View Full Version : 16th Hall of Fame
rauldc14
05-05-18, 11:35 AM
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcTaqMNSG8LY2_koaSmBodUu4bhoHbpcqSzERLqsP-rl72DNXBO-
http://www.grundycountyherald.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Hall-of-Fame.jpg
Deadline: August 5th
Siddon- LiST SENT
Mr. Freedom (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1900362#post1900362)
Frances Ha (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1900230#post1900230)
Call Me By Your Name (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1900170#post1900170)
Three Monkeys (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1901099#post1901099)
Poison for the Fairies (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1904685#post1904685)
Waterloo Bridge (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1908701#post1908701)
Perfume The Story of a Murderer (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1909851#post1909851)
3:10 to Yuma (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1910667#post1910667)
Naked (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1912402#post1912402)
They Shoot Horses Don't They (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1922782#post1922782)
Wait Until Dark (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1905689#post1905689)
Hashtagbrownies
Call Me By Your Name (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1900493#post1900493)
Wait Until Dark (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1900942#post1900942)
They Shoot Horses Don't They (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1907483#post1907483)
3:10 to Yuma (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1914032#post1914032)
Waterloo Bridge (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1917486#post1917486)
Poison for the Fairies (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1921868#post1921868)
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1923512#post1923512)
Mr. Freedom (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1926791#post1926791)
Frances Ha (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1927770#post1927770)
Naked (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1929764#post1929764)
PahaK- LIST SENT
Wait Until Dark (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1900497#post1900497)
They Shoot Horses, Don't They? (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1901231#post1901231)
3:10 to Yuma (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1904101#post1904101)
Frances Ha (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1904742#post1904742)
Call Me By Your Name (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1910516#post1910516)
Waterloo Bridge (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1911305#post1911305)
Three Monkeys (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1912031#post1912031)
Naked (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1913111#post1913111)
Mr. Freedom (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1913694#post1913694)
Perfume The Story of a Murderer (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1914066#post1914066)
https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1922755#post1922755
Edarsenal- LIST SENT
They Shoot Horses Don't They? (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1900612#post1900612)
3:10 to Yuma (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1901953#post1901953)
Waterloo Bridge (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1907504#post1907504)
Mr. Freedom (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1914083#post1914083)
Naked (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1916635#post1916635)
Wait Until Dark (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1917754#post1917754)
Frances Ha (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1922075#post1922075)
Perfume The Story of a Murderer (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1924612#post1924612)
3 Monkeys (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1927115#post1927115)
Poison for the Fairies (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1928612#post1928612)
Rauldc14- LIST SENT
Waterloo Bridge (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1900622#post1900622)
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1902770#post1902770)
Wait Until Dark (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1903743#post1903743)
Frances Ha (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1904330#post1904330)
Mr. Freedom (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1905074#post1905074)
They Shoot Horses Don't They (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1907488#post1907488)
Naked (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1910188#post1910188)
Three Monkeys (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1912989#post1912989)
Call Me By Your Name (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1920244#post1920244)
3:10 to Yuma (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1922609#post1922609)
Poison for the Fairies (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1925134#post1925134)
Miss Vicky- LIST SENT
Waterloo Bridge (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1900675#post1900675)
Frances Ha (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1901291#post1901291)
They Shoot Horses Don't They? (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1901976#post1901976)
3:10 to Yuma (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1902158#post1902158)
Poison for the Fairies (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1903634#post1903634)
Wait Until Dark (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1904277#post1904277)
Naked (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1905180#post1905180)
Mr. Freedom (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1905991#post1905991)
Three Monkeys (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1907408#post1907408)
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1910253#post1910253)
Call Me By Your Name (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1911053#post1911053)
Citizen Rules- LIST SENT
Waterloo Bridge (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1900876#post1900876)
Mr. Freedom (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1903801#post1903801)
They Shoot Horses Don't They? (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1904050#post1904050)
Frances Ha (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1904917#post1904917)
Call Me By Your Name (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1905808#post1905808)
Poison for the Fairies (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1907287#post1907287)
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1908339#post1908339)
Three Monkeys (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1908658#post1908658)
3:10 to Yuma (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1909451#post1909451)
Wait Until Dark (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1911876#post1911876)
Naked (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1925365#post1925365)
Cricket LIST SENT
Frances Ha (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1901321#post1901321)
Three Monkeys (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1901888#post1901888)
3:10 to Yuma (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1904775#post1904775)
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1905946#post1905946)
Waterloo Bridge (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1907436#post1907436)
Mr. Freedom (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1911958#post1911958)
Wait Until Dark (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1919218#post1919218)
Poison for the Fairies (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1919328#post1919328)
Naked (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1925843#post1925843)
MovieMad- DISQUALIFIED- BANNED from future Hall of Fames hosted by me
Call Me By Your Name (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1901823#post1901823)
Frances Ha (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1904127#post1904127)
Neiba- LIST SENT
Call Me By Your Name (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1901839#post1901839)
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1904703#post1904703)
Naked (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1906909#post1906909)
3:10 to Yuma (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1920783#post1920783)
Poison for the Fairies (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1921717#post1921717)
Wait Until Dark (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1920839#post1920839)
Frances Ha (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1925174#post1925174)
Waterloo Bridge (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1925831#post1925831)
They Shoot Horses Don't They (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1926460#post1926460)
Mr. Freedom (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1927322#post1927322)
Okay- LIST SENT
They Shoot Horses Don't They (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1909825#post1909825)
Wait Until Dark (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1912197#post1912197)
3:10 to Yuma (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1913337#post1913337)
Poison for the Fairies (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1914973#post1914973)
Frances Ha (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1926368#post1926368)
Waterloo Bridge (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1926649#post1926649)
Naked (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1928666#post1928666)
Three Monkeys (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1928971#post1928971)
Perfume The Story of a Murderer (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1929979#post1929979)
MR. Freedom (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1930620#post1930620)
There's only one other Hall of Fame going on so I figured now would be our time to pop open another. This will be another general Hall of Fame, same rules apply as they have before. Please only join if you are confident that you will finish every film in the Hall. I will accept nominations for roughly about a week, and then we can get cracking! Hope for an awesome one! PM your nominations when possible!
NOMINATIONS
Waterloo Bridge- 1931
Nominated by Citizen Rules
http://i.cdn.turner.com/v5cache/TCM/Images/Dynamic/i331/waterloobridge1931.14360_051320140120.jpg
Wait Until Dark- 1967
Nominated by Hashtagbrownies
https://princetonfilmsociety.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/wait-until-dark_757_426_81_s.jpg?w=768
Mr. Freedom- 1969
Nominated by Siddon
http://www.imfdb.org/images/0/0c/MrFreedom16.JPG
They Shoot Horses Don't They- 1969
Nominated by Cricket
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/54ec56d6e4b07c3f656a7f2e/t/59122fd04402439e16e81114/1494364131100/
Poison for the Fairies- 1984
Nominated by paHak
http://jarviscity.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/poison-for-the-fairies-girls.jpg
Naked- 1993
Nominated by Neiba
https://medialifecrisis.com/files/images/articles/201508-Popgap/Naked-1993/Naked-1993-00-04-33.jpg
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer- 2006
Nominated by Edarsenal
https://a.ltrbxd.com/resized/sm/upload/wt/li/6w/bx/perfume-1200-1200-675-675-crop-000000.jpg?k=d48ec8caf1
3:10 to Yuma- 2007
Nominated by Miss Vicky
https://images.ctfassets.net/7h71s48744nc/4KXFBzmbSgue0USSgcWOQI/274b5f88c1dd7a17472fcd19a0b3c128/3-10-to-yuma-review-image.jpg
Three Monkeys- 2008
Nominated by Okay
https://static.rogerebert.com/uploads/review/primary_image/reviews/three-monkeys-2009/hero_EB20090715REVIEWS907159991AR.jpg
Frances Ha- 2012
Nominated by Rauldc
http://images.amcnetworks.com/ifcfilms.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/18314-ART-34B-NH.jpg
Call Me By Your Name- 2017
Nominated by MovieMad
https://cdn1.thr.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/list_landscape_960x541/2017/08/call_me_by_your_name_still_10_-_publicity_-_h_2017.jpg
MovieMad16
05-05-18, 11:59 AM
Nomination sent.
edarsenal
05-05-18, 12:32 PM
sending nomination now.
Miss Vicky
05-05-18, 12:43 PM
I'm probably going to join, but I gotta figure out a nomination.
Citizen Rules
05-05-18, 12:49 PM
Glad you started this Raul....I'm going with a 1930s movies, but I have to decide which one.
edarsenal
05-05-18, 12:51 PM
Glad you started this Raul....I'm going with a 1930s movies, but I have to decide which one.
that sorta made it easy to guess which is yours when the initial reveal occurs lol
Citizen Rules
05-05-18, 12:53 PM
that sorta made it easy to guess which is yours when the initial reveal occurs lolOh well:p it might be a ruse?
In! :) Sending my nom now!
edarsenal
05-05-18, 05:30 PM
Oh well:p it might be a ruse?
a ruse, eh?
WELL played ;)
rauldc14
05-05-18, 07:27 PM
I have 4 nominations currently.
edarsenal
05-05-18, 10:15 PM
I have a feeling we'll be hitting at least 12 in this one.
How long time is there usually to watch the films in these? I'm kind of interested but I'm possibly moving in near future so don't want to get involved if the schedule is too tight.
Anyways my pick will not win, it will likely come in last place but all of you will remember it and won't be bored by it.
edarsenal
05-05-18, 11:03 PM
How long time is there usually to watch the films in these? I'm kind of interested but I'm possibly moving in near future so don't want to get involved if the schedule is too tight.
The general rule is around a week for each movie nominated with a bit of flexibility on the final due date depending on how folks are doing on getting them done.
Anyways my pick will not win, it will likely come in last place but all of you will remember it and won't be bored by it.
That's kind of a win all in it's own, isn't it? ;)
Citizen Rules
05-05-18, 11:08 PM
Anyways my pick will not win, it will likely come in last place but all of you will remember it and won't be bored by it. Wow, that caught my attention, can't wait to find out.
The general rule is around a week for each movie nominated with a bit of flexibility on the final due date depending on how folks are doing on getting them done.
That doesn't sound too bad even if I end up moving. I'll send my nomination shortly.
EDIT: Nomination sent.
