to think that I'm just trying to get all horror movies out of all the HoFs, but that was never my intention. I'm only concerned about the extreme horror in the general HoFs. I could care less if you guys want to have a separate HoF that's all extreme horror, but it's unfair to force that kind of movie on everyone. (I didn't even complain about the other horror movie that was nominated in the comedy HoF, or a bunch of other movies that were nominated in other HoFs, but nobody was even willing to try to find a solution.)

There are so many moves out there, that I just can't understand why this is so important to some people. If anyone had a valid problem with my nomination in a HoF, (or even in a song tournament), I would have no problem changing my nomination if someone asked me to change it.

The bottom line is that what's done is done. Unless something changes, I have no plans to join any more HoFs.

[rauldc14]

Wolf Children

Really enjoyed this one. It's the best anime that has ever been nominated in a Hall of Fame format (see that, Guap?) but it's much more than a good anime film. It's a film with a lot of heart and a very touching story. I love how the film was set up in the beginning showing the mother father relationship, and the ending was very fitting and touching as well. It was also very beneficial to see the kids progress throughout the film. I thought the animation itself was crisp and well drawn. I thought there was good character build up and it made us care for what was happening as well. A really solid nomination by PG!

4-

https://38.media.tumblr.com/98b63196e7b5896a9f4ed68d9c85acf5/tumblr_n24hjgYY8J1sm0rqlo1_500.gif

[MovieMeditation]

Glad you liked it, raul! I loved it back when I first watched it, can't wait to revisit it again soon! You cover many of the same aspects I loved about, a good write-up.

[Guaporense]

Wolf Children indeed is a very accessible movie that was made for the mainstream Japanese public. Hosoda said he made the film for parents who are trying to raise children. I would rate it about the same as The Girl who Leap Through Time but it's certainly not as good as Summer Wars, which is not that serious but it's more exciting and aesthetically creative film, Wolf Children felt to much like a standard Hollywood movie to me. Very good but lacked a bit in terms of being of a more interesting style and dealt with more radical/creative themes. Maybe it's conservatism the reason why westerners love it so much though (it is among the highest rated films on MAL, a site predominantly frequented by westerners).

Really enjoyed this one. It's the best anime that has ever been nominated in a Hall of Fame format (see that, Guap?)

Because we all know you are an anime critic who has a deep knowledge and appreciation of the medium. :D

[Zotis]

Welcome back Guap!

[Guaporense]

I was never away. :) I just didn't feel like posting.

[Zotis]

Aha, you sneaky devil.

[Zotis]

Just finished Killer Joe. I didn't care much for it. The acting and cinematography were good, but not exceptional. The characters were well enough portrayed, but uninteresting to me. Juno Temple was a 22-23 year-old who played a 12 year old named Dottie. She looked young for her age, but that was pushing it. I thought Emile Hirsch was Justine Timberlake. His character, like most of the characters in the film, was a complete looser. I did feel some sympathy for him though. The plot was a bit predictable, but the last scene was exceptional. I appreciated that the violence was unsettling and not glamourised.

2.5

[rauldc14]

I think I enjoyed it a little more than you, but I think we felt the same Zotis.

[Miss Vicky]

Juno Temple was a 22-23 year-old who played a 12 year old named Dottie. She looked young for her age, but that was pushing it.

Where did you get that she was 12? :confused:

I took her to be at least in her mid teens. Probably more like 16 or 17.

[Zotis]

Where did you get that she was 12? :confused:

I took her to be at least in her mid teens. Probably more like 16 or 17.

When Killer Joe asks her how old she is and she says 12, lol.

[cricket]

When Killer Joe asks her how old she is and she says 12, lol.

I don't remember that. I would guess you heard wrong, and if she did say it, it would be in jest. Her character is a simpleton.

[jiraffejustin]

She's not 12, but she does tell a story about when she was 12. I think Zotis just caught the dialogue a little incorrectly. I think she is supposed to be around 18.