Did my nomination arrive safely, rauldc14 or did I fail? My sent messages folder seems to be empty but I surely tried to send one :)
rauldc14
05-06-18, 10:20 AM
Did my nomination arrive safely, rauldc14 or did I fail? My sent messages folder seems to be empty but I surely tried to send one :)
I got it!
rauldc14
05-06-18, 09:54 PM
We have 7 nominations so far. It will be 8 once I finally decide what the hell I'm nominating.
Citizen Rules
05-06-18, 09:57 PM
We have 7 nominations so far. It will be 8 once I finally decide what the hell I'm nominating. 8 noms, I just PMed you my nom. I went with something newer this time:p
edarsenal
05-08-18, 04:26 PM
8 noms, I just PMed you my nom. I went with something newer this time:p
well -- so much for the EASY guess lol
rauldc14
05-08-18, 09:42 PM
We have 9 with mine. Still some spots open folks!
CosmicRunaway
05-11-18, 03:10 AM
I actually can't think of a film. I thought I had an idea, but it was nominated in a previous HoF. I might have to just creep on this thread without officially joining haha.
Miss Vicky
05-11-18, 03:56 AM
If anybody can't figure out which nom is mine once they're announced, I'll be very surprised.
rauldc14
05-11-18, 05:27 AM
I actually can't think of a film. I thought I had an idea, but it was nominated in a previous HoF. I might have to just creep on this thread without officially joining haha.
U can do it! I have faith you can come up with a nom! We would love to have you :)
Citizen Rules
05-11-18, 01:39 PM
I actually can't think of a film. I thought I had an idea, but it was nominated in a previous HoF. I might have to just creep on this thread without officially joining haha.I'll donate you a nom:p
I hope you can join Cosmic, you're always fun to have around and you have interesting noms too. So think harder!:)
HashtagBrownies
05-11-18, 03:10 PM
What have I got to lose? I'm in. Just need to think of my nom.
edarsenal
05-11-18, 03:22 PM
GLAD to have ya, Hash!!
and like the others said, Cosmic, come on and JOIN!! The nom will come!
CosmicRunaway
05-11-18, 03:22 PM
When were you planning to reveal the nominations? Maybe having a specific due date will help me decide haha.
cricket
05-11-18, 07:16 PM
I'm still thinking of joining
HashtagBrownies
05-11-18, 07:18 PM
Nom sent. I had a bunch of disturbing and edgy films I wanted to choose, but I decided to nominate a shockingly underrated film that deserves more publicity.
Miss Vicky
05-11-18, 07:23 PM
I'm still thinking of joining
Do it.
cricket
05-11-18, 07:28 PM
Do it.
If you insist
cricket
05-11-18, 08:16 PM
Ok I went with one of my biggest favorites. I never nominated it before because frankly it's just not a very well reviewed or respected movie. At the very least, I'd say it's an easy watch. I would guess nobody in the HoF has seen it, except maybe Siddon because he's seen everything. Since I've been a member, I've never once seen it mentioned on the forum by anyone besides me.
HashtagBrownies
05-11-18, 08:34 PM
Ok I went with one of my biggest favorites. I never nominated it before because frankly it's just not a very well reviewed or respected movie. At the very least, I'd say it's an easy watch. I would guess nobody in the HoF has seen it, except maybe Siddon because he's seen everything. Since I've been a member, I've never once seen it mentioned on the forum by anyone besides me.
Beerfest?
cricket
05-11-18, 09:08 PM
Beerfest?
Not quite that disrespected haha
edarsenal
05-11-18, 09:30 PM
not quite?
Well, then it must be Super Troopers
Ahhh, when does this start??? I'm so anxious :p
rauldc14
05-12-18, 09:31 AM
When were you planning to reveal the nominations? Maybe having a specific due date will help me decide haha.
I'm thinking Monday night.
Not quite that disrespected haha
wonderland?
cricket
05-12-18, 01:53 PM
wonderland?
Not that obscure
I think it's time for the reveal
https://media1.giphy.com/media/145hX7QVWqyili/giphy.gif
https://annoyingrambles.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/avengers-gif.gif
https://78.media.tumblr.com/92a9e3f569d4a777ae10732d4d126225/tumblr_ms0bn21fwP1rf3wd1o2_500.gif
rauldc14
05-13-18, 10:18 PM
It will be tomorrow. We have 11 films now.
cricket
05-14-18, 10:14 AM
I changed my nomination. If everyone's lists are up to date, nobody in this HoF has seen it.
rauldc14
05-14-18, 03:49 PM
Estimating 5:30 central time for reveal.
CosmicRunaway
05-14-18, 04:31 PM
I changed my nomination. If everyone's lists are up to date, nobody in this HoF has seen it.
So are you able to tell us what your first one was?
rauldc14
05-14-18, 05:18 PM
I haven't seen either, but I'm glad it was changed.
rauldc14
05-14-18, 05:50 PM
I lied! They are here a little early!
Waterloo Bridge- 1931
http://i.cdn.turner.com/v5cache/TCM/Images/Dynamic/i331/waterloobridge1931.14360_051320140120.jpg
Wait Until Dark- 1967
https://princetonfilmsociety.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/wait-until-dark_757_426_81_s.jpg?w=768
Mr. Freedom- 1969
http://www.imfdb.org/images/0/0c/MrFreedom16.JPG
They Shoot Horses Don't They- 1969
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/54ec56d6e4b07c3f656a7f2e/t/59122fd04402439e16e81114/1494364131100/
Poison for the Fairies- 1984
http://jarviscity.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/poison-for-the-fairies-girls.jpg
Naked- 1993
https://medialifecrisis.com/files/images/articles/201508-Popgap/Naked-1993/Naked-1993-00-04-33.jpg
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer- 2006
https://a.ltrbxd.com/resized/sm/upload/wt/li/6w/bx/perfume-1200-1200-675-675-crop-000000.jpg?k=d48ec8caf1
3:10 to Yuma- 2007
https://images.ctfassets.net/7h71s48744nc/4KXFBzmbSgue0USSgcWOQI/274b5f88c1dd7a17472fcd19a0b3c128/3-10-to-yuma-review-image.jpg
Three Monkeys- 2008
https://static.rogerebert.com/uploads/review/primary_image/reviews/three-monkeys-2009/hero_EB20090715REVIEWS907159991AR.jpg
Frances Ha- 2012
http://images.amcnetworks.com/ifcfilms.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/18314-ART-34B-NH.jpg
Call Me By Your Name- 2017
https://cdn1.thr.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/list_landscape_960x541/2017/08/call_me_by_your_name_still_10_-_publicity_-_h_2017.jpg
cricket
05-14-18, 06:06 PM
So are you able to tell us what your first one was?
Velvet was correct with his guesss.
Hmm... I've seen two (+ my own, obviously) of these before. I guess that's pretty much what I expected based on the older HoFs I checked.
cricket
05-14-18, 06:24 PM
Seen 4 including my own and all 4 are excellent. This will be an easy HoF to get through.
Miss Vicky
05-14-18, 06:30 PM
Besides my own nomination, I've only seen Call Me By Your Name. I watched it pretty recently and was fairly apathetic to it. I will watch it again but will probably save it for last.
My nomination is currently available to stream on Amazon Prime.
***
For My Reference:
Deadline: August 5th, 9/11 complete
Call Me By Your Name (Luca Guadagnino, 2017)
Nominated By: MovieMad16
2 hours, 12 mins
Source: Amazon Rental
Rewatch: Yes
Rating: 4+
Review: June 13, 2018 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1911053#post1911053)
Frances Ha (Noah Baumbach, 2012)
Nominated By: rauldc14
1 hour, 26 mins
Source: Netflix
Rewatch: No
Rating: 3
Review: May 17, 2018 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1901291#post1901291)
Mr. Freedom (William Klein, 1968)
Nominated By: Siddon
1 hour, 35 minutes
Source: Amazon Mubi Trial (https://www.amazon.com/Mr-Freedom-Delphine-Seyrig/dp/B073SGK7HB/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1526398388&sr=8-1&keywords=mr.+freedom)
Rewatch: No
Rating: 2.5
Review: May 31, 2018 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1905991#post1905991)
Naked (Mike Leigh, 1993)
Nominated By: neiba
2 hours, 12 mins
Source: Library
Rewatch: No.
Rating: 3
Review: May 29, 2018 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1905180#post1905180)
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (Tom Tykwer, 2006)
Nominated By: edarsenal
2 hours, 27 mins
Source: Amazon Prime
Rewatch: No
Rating: 3.5
Review: June 11, 2018 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1910253#post1910253)
Poison for the Fairies/Veneno para las hadas (Carlos Enrique Taboada, 1984)
Nominated By: pahaK
1 hours, 30 minutes
Source: Library
Rewatch: No
Rating: 3-
Review: May 24, 2018 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1903634#post1903634)
They Shoot Horses, Don't They? (Sydney Pollack, 1969)
Nominated By: cricket
2 hours, 9 mins
Source: Library
Rewatch: No
Rating: 3+
Review: May 19, 2018 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1901976#post1901976)
Three Monkeys/Üç Maymun (Nuri Bilge Ceylan, 2008)
Nominated By: Okay
1 hour, 49 mins
Source: Amazon Mubi Trial (https://www.amazon.com/Three-Monkeys-Yavuz-Bingol/dp/B073SGGPKD/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1526398463&sr=8-4&keywords=three+monkeys+movie)
Rewatch: No
Rating: 3+
Review: June 3, 2018 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1907408#post1907408)
3:10 to Yuma (James Mangold, 2007)
Nominated By: Miss Vicky
2 hours, 2 mins
Source: My Collection
Rewatch: Yes
Rating: 4.5+
Review: May 20, 2018 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1902158#post1902158)
Wait Until Dark (Terence Young, 1967)
Nominated By: HashtagBrownies
1 hour, 48 minutes
Source: Library
Rewatch: No
Rating: 3.5+
Review: May 26, 2018 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1904277#post1904277)
Waterloo Bridge (James Whale, 1931)
Nominated By: Citizen Rules
1 hour, 21 mins
Source: YouTube (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LSEKXDlzLUA)
Rewatch: No
Rating: 4-
Review: May 15, 2018 (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1900675#post1900675)
I've seen six, only one I didn't care for. Don't quite understand nominating foreign films while the other foreign film Hall of Fame is going. Looking at this field I think I should have gone with my second choice The Innocents, Seance on a Wet Afternoon, or The Collector would have gone very well with Wait Until Dark.
cricket
05-14-18, 07:21 PM
I'll probably watch Frances Ha first since it's on Netflix streaming and my wife may be interested.
I've seen five of the nominations, and few of them I've been planning on revisiting anyway, so this should be great.
https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/RW90Bf1InD4gbyiSrdcIDxAWco0=/0x0:2000x1500/1200x800/filters:focal(1053x638:1373x958)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/57700283/cmbyncover.0.jpg
Call Me By Your Name It was fine. I found it to be a little pornographic....not sexually but more wish fulfillment type. In a number of ways it's the inverse of Moonlight. Beautiful people living in a beautiful place with beautiful minds it was a little much. The film subverts your expectations slightly by not have any disapproving characters of the romance. Having a progressive family in a period piece is something different which I liked.
Timothee Chalamet is very good in this unlike Moonlight which was a true ensemble I think Chalamet really was the singular noteworthy performance. Both the age discrepancy between Hammer and Chalamet was a little uncomfortable for me. Also if your going to cast a jewish love story you shouldn't pick someone who is antithetically Jewish.
The snow shot at the end is probably the most gorgeous shot I saw that year. I also loved the sound track and I didn't have problems with the pacing that others had. I liked the first hour, I liked Stuhlbarg's monologue though I didn't think it was Oscar worthy or even his best work from that year.
Strange to pick a film everyone likely saw in December/January
3.5
cricket
05-14-18, 08:20 PM
That's the only movie I probably won't watch again since I just watched it two months ago. I really liked all of the performances but what really made the movie for me was the beautiful setting. I think I liked it as much as I could without being emotionally invested, and I will say the age difference was also a bit uncomfortable for me.
cricket
05-14-18, 08:21 PM
I found this movie on YouTube-
https://youtu.be/hWcc4PptU44
I've seen Call Me by Your Name as well, but I still am definitely going to revisit it, I liked it too much not to so I'm glad it was nominated.
Don't quite understand nominating foreign films while the other foreign film Hall of Fame is going.
:confusedwhite:
rauldc14
05-14-18, 08:50 PM
I've seen six, only one I didn't care for. Don't quite understand nominating foreign films while the other foreign film Hall of Fame is going. Looking at this field I think I should have gone with my second choice The Innocents, Seance on a Wet Afternoon, or The Collector would have gone very well with Wait Until Dark.
The Innocents has been on my watchlist for a long time.
I almost went animated BTW. But made a last minute decision not to.
Citizen Rules
05-14-18, 09:02 PM
Those look like a decent bunch of nominations. I've only seen 3 out of the 11 and will (as usual) be watching all 11.
For a second I thought someone had nominated The Innocents, which would have been the movie to beat. Too bad it wasn't nominated.
So are we suppose to guess who nominated what?
rauldc14
05-14-18, 09:10 PM
Guess away!
edarsenal
05-14-18, 09:12 PM
I found this movie on YouTube-
https://youtu.be/hWcc4PptU44
SWEET, THANKS cricket!!
rauldc14
05-14-18, 09:13 PM
I guess I never stated who is all in:
Citizen Rules
Pahak
Miss Vicky
Edarsenal
Cricket
Rauldc
Siddon
MovieMad
Hashtagbrownies
Okay
Neiba
edarsenal
05-14-18, 09:14 PM
The Innocents has been on my watchlist for a long time.
I almost went animated BTW. But made a last minute decision not to.
so which animated were you considering?
I had considered Rango at point, myself.
rauldc14
05-14-18, 09:20 PM
so which animated were you considering?
I had considered Rango at point, myself.
Fantastic Mr. Fox
edarsenal
05-14-18, 09:25 PM
Great bunch of films!! See 4 out of 11 of these.
Waterloo Bridge- 1931 Wow, been wanting to see the original after watching the one in the 40s HoF.
Wait Until Dark- 1967 Great film, seen it a number of times through my life. Will happily watch it again.
Mr. Freedom- 1969 NO IDEA what this could be, but I am intrigued.
They Shoot Horses Don't They- 1969 One I've always been interested in seeing and NOW I have the opportunity. And with cricket's link for youtube, I do believe I'll be seeing this one as the starter.
Poison for the Fairies- 1984 Another I haven't heard, but happy to try out
Naked- 1993 Took FOREVER to finally see this some time ago and get to do a rewatch.
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer- 2006 Visually incredible movie. Can't wait to see this again
3:10 to Yuma- 2007 LOVE this version!
Three Monkeys- 2008 Another unknown to be explored
Frances Ha- 2012 Heard of this one, never got around to seeing it, so. . .
Call Me By Your Name- 2017 Unknown to me but we will see
edarsenal
05-14-18, 09:27 PM
Fantastic Mr. Fox
struggled with that one when I saw it. Need to rewatch that one
Citizen Rules
05-14-18, 09:40 PM
Here's my crappy attempt at guessing who nominated what. I won't guess for myself, I mean wouldn't that be cheating?:p
Citizen Rules....???
Pahak...Poison for the Fairies ( I know nothing about Pahak's movie taste, so he gets this movie as my guess)
Miss Vicky....3:10 to Yuma ( It has to be MVs!...a good film too, looking forward to a rewatch)
Edarsenal...They Shoot Horses Don't They (It seems like an Ed nom, I've wanted to see this for a long time too)
Cricket....Mr. Freedom (it looks like an obscure & crazy Cricket film)
Rauldc...Call Me By Your Name (Raul watches a lot of new movies, he must have seen this one and liked it)
Siddon...Naked ( I have no idea, actually just a wild guess)
MovieMad...Waterloo Bridge (another wild guess, I seen the remake with Vivian Leigh and that was good)
Hashtagbrownies...Wait Until Dark (he said he would nominate something fun, and this is a fun film)
Okay...Perfume: The Story of a Murderer ( he said I would hate his next nom, haven't seen this one, but it's got a catchy title)
Neiba....Frances Ha (seems like a cool nomination, just might be Neiba's)
http://images.amcnetworks.com/ifcfilms.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/18314-ART-17B-NH.jpg
Frances Ha is the spiritual sequel to Noah Baumbach's Kicking and Screaming. Greta Gerwig plays a woman nearing 30 with nothing established, she managed to lose her boyfriend and home in the matter of a short period of time.
The film is really about all of these little journey's Francis goes on, she returns home for Christmas, goes to Paris on a whim with a credit card. She eventually ends up working at her former school helping incoming freshmen.
I liked it, it was a good film Baumbach makes it feel like a first film but gives it a number of little touches that most small films don't have. The movie has a great sound track and a fairly large cast. A couple things I really enjoyed about the film is how her male friends keep bringing home girls that are much younger than Frances. Also while Frances has fairly boring life her friend Sophie's background story is much more compelling.
rating_3_5
Don't quite understand nominating foreign films while the other foreign film Hall of Fame is going.
Don't quite understand why does that make any difference. Considering the movies made worldwide, we should have a even more balanced percentage of foreign films in all the HoFs. Americans tend to forget that their films are foreign to non-Americans.
Neiba....Frances Ha (seems like a cool nomination, just might be Neiba's)
Loved the compliment, but wrong! Ahaha! :D
Miss Vicky
05-14-18, 10:43 PM
Rango at point, myself.
Fantastic Mr. Fox
Gotta say, as much as I love animation, these particular films are exceptions and I'm glad neither was nominated.
cricket
05-14-18, 10:45 PM
I actually loved both of those^^
Miss Vicky
05-14-18, 10:45 PM
Miss Vicky....3:10 to Yuma ( It has to be MVs!...a good film too, looking forward to a rewatch)
Absolutely NO IDEA why anybody would suspect that this is my nomination. :shifty:
Rauldc...Call Me By Your Name (Raul watches a lot of new movies, he must have seen this one and liked it)
I have no idea what raul did nominate, but I'm 100% sure it wasn't this.
Citizen Rules - Waterloo Bridge
Miss Vicky - Perfume Story of Murder
Edarsenal - Naked
Cricket - They Shoot Horses Don't They
Rauldc - Frances Ha
Hashtagbrownies - Wait Until Dark
Okay - Three Monkeys
Neiba - Poison for the Fairies
Don't quite understand why does that make any difference. Considering the movies made worldwide, we should have a even more balanced percentage of foreign films in all the HoFs. Americans tend to forget that their films are foreign to non-Americans.
Well your not doing the Foreign Language Hall of Fame, I don't have an issue with foreign language films I nominated one in the last Hall of Fame (Aguire:Wrath of God)
Well your not doing the Foreign Language Hall of Fame, I don't have an issue with foreign language films I nominated one in the last Hall of Fame (Aguire:Wrath of God)
I don't get it, why does that matter? Were we expected to nominate anything but a foreign film?
Miss Vicky
05-14-18, 11:07 PM
I don't get it either. :confused:
After having done many General HOFs I would be shocked if there wasn't at least one foreign nomination. Actually I think the only HOF I've done that was 100% English language was the Best Picture HOF, which speaks more about the Oscar academy than it does about the participants.
edarsenal
05-14-18, 11:09 PM
Absolutely NO IDEA why anybody would suspect that this is my nomination. :shifty:.
I would have guessed either Yuma, or, more likely, Naked for you, MV
and for Siddon and Citizen Rules, neither of those films were mine. :)
Miss Vicky
05-14-18, 11:13 PM
I would have guessed either Yuma, or, more likely, Naked for you, MV
Really? I mean, the title and the first few words of IMDb's description "Parallel tales of two sexually obsessed men..." certainly pique my interest, but I've never seen Naked.
Don't quite understand nominating foreign films while the other foreign film Hall of Fame is going.
Americans tend to forget that their films are foreign to non-Americans.
OH yeah I never quite got that head in the sand approach to life. It used to be the Brits who thought their teen tiny country was the centre of the universe.
cricket
05-14-18, 11:23 PM
I would guess Naked for Raul and They Shoot Horses for Miss Vicky.
OH yeah I never quite got that head in the sand approach to life. It used to be the Brits who thought their teen tiny country was the centre of the universe.
The center of the Hall of Fame is to binge these films and when you watch 15 foreign films 1/3rd of which are over 2.5 hours you don't really want to even look at another reading exercise.
And that is quite the ironic comment based on the fact you aren't contributing to either Hall of Fame and you don't know what I nominated.
OH yeah I never quite got that head in the sand approach to life. It used to be the Brits who thought their teen tiny country was the centre of the universe.