[Zotis]

He asks her in a very straight forward manner, and she answers seriously. But I suppose it isn't clear if that's her actual age, or just her simpleton response. It has nothing to do with her boyfriend story from when she was in the third grade. She would have been 8 or 9 at that time. But I think the comment from her brother to her dad about her being a virgin could indicate she's older.

[seanc]

Platform: I think my ignorance on Chinese culture and politics in the 80's probably kept me from engaging with this the way I would want. However even if I did have a better grasp on the politics of the movie I still think it is way too meandering for my tastes. There are a couple scenes that engaged me but then they were just dropped, which is fine because that is the type of movie it is, but I would have liked some kind of forward momentum to keep me engaged. There is no sense of time at all which seems steange for me even in a movie that is obviously plot free. I didn't have any issues with the cinematography but didn't find anything striking about it either. I am sure my lecture about frame composition is forthcoming, but that's cool, I could always use one.

[Gatsby]

Take Shelter (Jeff Nichols, 2011)

http://i.imgur.com/NfwWr6p.gif

What do you get when you combine conditions of paranoid mental illnesses with a giant storm? A serious disaster, elevated to a level of genius by the acting and direction.

When I sat down on my couch and starting watching this film, I had very high hopes for it, because it became part of Swan's new Top 10 and I had watched Mud, another film by Jeff Nichols, which was above average, and made me re-evaluate Matthew Mccounaughey.

This time, it was the re-evaluation and discovery of an actor named Michael Shannon. I had seem him here and there but I never considered him to be an actor with enough charisma and talent to steal the show. Not here. If the movie consisted of him staring and shouting at the screen for an hour I'd gladly be engaged.

The schizophrenia in Take Shelter is nothing like how it is portrayed in other films, for example, Repulsion by Roman Polanksi, which is served with a dish of surrealism and complete claustrophobia, then tragedy. Shannon's performance in this film makes it look no more than a struggle of the head of a family, but enhanced by another struggle, located inside the head. We can have feeling towards his character, Curtis, because schizophrenia is described closer to the audience than ever before.

Nobody believes Curtis at first, but then when the storm strikes, Curtis becomes enraged and angrily despises the people who did not prepare. But what use is that? After a disaster has struck, the survival is not decided by "I told you so!". From an audience's point of view, knowing what was going to happen, this is very tragic and powerful moment.

The only problem I have with this film is not much of a criticism, but just a personal thought. After all the shouting, warning, and captivating silent gazes, when the storm actually starts to strike, it feels suddenly empty, because all that had been going on for nearly two hours. But like an actual storm, I guess that was inevitable, no matter how much you edit the script.

4+

http://i.imgur.com/AFxlx6v.jpg

[mark f]

So you thought an actual storm struck.

[Gatsby]

So you thought an actual storm struck.
No.

I probably sounded too literal. :p

[Swan]

I'm a bit confused by the final paragraph of your review, Gatsby, but really enjoyed and appreciate the rest of it. I especially like the paragraph about schizophrenia, because it sheds light on the fact the people with schizophrenia are really just people, like anyone else, and not the overblown crazies often depicted in the media. Schizophrenia, to me, is separate from the person who has it - it's like they have something inside them that's messing with them and giving them problems, but it's not who they truly are. That's how I feel about my own schizophrenia, anyway. I reflect back on my breakdown and the ways it messes me up and I think, all that is so different from how I feel deep down. It makes me often afraid of people, when deep down I love people. It makes me tired most of the time, when deep down I am enthusiastic about life and my future.

I think learning about the mental illness and not being afraid of those who have it can allow for empathy because you then realize they're not so different. And Take Shelter goes a long way in helping promote that.