The center of the Hall of Fame is to binge these films and when you watch 15 foreign films 1/3rd of which are over 2.5 hours you don't really want to even look at another reading exercise.
And that is quite the ironic comment based on the fact you aren't contributing to either Hall of Fame and you don't know what I nominated.
It came up on my feed so I read. Neiba's post and replied to it. I did not even see who neiba was replying to or what the thread was until after I posted. Further to that, I had absolutely zip knowledge the rules were that outsiders could not post. Is this a secret society? That's awesome. Can I jump in? How do I gain membership? Maybe you can advocate for me. 😎
Miss Vicky
05-14-18, 11:34 PM
Maybe my nomination wasn't as obvious as I thought? It's from a decade that I tend to favor and stars an actor that I favor. It's also a genre I've nominated before.
Then again, it also stars an actor that I hate. :laugh:
Maybe my nomination wasn't as obvious as I thought? It's from a decade that I tend to favor and stars an actor that I favor. It's also a genre I've nominated before.
Then again, it also stars an actor that I hate. :laugh:
Letters from Iwo Jima obv.
Miss Vicky
05-14-18, 11:44 PM
Letters from Iwo Jima obv.
I was wondering when you'd pop in here and make that comment.
edarsenal
05-15-18, 12:10 AM
Really? I mean, the title and the first few words of IMDb's description "Parallel tales of two sexually obsessed men..." certainly pique my interest, but I've never seen Naked.
Always thought you've seen that for some odd reason.
Naked used to be in my top ten. Neiba most likely nominated it.
HashtagBrownies
05-15-18, 03:28 AM
Waterloo Bridge: Looks good.
Mr. Freedom: This looks amazing!
They Shoot Horses Don't They: Sounds like a high-concept film, I love those.
Poison for the Fairies: This looks great.
Naked: Another beloved film I have yet to watch.
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer: Hmmm, the only way to judge it is to watch it.
3:10 to Yuma: I'm not exactly a western guy, but this looks fun.
Three Monkeys: Have no idea what to expect.
Frances Ha: Looks good.
Call Me By Your Name:One of my favourites.
Wait Until Dark: One of the most intense thrillers I've ever seen.
Will post a review of these soon.
My guesses:
Waterloo Bridge - Citizen
Wait Until Dark - Hashtag
Mr Freedom - Siddon
They Shoot Horses Don't They - Cricket
Poison For The Faires - Pahak
Naked - Neiba
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer - Edarsenal
3:10 To Yuma - Miss Vicky
Three Monkeys - Okay
Frances Ha - Raul
Call Me By Your Name - MovieMad
I've seen three. Naked is one of my favourite films. Watched Frances Ha for the first time this year and loved it, not sure how it will hold up though and i totally get anyone hating it as it's easy to hate Frances. Liked Call Me By Your Name a lot but it's probably not a film i'd watch again anytime soon at least.
I would guess Naked for Raul and They Shoot Horses for Miss Vicky.
Classic misdirection, saw Citizen pull off this trick earlier too. Y'all don't fool me :coleman:
http://p4.storage.canalblog.com/44/76/110219/26984324.jpg
Mr. Freedom is a vicious satire of Americana, Vietnam War, and now Super Hero movies. It was made by a pair of ex-patriots, William Klein (director) and John Abbey (star). Klein fills the screen with incredible low budget imagery, you have to marvel at the sheer amount of work Klein put into several scenes. If you can imagine Wes Anderson in the 1960's you can understand what Klein was going for.
The story is far from perfect, it loses steam at the end. Klein clearly loves building this comic book world and ripping apart America. Then again it's important to recognize this film was shot in 1968 and released in 1969. So this was made as a response to when the war turned against the US after the Tet offensive and My Lai massacre.
But while the Vietnam war metaphor stuff has aged a bit the commentary on commercialism, racism, sex, american idea of exceptionalism and politics has become even more profound. This movie is about 20-30% Easter Eggs that begs you to revisit and pause to get all the little jokes Klein slips in here and there.
rating_5
Classic misdirection, saw Citizen pull off this trick earlier too. Y'all don't fool me :coleman:
Yeahhhh. cricket gave it away by posting the youtube link :laugh:
edarsenal
05-15-18, 06:04 AM
My guesses:
Waterloo Bridge - Citizen
Wait Until Dark - Hashtag
Mr Freedom - Siddon
They Shoot Horses Don't They - Cricket
Poison For The Faires - Pahak
Naked - Neiba
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer - Edarsenal
3:10 To Yuma - Miss Vicky
Three Monkeys - Okay
Frances Ha - Raul
Call Me By Your Name - MovieMad
I've seen three. Naked is one of my favourite films. Watched Frances Ha for the first time this year and loved it, not sure how it will hold up though and i totally get anyone hating it as it's easy to hate Frances. Liked Call Me By Your Name a lot but it's probably not a film i'd watch again anytime soon at least.
excellent guess, camo! That IS my nom!
Naked used to be in my top ten. Neiba most likely nominated it.
BINGO!!!
Pahak...Poison for the Fairies ( I know nothing about Pahak's movie taste, so he gets this movie as my guess)
You and Camo are correct. I suppose it helps that I've mentioned the film couple of times already and it's in my top films on the site :D I don't yet know people enough to make my own guesses.
Two other films I've already seen at some point are 3.10 to Yuma (don't remember much but I think it was OK) and Perfume (this was pretty good, I Think). Will probably watch one of the movies tonight.
You and Camo are correct. I suppose it helps that I've mentioned the film couple of times already and it's in my top films on the site :D I don't yet know people enough to make my own guesses.
I didn't even realize it was in your top ten, i just wrote down the ones i knew for sure then guessed the rest.
May as well spoil it since several of you have revealed your noms, Raul said all of mine are correct :cool:
rauldc14
05-15-18, 10:49 AM
Like Camo said, he got them all! Nice work Camo!
Well your not doing the Foreign Language Hall of Fame, I don't have an issue with foreign language films I nominated one in the last Hall of Fame (Aguire:Wrath of God)
So what?? Should we do a Hollywood HoF and ban Hollywood films from the general HoFs?
The center of the Hall of Fame is to binge these films and when you watch 15 foreign films 1/3rd of which are over 2.5 hours you don't really want to even look at another reading exercise.
Not sounding like a true cinephile speaking, honestly... There is a lenght limit in these HoFs for a reason, everything under that limit is acceptable. And the separation between foreign and non-foreign is quite ridiculous, frankly. I should have nominated Rocky for the foreign HoF cause I'm portuguese...
You aren't supposed to binge them, you can if you want but there's a week per film which i wouldn't call binging.
I'm surprised you've still got an issue with foreign films after seeing so many films Siddon, but i guess everyone is different. At some point i think most just get used to them if they watch them often enough. Think i watched more foreign films last month than is in that five month long HoF.
Miss Vicky
05-15-18, 11:12 AM
I just requested Call Me By Your Name from my library (as well as several other noms) and I am 147th in line to borrow it. :laugh:
Good thing I'd planned to watch it last anyway. If my turn doesn't come up by the time I've watched everything else, I may end up renting it from Amazon again. Oh well, I'm sure they'll screw up a few more orders between now and then and I'll have more than enough in courtesy credit to cover the rental fee.
I just requested Call Me By Your Name from my library (as well as several other noms) and I am 147th in line to borrow it. :laugh:
147 :eek: That sounds like a lot.
rauldc14
05-15-18, 11:53 AM
I'll set the deadline for August 5th. That's almost 12 weeks from now.
edarsenal
05-15-18, 01:17 PM
watched They Shoot Horses, Don't They? last night and will most likely post about it this evening. And there will be SERIOUS Spoiler Alerts since I can't figure out any way to write about it without giving anything away.
VERY good film. Very depressing, but VERY good. (which is the gist of what I would write WITHOUT spoilers) lol
Citizen Rules
05-15-18, 02:07 PM
I just requested Call Me By Your Name from my library (as well as several other noms) and I am 147th in line to borrow it. :laugh: Wow, 147th! I thought my library was bad when I tried to request it and it said I would be number 42. I think I'll just find it some other place, though my library has a thing called Lucky Day where they have brand new releases that can't be requested, it's first come is first to get the movie. Maybe I'll get lucky.
Like Camo said, he got them all! Nice work Camo! Raul can you update the reveal with the movie posters, so when we look at it we can see who nominated what?
HashtagBrownies
05-15-18, 03:06 PM
Call Me By You Name (2017)
44527
Just a completely wonderful experience. A Ghost Story may be a 10/10 film, but this is making me question which was the better film of 2017. The film perfectly and realistically conveys the comforting, sleepy, nostalgic feel of being on a holiday and being too relaxed to do anything, helped by a combination of its realistic dialogue, beautiful colour pallet and 35mm camera. I know this as I go to a tiny house near the beach for a week every year and it’s the time I look forward to most in the year; This film was a welcoming reminder to it.
I just love Chalamet, I’m around the same age as him so I completely relate to him (Also he loves reading!). The romance in the film is so beautiful, I don’t think I’ve ever felt like this during a romance film. Some may be creeped out with the age difference between him and Hammer, but they address the concern in the film and I feel it’s alright as they’re both age of consent. It's easy to see the characters' different motivations: Chalamet is a young man desperate for love and sex and sees his relationship with Hammer as an eternal bond, while Hammer (The older man) on the other hand is a more experienced lover and just sees Chalamet as just another swoon in a long line. All of these combine together to make the ending utterly devastating.
In nearly every LGBT film I’ve seen they always have to say s*it like “What will our parents think if we do this?!” and then at the end of the film they have to make a big song and dance number about how it’s ok to be gay. This film has none of that, it just treats the relationship as if it’s the most casual thing ever, I love it; Making being gay not a big deal is the most diverse thing you can do.
One of my favourites.
4.5+
Wait Until Dark
First of all this was based on a play and it really showed. I don't usually like when plays are just filmed without bothering to adapt them properly for different media. I can see how this could work on stage but for the screen it would have needed more extensive rewriting.
Story didn't seem to make much sense. First of all the amount of heroin in the doll is way too small for the massive operation to reclaim it. Second why does Roat even involve the duo? He's already killed one person and could easily force what ever information he needs from Susy but instead brings in two more people he doesn't trust.
Hepburn is great as Susy. Her portrayal of blindness feels rather convincing. The evil trio is a bit too theatrical to my tastes. Husband is fine but Oscar nomination for supporting actor seems exaggeration. Gloria was OK (but whoever chose her glasses deserves a beating - no wonder she was picked up at school with those).
I liked the beginning and how the airport scene flowed without dialogue. After that the film became just filmed theater. It bothered my how at times Susy couldn't sense three men in the apartment and a moment later she notices how two visitors were wearing the same shoes (there were few other similar issues). That horroresque leap at the end didn't fit the tone of the film, otherwise the ending was rather good.
Not my type of film but could perhaps enjoy it on stage.
2
HashtagBrownies
05-15-18, 03:23 PM
First of all this was based on a play and it really showed. I don't usually like when plays are just filmed without bothering to adapt them properly for different media.
I don't mind this really. If I can be entertained by a play set in one location, the film can do the same. I actually tend to search out films set in one location, I like to see what they can accomplish.
CosmicRunaway
05-15-18, 04:17 PM
I ended up being quite busy these past few days and ultimately wasn't able to join. I'll try to pre-emptively come up with a nomination for the next general HoF so I don't miss out on two in a row haha.
Out of the nominations, I've only seen Perfume and Call Me By Your Name, but there looks to be an interesting mix of films here. I might have to watch Waterloo Bridge to see how it compares to the version from 1940, which I ended up enjoying when it was nominated for the first 1940s HoF. It didn't place high on my list, but that's because I really liked the other films as well haha.
Citizen Rules
05-15-18, 05:22 PM
..I might have to watch Waterloo Bridge to see how it compares to the version from 1940, which I ended up enjoying when it was nominated for the first 1940s HoF... I knew I wanted a 1930s movie to help support the 1930s Countdown. But which one? I went with Waterloo Bridge as I had nominated it before...but this version is different enough as it's an early precode film, so it feels totally different, at least to me. I think people who didn't care for the 40s version might like this one better. I'll guess we'll see.:p
edarsenal
05-15-18, 08:18 PM
I don't mind this really. If I can be entertained by a play set in one location, the film can do the same. I actually tend to search out films set in one location, I like to see what they can accomplish.
Arsenic & Old Lace is an excellent example of this where the single location film from a stage play truly does work wonders.
And very happy to hear that Call Me By Your Name doesn't bother with the soapbox and simply creates a romantic tale for us to enjoy. Very cool.
edarsenal
05-15-18, 08:23 PM
I ended up being quite busy these past few days and ultimately wasn't able to join. I'll try to pre-emptively come up with a nomination for the next general HoF so I don't miss out on two in a row haha.
Out of the nominations, I've only seen Perfume and Call Me By Your Name, but there looks to be an interesting mix of films here. I might have to watch Waterloo Bridge to see how it compares to the version from 1940, which I ended up enjoying when it was nominated for the first 1940s HoF. It didn't place high on my list, but that's because I really liked the other films as well haha.
I was really hoping you were going to make it.
Would have been very curious to read your thoughts on Perfume and hopefully you'll see Waterloo and remark on it.
I knew I wanted a 1930s movie to help support the 1930s Countdown. But which one? I went with Waterloo Bridge as I had nominated it before...but this version is different enough as it's an early precode film, so it feels totally different, at least to me. I think people who didn't care for the 40s version might like this one better. I'll guess we'll see.:p
Pretty glad you did nominate this since I remember the conversations about this and potential comparisons there would be between the two films.
Hell, I may have to revisit the 40's version so that I may be able to add that to my eventual review.
edarsenal
05-15-18, 09:00 PM
https://theredlist.com/media/database/films/cinema/1960/they-shoot-horses-dont-they/029-they-shoot-horses-dont-they-theredlist.jpg
They Shoot Horses Don't They?
SPOILERS!!
DO NOT READ IF YOU HAVEN'T WATCHED THIS
PS Do NOT read the elongated description of this film on IMDb because they really spoil it for you. I was able to have the distinct pleasure of going completely and utterly blind into this film and for anyone who has not seen this, it really is way to go.
One of the really amazing aspects of seeing this blind is truly discovering the full context of the title to this film. Which I had foolishly thought was a Westerns reference, not knowing the actual story and, with the opening of the movie I was unsure of where it was going to take me.
Along with the moments that we step out of the story to Robert dealing with a judicial system, there seemed to be a kind of dreamscape aspect to it. Especially the sentencing scene that was in a dark room.
Which, made the final moments of this film a truly excellent jaw-dropping experience that really hit home and completely blew me away.
So. Yeah, going in blind REALLY paid off in spades. Which is why I make that opening plea for those who haven't seen this.
For those who have, which is why you're probably reading this now, silly me :rolleyes: I can express my appreciation for the metaphor of a Dance Marathon shown at its most grueling. Along with the final understanding that "It's all rigged and stacked against you" and the pointlessness of it all.
The brilliance of it is, with any movie set during The Depression, they always include the barren landscape as an emotional device, and with this movie, we never see any of it. Instead, the hopelessness is presented to us by those in the Marathon (which symbolizes Life and the Rat Race) and it's callous indifference to the brutality inflicted and how The Show is created to momentarily help others forget their own desperation while making someone else a buck.
In retrospect, I find myself thinking back to countless scenes and interactions that signify on a greater degree of The Rat Race at every turn. And that amazement hits me again and again.
This has been a terrific opening film to start this Hall of Fame and brilliantly sets the bar for some exciting film watching to come.
cricket
05-15-18, 09:31 PM
Glad you liked it. It's pretty unique and I think it'll do well.
Citizen Rules
05-15-18, 10:22 PM
Glad you liked it. It's pretty unique and I think it'll do well.I suspect I'll like it too. I mean a young Jane Fonda, woohoo!
rauldc14
05-15-18, 10:27 PM
Waterloo Bridge
https://andrewsidea.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/waterloobridge4.jpg?w=517&h=388
I really liked this version of the film and I find it superior to the 40s film. I think a big part is I like the way the story is told better to me. It focuses in on the relationship of the two main characters very well in my opinion. The chemistry developed between Myra and Roy seems more sudden and realistic in this film. The acting is superb as well. I specifically find Douglass Montgomery a major upgrade over Robert Taylor. Mae Clarke was also great and I need to seek her out in more films. The ending felt a bit more genuine this time around, and so did their feelings for each other. I also give it big props for it's supporting acting, which was solid all around. The setting of Mae's apartment just seemed like a good one to have in the film, tough to say why but it felt like a nice hangout spot for the two of them. The pacing of the film is much better than the 40s version as well. Overall a success and something that could certainly find its way on my 30s list so a good pick by Citizen here. I'm not sure how others will feel about it though but I liked it.
3.5+
Citizen Rules
05-15-18, 10:32 PM
@rauldc14 (http://www.movieforums.com/community/member.php?u=60169)
Glad you liked it. And I kind of thought that people who didn't care for the 40s version with Vivian Leigh might warm up to the original version. IMO this is Mae Clarke's finest performance. She's an actress you don't hear much about anymore. If you remember the first time I joined a main Hof, I nominated Lady Killer because it had Mae Clarke. Hopefully people will like this film enough to include it on their list for the 1930s Countdown.
edarsenal
05-15-18, 10:33 PM
Glad you liked it. It's pretty unique and I think it'll do well.
it really is unique and I'm sure it'll do very well
cricket
05-15-18, 10:33 PM
The actors are so different looking in that version.
edarsenal
05-15-18, 10:36 PM
Very curious to see this version of Waterloo Bridge. Even more so hearing that you enjoyed it more, rauldc14
Miss Vicky
05-16-18, 02:37 AM
http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MovieLog/waterloobridge1931.gif
Waterloo Bridge (James Whale, 1931)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0022550/?ref_=nv_sr_2)
Date Watched: 05/15/18
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 16th MoFo Hall of Fame, Nominated by Citizen Rules
Rewatch: No.
I must admit that I was less than thrilled to see this film show up on the list of nominations and I don't deny that I have something of a prejudice against very old movies. I frequently struggle to connect with them because the acting is so often overly theatrical and very much unlike more modern acting that leans more towards a natural, less exaggerated approach. It also bothers me how ridiculously puritan these films often are (and yes, I'm aware of the whys about that), with an essentially total denial of anything sexual or base in nature.
While James Whale's Waterloo Bridge did not completely shatter my preconceived notions about films of this era, I was very pleasantly surprised at how different it still managed to be from my expectations. I certainly never thought that I would be watching a film that covered the subject matter that it did or that I would be able to overcome the disconnect I so often feel and actually be engaged with the characters, though it took some time for me to get there. I also came into this film being almost completely ignorant of its director, knowing him only as the director of classic horror movies (none of which I've actually seen) and knowing that really only because of the film Gods and Monsters.
As to the more specific aspects of the film, I thought the performances of both Mae Clarke and Douglass Montgomery were strong - though I found both characters distasteful in the beginning: Her for her attitude and him for his ridiculous level of naivete and his premature proclamations of love. But both managed to win me over eventually and I found myself actually wanting things to work out for them and invested in their fates. I also really appreciated that the film did not give the stereotypical Hollywood ending. There was no Happily Ever After shoe-horned in to make the audience feel good.
Ultimately, I came away with a very positive impression of the film, but I do have to wonder how much of that was owed to the difference between expectation and reality and I wonder whether the film will hold up as well on a rewatch. Right now, though, that doesn't matter and for the moment at least this is a very strong start to this Hall of Fame.
4-
Citizen Rules
05-16-18, 01:03 PM
Miss Vicky glad you liked Waterloo Bridge, as it turns out I watched it too last night.
Citizen Rules
05-16-18, 01:37 PM
https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=44536&stc=1&d=1526486442
Waterloo Bridge (1931)
What impressed me most about Waterloo Bridge, was Mae Clarke's body language. She brought her character to life by deliberately using poor body posture. She's slumped over with rounded shoulders and her head tilted down. That folded into herself body language, matched the self loathing expression on her face. That's method acting, as she's 'feeling' the emotions of her character: a woman who hates herself for becoming a prostitute.
Waterloo Bridge is considered one of Mae Clarke's finest performances. She reminded me of another early actress who I really like, Miriam Hopkins. Well, maybe you guys will see Miriam in one of her finest performance in another Hof;)
Had Waterloo Bridge been made only 3 years later it would have been quite different in story presentation. In 1933 the Hays Production Code took effect which was Hollywood self censoring itself, so that the Catholic Decency League wouldn't go through with their threats to get federal laws passed to control movie making. So...all of that makes this a pre code film, a cinema term that applies to sound films made before 1934.