:up:

[Zotis]

I watched Platform. I skipped ahead because I just really felt like watching it. It was interesting, and definitely artistic. I wouldn't say it was a masterpiece, but it's still one of the best Chinese films I've seen. I loved all of the interesting shots and the way it was filmed. I'm tempted to say it needed a bit more close up shots, but I can't really say if that would negate intentional effects, so I'll just leave it to the artist's discreation. I loved the realism and the story, but I couldn't really get a feel for how good the acting was. It seemed good from a distance anyway. I liked the use of color. And the dynamics of culture and family were subtle yet deep. I really enjoyed the ending. So far of what I've seen this is in first place.

[Pussy Galore]

I watched Before Sunset a couple days ago and it was great, so great that I watced the other 2 movies a couple days later.
Richard Linklater seems to have a recurring theme of showing how people grow (with the Before and Boyhood) and it works really well for me. Celine and Jesse are great character because they are intelligent, funny, reliable, etc. I love dialogue based movies and it is exactly that, sure there debates about gender differencesweren't totally accurate, scientifically right, but I don't think it necessarilly has to be that way, it gives the film more realism. The only ''negative'' I could say is that I liked the other 2 better, but not by much and I say it as a long movie. And I also have to say that I'm not the biggest fan of romance so that I liked it that much gives it more credit.

[MovieMeditation]

I must thank raul for being a great host for this Hall of Fame... Never have I been contacted so much about getting my ass moving and post in this thread. So thanks raul :p

Haha, but anyways, yeah I watched The Tale of the Princess Kaguya and here are my quick, but admittedly lazy, write-up!

I once watched about 20 minutes of this, after finding interest in the film because of the stunning use of watercolors and the fact that it was Studio Ghibli who stood behind it. But I must say, I wasn't exactly blown away by this film, unfortunately.

First off, it takes forever to get going and though I can see the point in showing her grow up and learn about live and present the place she loves and which becomes important later and throughout the film, I didn't really care much during these first like 40 minutes.It could definitely have been cut shorter. And as soon as she finally begin to turn to the life of a princess, things get a lot better. Here there is some discussion of Japanese culture and the ways of being a princess, all of this works really well. I also liked the father character and how greedy he became, how he didn't see everything for the princess, but more for himself. I also loved when all the potential husbands came along, trying to win her heart by comparing her to all sorts of non-existing out-of-this-world stuff. This made the princess suggest that they should all travel out and bring these items to her. I liked that. Everything was presented in a tone that really felt true to the ways of telling an old tale. Repeating themes and showing the magic in just the right way. In general, throughout it felt a lot like it respected the source material, trying to really tell it all in a poetic way, and together with that stunning imagery, it saved it from becoming a little too boring.

But I found the ending weak to be honest. Suddenly they just rushed in the whole "the moon is coming to take me" bs. Overall, only the middle part was truly great, the rest was so-and-so. It would've been a great short film, actually.

3

[Nope1172]

When will the results be posted, I'm not a part of the HoF, just curious

[seanc]

You Can't Take It with You: Very non-offensive easily digestible film. Sometimes those are just what the doctor ordered and tonight was one of those nights. When this movie is not focused on its plot it is fantastic. The characters are great and the themes speak very easily through them. When it gets bogged down in its plot and feels the need to state the themes frankly the film suffers a little. I was having fun more often than not. Delightful film.

[Sane]

You Can't Take It with You: Very non-offensive easily digestible film. Sometimes those are just what the doctor ordered and tonight was one of those nights. When this movie is not focused on its plot it is fantastic. The characters are great and the themes speak very easily through them. When it gets bogged down in its plot and feels the need to state the themes frankly the film suffers a little. I was having fun more often than not. Delightful film.

I thought it was an excellent feel-good film. Very sentimental in parts but it had done enough to create good characters so it didn't feel overdone. Basically I loved it.

[neiba]

Being John Malkovich (Spike Jonze, 1999)

The concept alone is fantastic. It starts like a comedy with some really funny moments but it slowly turns into something else, much deeper and philosophical.
Overall the perfomances are amazing by everyone involved especially Malkovich who is truly "one of the great American actors of the XX century"!
I really need to check more work by Spike Jonze! I felt the same with Her: the premise seemed too crazy to work but it actually does!
Great nomination MV! :)

rating_4

[Miss Vicky]

So glad you liked it, Neiba!