This is the 1st of three film versions: Waterloo Bridge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterloo_Bridge_%281931_film%29) (1931), Waterloo Bridge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterloo_Bridge_%281940_film%29) (1940), and Gaby (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaby_%28film%29) (1956). All of which are based on the 1930 play by Robert Sherwood. The play itself was based on a true story of Robert Sherwood meeting an American girl in wartime London who's circumstance were like Myra's in the movie.
OK back to the movie....Kent Douglass was surprisingly naturalistic, I really believed him as a solider who fell in love with a poor American girl with a secret she desperately wants to keep. I thought he was real good in this, he pulled over nativity and sincerity well. I'm not sure why he didn't have a bigger career.
The woman who played his mother was real good too and surprisingly sympathetic, whilst showing her motherly concern for her son, who she doesn't want to marry Myra.
Bette Davis shined in her small role in what was only her 3rd film, and in the very first year of her movie career. She already showed promise as someone who demands attention from the camera.
Yeah, I know I'm long winded today, but I love early Hollywood film history and that's why I nominated Waterloo Bridge (1931) as it's a noteworthy pre code film, directed by James Whales and it's quite different in structure and feeling than the 1940 version of Waterloo Bridge.
HashtagBrownies
05-16-18, 03:56 PM
Wait Until Dark (1967)
https://78.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m2wzhicuak1qi5axlo1_500.gif
I remember first hearing about this and being super pumped to see it. I’m sure this has given me a biased opinion of the film.
Hepburn gives an amazing performance as our blind main character, I’m sure someone who hadn’t heard of her before seeing the movie would actually think she’s blind. I think the the film being set in one apartment helps to build the tension and terror. It’s also cool to note that the apartment is mostly underground; Isolated from the outside world.
Now let’s talk about the REAL meat on the bone, the suspense and ending. The film does a fantastic job of being suspenseful, with the robbers getting more aggressive and violent as the film goes on. The last 10-15 minutes are absolutely insane, pure terror; The perfect climax to an hour and a half of build up. I was sweating mad, on the very edge of my seat and jumped out of my skin a few times. What I adored was the gimmick of having most of the end in pure darkness, very creative and terrifying. (It helps to watch the film in a dimly lit room!)
If I had any complaints it’s that the first hour and a half have a more Hitchcock-ian tone while the last 10 minutes are horror, the whole film would be much better if it was mostly horror. I also feel the ‘pure darkness’ bit was underused, they could’ve done a lot more with that and made the film much more scary.
One of the most nail-biting and anxiety-causing films I’ve ever seen.
4.5
edarsenal
05-16-18, 08:29 PM
two good reviews for Waterloo right out of the gate - VERY nice!
Should anyone need it, youtube has Waterloo Bridge (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LSEKXDlzLUA&t=866s) and it looks like a decent copy. I'll be using it to watch it.
The link starts a ways into the film, sorry about that.
edarsenal
05-16-18, 08:36 PM
Wait Until Dark (1967)
https://78.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m2wzhicuak1qi5axlo1_500.gif
I remember first hearing about this and being super pumped to see it. I’m sure this has given me a biased opinion of the film.
Hepburn gives an amazing performance as our blind main character, I’m sure someone who hadn’t heard of her before seeing the movie would actually think she’s blind. I think the the film being set in one apartment helps to build the tension and terror. It’s also cool to note that the apartment is mostly underground; Isolated from the outside world.
Now let’s talk about the REAL meat on the bone, the suspense and ending. The film does a fantastic job of being suspenseful, with the robbers getting more aggressive and violent as the film goes on. The last 10-15 minutes are absolutely insane, pure terror; The perfect climax to an hour and a half of build up. I was sweating mad, on the very edge of my seat and jumped out of my skin a few times. What I adored was the gimmick of having most of the end in pure darkness, very creative and terrifying. (It helps to watch the film in a dimly lit room!)
If I had any complaints it’s that the first hour and a half have a more Hitchcock-ian tone while the last 10 minutes are horror, the whole film would be much better if it was mostly horror. I also feel the ‘pure darkness’ bit was underused, they could’ve done a lot more with that and made the film much more scary.
One of the most nail-biting and anxiety-causing films I’ve ever seen.
4.5
I absolutely loved Alan Arkin's character in this
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_kDnJdNOMgXc/SttVlsT0jRI/AAAAAAAABr8/8N_JW0nGxmI/s400/roat.jpg
Miss Vicky
05-16-18, 09:30 PM
Should anyone need it, youtube has Waterloo Bridge (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LSEKXDlzLUA&t=866s) and it looks like a decent copy. I'll be using it to watch it.
That's where I watched it. It's a good copy.
Speaking of YouTube, it looks like the copy of They Shoot Horses, Don't They? that Cricket linked to has been taken down due to a copyright claim. Will have to find another source for it.
Citizen Rules
05-16-18, 10:49 PM
That's where I watched it. It's a good copy.
Speaking of YouTube, it looks like the copy of They Shoot Horses, Don't They? that Cricket linked to has been taken down due to a copyright claim. Will have to find another source for it. That's happened before here. I'm not surprised that someone took down They Shoot Horses, Don't They?, I told another MoFo (not in this Hof) that it's a bad idea to post links to copyright movies on Youtube. Movie Forums is a big enough board that someone can see those links when we post them, then they go and hit the report button, just to be an ass. Which gets the movie removed as Youtube doesn't want any problems with copyrighted material.
I don't think for a second any MoFo would do that. But for every one of us, there's a 100 people who lurk here without signing up. Best not to post Youtube links for copyrighted movies, send them by PM instead.
Miss Vicky
05-16-18, 10:55 PM
The Waterloo Bridge video seems to have been uploaded by Universal, so it shouldn't be an issue.
I found They Shoot Horses, Don't They? from my library and requested a hold. There are available copies so I'll probably pick it up this weekend, along with a couple of others that are already waiting.
Citizen Rules
05-16-18, 11:02 PM
The Waterloo Bridge video seems to have been uploaded by Universal, so it shouldn't be an issue... That looks to be correct. I'm guessing it's a public domain movie, so that will stay put as there's no copyright.
edarsenal
05-16-18, 11:25 PM
Glad I checked out They Shoot Horses BEFORE it got taken down and good idea CR about PMing instead of posting. Shame, that.
And I agree, Vicky, that IS a good copy. Actually in the middle of it, right now.
https://cps-static.rovicorp.com/2/Open/CinemaSource/Three%20Monkeys%20(Uc%20maymun)/_derived_jpg_q90_600x800_m0/068122H4.jpg?partner=allmovie_soap
Three Monkeys is a drama morality tale from Turkey. It's tells the story of a murder/accident and a family who takes on the burden of the accident. The father goes to jail for a crime he didn't commit and things happen.
I don't want to get into too much when it comes to spoilers because the pacing and plot are partitioned out very slowly. I believe this was done to cover budgetary issues as it's one of those dramas with only four characters. (a father, a son, a mother and the politician) If you ever watched the Dekalog you kind of know what your getting yourself into. The good news is Nuri Bilge Ceylan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuri_Bilge_Ceylan) has a real eye for visuals. A number of the shots look good even if it's a lot of people starring off and long dramatic pauses.
I'm not sure how I'll rate this it's between 2 and 3 stars for me.
jiraffejustin
05-17-18, 01:20 AM
I've only seen Mr. Freedom and Naked out of the lot, both of are good. Naked is fantastic though, and I'll be rooting for it. Probably won't win though.
Citizen Rules
05-17-18, 01:22 PM
Glad I checked out They Shoot Horses BEFORE it got taken down and good idea CR about PMing instead of posting. Shame, that. I can't actually take credit for that idea, someone else said the same warning about posting youtube videos in another HoF. I can think of at least 3 times people have posted links and then the movie gets removed. But like Miss Vicky said Waterloo Bridge seems to have been uploaded by Universal so it should stay put. It looks like a nice copy of the film too.
Like edarsenal, I suggest you don't read the review before watching the film (thanks for the tip, by the way).
They Shoot Horses, Don't They? (1969) n
I have a vague recollection that I've heard the film's name before but knew nothing about it.
This is a difficult film for me to review. I liked its nihilism and its portrayal of humanity. I loved the ending and how it linked the introduction to the rest of the movie. But on the other hand, at least for me, the film hasn't aged well - dance marathon is reality television for the people of great depression and I've had my share of both reality television (that share was very small) and satires about it. Yes, the show is partially scripted and its purpose is to give the audience something to feel, something to hide the emptiness and suffering in their own lives. It's obvious and I don't feel like hearing it for the hundredth time. And yeah, at 1969 Pollack was most likely comparing the marathon itself to life but at 2018 it doesn't really make a big difference before the end.
I was often bored when watching this. I understand why some things were done (like keeping all characters shallow, showing long and tedious shots of the derby, etc.) but I don't like it when the message is emphasized at the expense of the film as a whole. Life sucks and then you die but the film could still be more entertaining.
Acting was adequate, there was zero depth on the characters and actors were just playing shells visible for the rest of the world. Soundtrack was what you'd expect a 1930s dance marathon to sound like. Cinematography was clinical, almost dull (derbies looked silly and the ending was pretty much the only beautifully shot scene in the whole film - on purpose, I suspect).
Boring buildup in a setting that doesn't interest me in the slightest that leads to very nice ending (the end itself is worth one popcorn for me).
2.5
Miss Vicky
05-17-18, 07:17 PM
http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MovieLog/francesha.gif
Frances Ha (Noah Baumbach, 2012)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2347569/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1)
Date Watched: 05/17/18
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 16th MoFo Hall of Fame, Nominated by rauldc14
Rewatch: No.
Frances Ha is a well made film. The cinematography is crisp and beautiful, the soundtrack was well chosen, and the performances are solid. It all centers around Frances, an apprentice dancer who bounces around from apartment to apartment. She very awkwardly bumbles through her interactions with her friends and other people she encounters in her life and struggles to deal with her very strained relationship with her best friend.
Which would all be wonderful if I found Frances endearing, but instead I found her rather annoying and it's impossible to truly enjoy a film like this if you don't like the main character.
3
cricket
05-17-18, 09:24 PM
Frances Ha
https://78.media.tumblr.com/e3ec90fa784a834d38e2c7c318d819e6/tumblr_o9awnym1Fx1v4a8wfo1_1280.png
I wasn't sure what to expect going in, and then early on I didn't think I was going to like it. I'm generally not fond of people, who because they went to college, they think that automatically means they're never going to have to work hard again. That's the impression I got of these people, but they seemed like decent people and I did like them. I actually felt bad for Frances. It seemed to me that she put on a front for others, pretending she was happy when she actually wasn't. I don't think the movie really leads anywhere or has much of a story. I just saw it more as spending some time with these folks, and it felt very real. I liked the decision to film in black and white. I think that, especially with a lower budget, black and white can hide mistakes and weaknesses. It also jived with the simplicity of the film and it looked good. The acting was good and it had a great soundtrack. It absolutely flew by in what seemed like less than an hour. It's a modest movie that won't stay with me forever, but I quite liked it.
3.5
Surprised you liked it Cricket. One thing i liked about it is while we are always supposed to root for her the film doesn't coddle her, the film fully recognizes she is making poor choices and she gets mocked and kinda cruelly treated like ***** for it. There's a couple of unexpected scenes when people are outright laughing at her and calling her a failure in a more mean than playful way and she kind of has to keep up her happy go lucky demeanour both to keep herself going and because she knew it was true. It's like when people say they love a character but they just want to strangle them because of their poor choices, the script kinda did exactly that for us at times. There's also not much self-pitying allowed, there's of course some but not as much as you'd expect. And i don't believe it's purely supposed to be that she is such a positive person, the time she ventures towards self-pity the most she is slapped back to reality when her love interest slams her for daring to compare herself to starving Africans by pointing out that she is basically poor by choice, she could go home to her parents at any time or could change careers or whatever.
Also twee indie things often annoy me but i was weirdly into it turning out her friend was her soulmate that she was rabbling on about during her stoned speech haha.
watched They Shoot Horses, Don't They? last night and will most likely post about it this evening. And there will be SERIOUS Spoiler Alerts since I can't figure out any way to write about it without giving anything away.
VERY good film. Very depressing, but VERY good. (which is the gist of what I would write WITHOUT spoilers) lol
Sounds like I'll love it :)
cricket
05-19-18, 08:14 AM
If anyone else has access to Fandor and needs a way to watch Three Monkeys, send me a pm. Half ass write up coming in a while.
rauldc14
05-19-18, 11:56 AM
14 reviews already from 8 different people. A nice start I would say.
MovieMad16
05-19-18, 12:01 PM
Make that 15 from 9!
https://images.kogan.com/image/fetch/s--XUGnkuMf--/b_white,c_pad,f_auto,h_400,q_auto:good,w_600/https://assets.kogan.com/images/booksbatch/BKT-9781786495259/call-me-by-your-name.jpg
Connor Macgregor Reviews...Call Me By Your Name
INTRO: Everyone was raving about Call Me By Your Name before I watched it. The acclaim, the accolades, the sheer buzz around this film was intense. So when finally watching it, I had high expectations, and they were met pretty comfortably.
SUMMARY: In early-1980s northern Italy, amid the lush Mediterranean landscapes of a serene and golden summer, 17-year-old, Elio, visits the family's summer villa to spend his vacation with his father and Greco-Roman culture professor, Mr Perlman, his translator mother, Annella, and the American doctoral student who works there as an intern, Oliver. But, little by little, over the course of six fleeting weeks, a timid friendship between Elio and Oliver will prepare the ground for an unexpected bond, as the unexplored emotions of first love start boiling over. Could this sun-kissed romance in Lombardy be the prelude to maturity?
THE CAST: You have such a strong cast in this film. We'll begin with Timothee Chalamet who is very much the lead, and like Jennifer Lawrence in 2010, becomes a major star because of this film. His childlike innocence compared that with his growth into adulthood is captured perfectly in this film. It's very much a perfect coming of age film. Arnie Hammer is also great in the film, playing an older, cocky, yet confident male that is easily attractive both physically and personality wise. Their characters, Elio & Oliver make a beautiful couple as a result. This is also the film I discovered Esther Garrel, who is brilliant as Elio's sort of girlfriend Marzia, a young woman also growing up, and also confused in her own way. There's also the wonderful Michael Stuhlberg who plays Elio's father who is arguably one of cinema's greatest dads even if he doesn't really do much in the film.
SETTING: What makes CMBYN such a special film is its setting. It's arguably paradise like nothing else on earth. The house, the weather, the trees, the picturesque small sleepy town, you can almost feel the heat breaking through the screen, the water falling down your skin. The film's sensual power is untouched like nothing else in cinematic history. I've never felt like that before with a film, ever. Add the beautiful music by Sufjan Stevens (Mystery Of Love I can't stop playing) and you have a film that goes almost beyond a film in its connection with the viewer.
OVERALL: Call Me By Your Name is the type of film you watch to relax yourself with after a long hard day’s work. It’s LGBT theme is simple and effective, portraying itself as a love story first more than anything else. Absorbing and delightful, it’s a film that will leave an impression on you for a very long time.
RATING: 99% - A
Miss Vicky
05-19-18, 01:07 PM
I started They Shoot Horses yesterday. Will probably finish it today and post a review. Might watch something else too.
Call me by your Name (2017)
I didn't quite know what to expect. My two flatmates are gay, with very different ages (38 and 25) so I watched this with them when it came out in the cinema. Obviously it resonated in them more than it did with me, especially because they both had quite similar stories. However, I feel this is not a type of story that only gay men live, the same can happen in a straight couple (though not as common, I think). It achieves this because it just tries to be a simple love story, instead of a preaching film about the LGBT rights, which I found quite refreshing, and alone deserves a positive rating.
I liked the acting pretty much, especially by the lead couple. I found their chemistry to be really compelling and everything seemed really natural. The characters are portrayed as these annoying pseudo-intellectual guys, but I get where that comes from, even if I took a while to feel confortable with.
The sountrack is very very good and was one of the elements I liked the most about the film. It fits the setting and the story perfectly, making it easy to be absorbed by what goes on the screen.
Overall, I was looking at this as an average film with nothing wrong about it, but also nothing really extraordinary, but the last scene is a huuuge bonus in my opinion. That dialogue between Elio and his father gives the whole film a depth that was absent till then, in my opinion.
3.5
cricket
05-19-18, 05:42 PM
Three Monkeys
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ac/d7/12/acd71291b4d47a9ce466abfe9298a072.jpg
I didn't know anything about this going in and I haven't read anything about it since watching.
SPOILERS
Great job at gaining my interest immediately, and with the way it started, I thought it was going to be a thriller. It turns out to be an intense drama. It's the kind of story I really enjoy. No real complaints although I feel like I could have used more detail on some things, like what exactly happened to the son when he was injured, and what happened to the other son. I went back and forth on my feelings toward the mother. I thought it was awful what she did, but on the other hand she must have a miserable life. The way she became obsessed with the politician at first seemed odd, but then I thought maybe he was almost a representation of a much better life in general. On the other hand still, the whole family must be miserable since they apparently suffered a tragedy. It's just a life that makes you appreciate what you have. The slow burn of the events unfolding kept me on the edge of my seat. The filmmakers could have easily gone for some harsh knockout moments, but instead took an even-keeled approach. That probably makes for a better and more realistic movie. I would have said go for the gusto, because as much as I enjoyed this, it wasn't that far off from being a favorite. A couple of holy crap moments could have gotten me there. The cinematography and sound quality are superb and the performances are strong. It was a real good movie and a great nomination.
3.5+
I'm very glad you enjoyed it cricket! As you've said, the cinematography and the sound design are fantastic. Every time I think about the film, the sounds of the train accompany my thoughts. I love me some miserable and depressing films, and I think Three Monkeys is among the best of them in that regard.
cricket
05-19-18, 06:12 PM
I'm very glad you enjoyed it cricket! As you've said, the cinematography and the sound design are fantastic. Every time I think about the film, the sounds of the train accompany my thoughts. I love me some miserable and depressing films, and I think Three Monkeys is among the best of them in that regard.
I almost nominated a movie that has a lot of similarities. It'll probably be my nom for the 17th.
edarsenal
05-19-18, 10:11 PM
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/S/sgp-catalog-images/region_US/showtime_svod-131808-Full-Image_GalleryBackground-en-US-1483994509464._RI_SX940_.jpg
3:10 To Yuma
"Even bad men love their mama."
A true western in it's very essence and a definitive must see for Western fans looking to venture into movies made within the past decade or so. The story is originally written by Elmore Leonard, a favorite writer of mine, and a remake of the 1957 version with Glenn Ford and Van Heflin (which I truly need to see since I've only saw it as a kid and scarcely remember or can truly appreciate it as I would now) so I cannot confirm how close to the novel or original movie it comes, but I do know, on it's own merits, I rate it very highly.
Leonard's characters are rarely, strictly good OR evil. They are human. And we see this and, in any good Western, we see a deeper message of honor, and doing what needs to be done, to the very end.
Ben Wade, played with roguish style by Russell Crowe is caught after committing a violent stagecoach robbery of Railroad funds.
To get him to the town of Yuma and the train to jail, Dan Evans, a nearly broken rancher/farmer, played with a believable mixture of humility and nobility (which ain't easy) of a simple man trying to provide for his family against odds determined to make him fail; is willing to come along for the price of paying off past debts to make it happen.
Along with some minor roles done wonderfully by Peter Fonda and Alan Tudyk, who also go to make sure that Crowe's character makes his train, a favorite scene-stealer, for me, is---
https://megustaelvillano.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/charlie-prince.jpg
Ben Foster playing Crowe's #2 man, Charlie Prince with such a dangerous serenity in a VERY sharp coat, I simply f@ckin love his character.
As previously stated, this is reminiscent of the Old School Westerns and the Codes that rang true for them, sans any naivety, along with some great shoot outs and action scenes, there are some truly excellent dialogue throughout this film. As I say, a must see for Western fans and a very worthwhile film for those that are not, so much.
Miss Vicky
05-19-18, 10:32 PM
Great write up, edarsenal !
So glad you still loved it. I also totally agree about Ben Foster. Obviously I saw the movie because I love Russell Crowe - and he is fantastic as Ben Wade - but Foster stole the show for me, too. Love that performance so much.
As to the 50s version, I watched it after becoming completely enamored with Mangold's take on the story - and was very disappointed. Although the basic story is the same, I found the characters far less engaging (though the 50s Charlie Prince had some decent lines) and absolutely HATED the ending, which is completely different from this one.