I know a lot of the participants have already seen it, but I was a little worried how the first-timers would react. I didn't love it the first time I saw it. I just thought it was weird, but it was definitely something that stuck in my mind. Obviously my opinion of it has only changed for the better with rewatches. :)

I still have three films left to watch for this one, but should be finished in the next week or so.

[Nope1172]

Being John Malkovich (Spike Jonze, 1999)

The concept alone is fantastic. It starts like a comedy with some really funny moments but it slowly turns into something else, much deeper and philosophical.
Overall the perfomances are amazing by everyone involved especially Malkovich who is truly "one of the great American actors of the XX century"!
I really need to check more work by Spike Jonze! I felt the same with Her: the premise seemed too crazy to work but it actually does!
Great nomination MV! :)

rating_4
Have you seen any other Charlie Kaufman movies? He is my favorite screenwriter.

[neiba]

I saw Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, but I didn't know it was by him! I'll check more of him! :)

[Nope1172]

I saw Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, but I didn't know it was by him! I'll check more of him! :)
Check out Adaptation and Synecdoche, New York.

[rauldc14]

Nope, the deadline is September 20th for ballots so results will be shortly thereafter.

We are about halfway through time wise with this HOF. If you haven't seen at least 9 or so consider yourself behind :) (cough Meds :p)

Anyways, plenty of time but technically less than 2 months.

[MovieMeditation]

Fuuuuuuuuuuck!

Don't remind me. :p

I will make it, okay. Don't worry about it, I got this! :D

[cricket]

Being John Malkovich

https://filmgrab.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/438.png?w=740&h=

As I said when I watched Rushmore for the last Hall of Fame, I'm not normally a fan of quirky movies. For me, Being John Malkovich is probably the best that fits into that category.

I've seen this movie a few times, the last time being about four years ago, and I think this was my best viewing. I didn't remember this movie being so funny; I laughed an awful lot. It's also an incredibly unique movie that I find to be iconic.

I love the cast; Malkovich, Keener, Cusack, and Diaz are all fantastic in this. The cameos also add to the fun. The story is a blast and I think it's a great flick!

https://filmgrab.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/418.png?w=960&h=

4.5-

[neiba]

The Blues Brothers (John Landis, 1980)

I can't remember the last time I had so much fun watching a movie! Firstly, I didn't know anything about this before watching it, only that it was a favourite of Gats (that usually tells it's good), so I got completely stunned when I saw James Brown, Aretha, Tom Malone and ****ing Ray Charles in here! I was like: WHAAAAAT???
The sountrack is incredible, the pacing is great after Brown's appearance and there are so many epic scenes! I wasn't expecting to laugh but the last hour is insane! Great nom, Gats!!!

4.5 -

[Miss Vicky]

I didn't remember this movie being so funny; I laughed an awful lot. It's also an incredibly unique movie that I find to be iconic.

It is a very funny movie. Kaufman's script and the performances work so well. I was especially surprised by Cameron Diaz who is... not exactly the best actress working today. But I definitely think Malkovich himself stole the show a bit.

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MoFoMovieGifs/malkotits.gif

Anyway, I'm loving these positive reviews for BJM. :up:
Keep them coming!

[cricket]

For anyone who hasn't seen it yet, The Hustler is on TCM tomorrow.

[Friendly Mushroom!]

Plus The Hustler is also on Netflix instant.

[Gatsby]

Glad you enjoyed The Blues Brothers neiba, finally someone who gave it a reasonable rating for a masterpiece. I think not having any particular expectations helped your viewing, which was my case too. I was blown away by the film's ability to constantly throw this and that to the floor and still not loose pace.

[MovieMeditation]

I'm on a roll raul, I watched Killer Joe today!

I better watch out so I don't get too far ahead of you all. :D

[neiba]

Gonna try to watch Take Shelter tomorrow! :)

[Miss Vicky]

https://33.media.tumblr.com/c5930bdaaf30f0520dbb6adb76108d7c/tumblr_mta43sDykb1r94e9jo1_500.gif

Festen

Holy sh*t. So this movie and its characters were completely insane. I went into this knowing next to nothing about it, though I suspected that the title was probably a bit of sarcasm.

From the start, I hated everybody except Christian and maybe Helene's boyfriend. Truly despicable people the lot of them, and I particularly hated Michael. But that hatred didn't translate to a dislike of the film, actually I really couldn't take my eyes off the screen.

My mouth was truly agape at Christian's first speech, while my eyes teared a little. I never doubted the truth of his words and just felt a sickening feeling in my gut when his sister's letter and his father's insistence that "that's all you were good for" confirmed his accusations. I also felt sick at the Little Black Sambo song and the way so many of the guests joyously accompanied Michael on it.

Overall this film was excellent (and it made me truly grateful for how normal/boring my family gatherings are) and I can find little to criticize or complain about. The performances were universally strong and the story was engaging. My only gripe would be about the cinematography, but I suppose it's fitting that such ugly people should be filmed in such an ugly way.

4+

Also a big thank you to mark f for helping me obtain a watchable copy.

[rauldc14]

Really?!?!? Your taste never ceases to amaze me! You literally are my polar opposite! :p

[cricket]

But isn't Festen supposed to be a little twisted? She likes twisted I think.

[seanc]

Very cool MV. I think we mostly had the same experience, miracles never cease, alhough you liked it a bit more than me. I almost threw up at the conga line. Amazing how emotionlly charged such a simple scene that was. Glad you watched it.

[MovieMeditation]

So glad my nomination is doing good with this HoF!

Glad you liked it Miss Vicky! Good review too.

[Miss Vicky]

I went back and read your comments, raul (I'd avoided them before because I hadn't seen the movie yet) and I'm quite surprised that you felt nothing at all for Christian. He didn't outwardly show a lot of emotion, though I think it could be seen bubbling under the surface, but it was obvious to me that he was scared and traumatized not only by what he'd suffered but by the loss of his sister. I also think that what he did was incredibly brave.

Also, while I'm with you on needing to connect to characters, for me it doesn't necessarily have to be a positive connection. If I truly despise a character - like Michael and the father - I can stay engaged with my desire to see bad things happen to them.

[Miss Vicky]

But isn't Festen supposed to be a little twisted? She likes twisted I think.

I don't know what could possibly give you that idea...

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MoFoMovieGifs/quillsrush.gif

:shifty:

[seanc]

I also think that what he did was incredibly brave.

Interesting comment. I really liked Christian but I would say in reality the way he brought this to light would be very counterproductive. I came to terms with the fact that this movie wasn't really grounded in reality anyway. The movie worked for me as an allegory. If I had looked at this movie as realistic, I would question the motivations of almost all the characters.

So if you think Christian's speech at the party was brave in reality, I probably disagree. If you just mean in terms of bringing these things to light then I agree.

[Miss Vicky]

I think it was brave to say it out loud, especially in front of everybody like that and given the sort of bigoted, unaccepting, and delusional mindset his family members displayed.

[Gatsby]

I think it was brave to say it out loud, especially in front of everybody like that and given the sort of bigoted, unaccepting, and delusional mindset his family members displayed.
No wonder you love SC and hate him at the same time.

[seanc]

I think it was brave to say it out loud, especially in front of everybody like that and given the sort of bigoted, unaccepting, and delusional mindset his family members displayed.

Brave to me would be to confront his dad about it face to face not in an environment like this where he knows the response will be to ignore and for it to destroy from within.

[Miss Vicky]

Brave to me would be to confront his dad about it face to face not in an environment like this where he knows the response will be to ignore and for it to destroy from within.

He revealed his father for the monster that he is, revealed his mother for the enabler that she was, shattered his siblings' illusions of their parents, and alienated that monster from his family. Seems a just punishment to me. :shrug:

[MovieMeditation]

Brave to me would be to confront his dad about it face to face not in an environment like this where he knows the response will be to ignore and for it to destroy from within.
But don't you think he has already tried that or something similar? I personally think he has went through this scenario many times, trying to convince people around him of what happened to him and his sister. But the death of the sister has made him go to more drastic methods. Now it's enough.

Great place to do it imo. The ultimate humilation in front of the entire family, so they can see what disgusting pig he really his. Catch him at a place where he can't run; where he is "naked". He can't fight back either, really.

[seanc]

IMO the kind of satisfaction you guys are talking about is very fleeting and unable to produce any kind of real change for anyone.

I also don't think his siblings had any illusions, I am sure they went through he same thing and I think you can see it in their personalities.

[Miss Vicky]

I also don't think his siblings had any illusions, I am sure they went through he same thing and I think you can see it in their personalities.

Really? I disagree, especially for Michael. We know from his father's speech that Michael spent very little time at home, so it's certainly plausible that his absence protected him from being a victim. I think it's also apparent in his reaction towards Christian after the speech and his later reaction towards his father when he admits the truth.

As for Helene, I think perhaps she knew what had happened to Christian and Linda but was in denial about it, but I don't see any evidence that she was a victim herself. I've read of plenty of cases of real pedophilia/incest/abuse in which a parent will target only one or two of their children while leaving the others alone.

[seanc]

Really? I disagree, especially for Michael. We know from his father's speech that Michael spent very little time at home, so it's certainly plausible that his absence protected him from being a victim. I think it's also apparent in his reaction towards Christian after the speech and his later reaction towards his father when he admits the truth.

As for Helene, I think perhaps she knew what had happened to Christian and Linda but was in denial about it, but I don't see any evidence that she was a victim herself. I've read of plenty of cases of real pedophilia/incest/abuse in which a parent will target only one or two of their children while leaving the others alone.

Hmm, you could be right. I didn't think either acted shocked at his allegations. Michael in particular I thought was reacting to the way Christian did it and not the accusation itself. Now you have made me want to see it again.

I understand what your saying in the bolded part and it is certainly true but not exclusive and I didn't get that feeling here at all but I most certainly could be wrong because it is never said explicitly either way.

[Miss Vicky]

What I saw in Michael was a blind faith in his parents and a typically knee-jerk violent reaction when he doesn't like what someone is saying. From the first time we see him, we know that Michael has an explosive temper and many other scenes only cement that. I don't know that shock is an emotion that he's truly capable of experiencing.

[seanc]

Michael is probably the most visibly broken character in the film and had a very unhealthy relationship with his family. Those things don't usually happen by accident. To me that is a big point of proof in my direction. We are just reading it differently though. That is what I like about a movie like this, you have to bring a lot of yourself to it and everyone is going to read it different.

[Miss Vicky]

It's certainly possible that Michael was abused, but I don't see anything that says yes, he was.

If anything I think his behavior may more be attributable to feeling shunned by his father and being desperate to gain his approval. Again, he was sent away to boarding school as a child - something I don't think happened to any of his siblings. When he was around his family, I suspect he may have noted how much attention his brother and sister received from his father and perceived it as mere favoritism. We also know that Michael was not invited to the party. Even before the father's "talentless children" comment, his disappointment in and disgust towards Michael was palpable to me. Now of course this is all conjecture, but it seems a more supportable explanation for his brokenness than sexual abuse.

[seanc]

Fair enough. i hope some other people weigh in and say what they think.

[rauldc14]

Fair enough. i hope some other people weigh in and say what they think.

I didn't like it, but I'm alone:D

[seanc]

I didn't like it, but I'm alone:D

What did you think aboit the sister and brother though?

Did you think their experiences were the same as Christian's?

If not, did you think that they at least knew about it?

[rauldc14]

I think Christian was cast out, and in a way I really believed what he said.