I finished They Shoot Horses earlier today, but am struggling with the write up. Still hoping to get it done tonight.
edarsenal
05-19-18, 10:51 PM
Great write up, edarsenal !
So glad you still loved it. I also totally agree about Ben Foster. Obviously I saw the movie because I love Russell Crowe - and he is fantastic as Ben Wade - but Foster stole the show for me, too. Love that performance so much.
As to the 50s version, I watched it after becoming completely enamored with Mangold's take on the story - and was very disappointed. Although the basic story is the same, I found the characters far less engaging (though the 50s Charlie Prince had some decent lines) and absolutely HATED the ending, which is completely different from this one.
I finished They Shoot Horses earlier today, but am struggling with the write up. Still hoping to get it done tonight.
Sorry to hear that about the original. That sucks. Though I had a feeling that Crowe and Bale had REALLY delivered those characters far better without seeing the original.
I'd hate to think what the ending in the original is, since this one seems to ring true of the writer's style of endings.
Looking forward to hearing what you have to say about They Shoot Horses. I finished Waterloo Bridge yesterday and not sure if I'll have the time to post my review tonight or not.
cricket
05-19-18, 10:59 PM
I wasn't a fan of the original either. I'm looking forward to this one even more now that I know Ben Foster is in it. He's been great in everything I've seen him in.
Miss Vicky
05-19-18, 11:43 PM
http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MovieLog/theyshoothorses.gif
They Shoot Horses, Don't They? (Sydney Pollack, 1969)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065088/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1)
Date Watched: 05/19/18
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 16th MoFo Hall of Fame, Nominated by cricket
Rewatch: No.
Although I've known of this film for some time, it was only by its reputation as a quality film. I was completely ignorant of its content until I pressed play.
And I came away with very mixed feelings about it. I liked the sort of spectacle of cruelty that the dance marathon represented and how it reflects how much people enjoy watching others suffer and the lengths to which people will go in the name of entertainment or in the pursuit of money or perceived fame, whether it be from greed or desperation. But at the same time, the premise also meant that meaningful interaction between the characters - and, therefore, proper development of those characters - was limited. As a result, they came off to me as being very one dimensional and too much so for me to care about them. This was especially true for Gloria and as a result I felt nothing when the film came to a close.
None of which is to say that I think it's not a good movie. It's a well constructed film and I can kinda see why it clicks so well for others, but unfortunately it just didn't do that for me.
3+
Miss Vicky
05-20-18, 10:50 PM
http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MovieLog/310toyuma.gif
3:10 to Yuma (James Mangold, 2007)
Imdb (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0381849/?ref_=nv_sr_1)
Date Watched: 5/20/18
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 16th MoFo Hall of Fame, nominated by me
Rewatch: Yes
I've never much considered myself a fan of Westerns. There are a handful of them that I really love, but overall I find the genre to not really suit my tastes. James Mangold's 3:10 to Yuma is a big exception to that and became an instant favorite when I first watched it eleven years ago.
It has all of the aspects of the genre that you expect to see - gun fights, drinking, beautiful women, horses, and gorgeous landscapes but all of those things are completely secondary to the relationships between the characters. And these relationships are what really draw me into the film.
The story centers around one particular relationship - the uneasy truce and growing respect between Russell Crowe's Ben Wade, an infamous outlaw who has been captured and is to be transported to Contention to board a train to Yuma prison, and Christian Bale's Dan Evans, a struggling rancher, husband, and father desperate to save his home and redeem himself in the eyes of his family, who has volunteered to escort Wade to the train for a price. I've never been a fan of Bale and would in fact list him among my least favorite actors, but in this role he is solid. His stoicism and restrained emotion work well to embody the self loathing and desperation of the downtrodden rancher who still holds on to his principles. Not surprisingly though, he is outshown by Russell Crowe who brings charisma, intensity, a cunning playfulness, and just a touch of sensitivity to a man that is also a ruthless killer and remorseless thief.
But the performance that impressed me most - not just this time, but the first time and every time - has been Ben Foster as Charlie Prince, Ben Wade's second in command with a cool swagger, a great sense of style, and fantastic lines. But more importantly, this cold blooded killer is also a man of dedication and unwavering loyalty. And as much as he deserved what came to him in the end, I couldn't help but feel a twinge of pity at the betrayal he suffered.
And that to me is what really makes it a great film. Things are not truly black and white. The characters are human, the lines between heroes and villains are blurred, and I am able to become just as emotionally invested in each.
4.5+
edarsenal
05-21-18, 08:38 PM
obviously, I fully agree on every point about Yuma.
It seemed everyone really stepped up as far as the acting goes in this, along with every other great aspect about it.
cricket
05-21-18, 08:49 PM
I've got Yuma coming for next weekend.
if you upload the movies to pornhub they wont be taken down
rauldc14
05-22-18, 04:05 PM
Perfume: Story of a Murderer
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-rIR5TKUUx1I/V0wTLcGgkgI/AAAAAAAAFKs/LK7KIZgeEPo9MXa-djLqGl4hv_1eJ8iCwCLcB/s1600/perfume.jpg
I hadn't heard of this film coming into the Hall of Fame. For some reason I thought it was some goofy based on a true story tale, but now I know it is fiction.
It's problem for me is that it all seems a bit too farfetched. Yes, I know that there have been more insane things that people have done historically and also in make believe in movies, but it was really hard to make it seem like Anything realistic or logical even for this insane man to do. The hardest part perhaps for me was I wasn't all that convinced of the performance of Ben Whishaw. In order for me to like a movie about a madman, I need to like the performance of the actual madman, and he didn't do any favors. The idea is so out there that he needed to be convincing. Heck, he wasn't even convincing in his murders as they didn't seem all that realistic to me.
I did like the score of the film though and a complete kudos package goes to Dustin Hoffman for his performance as Baldini. He was the absolute highlight of the film for me. For the most part the cinematography was on point too.
I do think for the most part people will like this though. I can see it doing good. And I can't even really call it a bad film, just one I didn't care for although like I said there were some merits to it.
2.5
Miss Vicky
05-24-18, 12:53 PM
I watched part of Poison for the Fairies yesterday. I'm going to try to finish it today and hopefully squeeze in Wait Until Dark as well, so I can return them when I go to the library to pick up Naked tomorrow.
Miss Vicky
05-24-18, 10:13 PM
http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MovieLog/poisonforfairies.gif
Veneno para las hadas(Poison for the Fairies) (Carlos Enrique Taboada, 1984)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0135033/?ref_=nv_sr_1)
Date Watched: 5/24/18
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 16th MoFo Hall of Fame, nominated by pahaK
Rewatch: No
I had some very mixed feelings about this one. Although I was thankful for the relatively short run time, I found the majority of the film to be an absolute chore to get through. The acting by the two leads was pretty unconvincing to me, even for children, and I found Veronica far more annoying than at all creepy or sinister. Making matters worse was the awful sound quality. As the film went on, I began to wonder why this film is rated so highly.
And then the ending happened. I can't say that it came completely as a surprise as I expected it to culminate in something like that, but I didn't expect the cold and calculated method of it. I thought that was wonderful and really elevated the film, but not so much that I can say I actually enjoyed it. I'm probably overrating it in relation to my experience watching it, but those last few minutes were great and I do need to give credit for that.
3-
edarsenal
05-24-18, 11:36 PM
Perfume: Story of a Murderer
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-rIR5TKUUx1I/V0wTLcGgkgI/AAAAAAAAFKs/LK7KIZgeEPo9MXa-djLqGl4hv_1eJ8iCwCLcB/s1600/perfume.jpg
I hadn't heard of this film coming into the Hall of Fame. For some reason I thought it was some goofy based on a true story tale, but now I know it is fiction.
It's problem for me is that it all seems a bit too farfetched. Yes, I know that there have been more insane things that people have done historically and also in make believe in movies, but it was really hard to make it seem like Anything realistic or logical even for this insane man to do. The hardest part perhaps for me was I wasn't all that convinced of the performance of Ben Whishaw. In order for me to like a movie about a madman, I need to like the performance of the actual madman, and he didn't do any favors. The idea is so out there that he needed to be convincing. Heck, he wasn't even convincing in his murders as they didn't seem all that realistic to me.
I did like the score of the film though and a complete kudos package goes to Dustin Hoffman for his performance as Baldini. He was the absolute highlight of the film for me. For the most part the cinematography was on point too.
I do think for the most part people will like this though. I can see it doing good. And I can't even really call it a bad film, just one I didn't care for although like I said there were some merits to it.
2.5
I honestly had NO IDEA where you'd be on this film, and sorry they lead didn't work for you. It IS true, if the madman isn't done well for the viewer, it's hard to give "involved" in what happens.
And yes, Hoffman is a great highlight to this film! I got such a kick out of him.
edarsenal
05-24-18, 11:38 PM
BTW, I am out of town until next Wednesday and won't be popping in much during this time, so. . . if I don't, see ya all when I see ya all
rauldc14
05-25-18, 01:40 AM
I watched Wait Until Dark yesterday. I'll have a write up tomorrow.
rauldc14
05-25-18, 10:19 AM
Wait Until Dark
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-UrbOVrTI-8M/UVJI-m2TnCI/AAAAAAAAJbU/NjJbn9ySVi4/s1600/Audrey+Hepburn_Wait+Until+Dark_1967.JPG
My best comparison for it is a low tier Hitchcock film. It takes awhile for me to get invested in what happens and once I do, the film is pretty much nearing it's end.
I did enjoy the setting of the film and like Hashtag said, it was cool to see the film be in one location. Films like that have always worked for me, much like Rear Window or Dial M for Murder. It was a pretty cool location to use.
I don't want to say the acting is bad because it's not, it's just not that memorable a performance from Audrey Hepburn for me. On a favorites level this may be my lowest of the performances I've seen although it really isn't bad. She did play a believable blind woman certainly. I thoroughly enjoyed Alan Arkins performance, making it the second movie of this Hall of Fame where a supporting character outshines the main one for me.
The ending was ok I suppose. I don't necessarily get the type of it being sensational but at the same time I can see what makes it the highlight of the film since it does certainly build some nice suspense.
Perhaps I've been too critical, but in the end it's just a decent film for me with not much standing out.
3
Citizen Rules
05-25-18, 01:53 PM
http://www.imfdb.org/images/0/0c/MrFreedom16.JPG
Mr Freedom (1969)
I didn't hate it!...Actually, I laughed out loud at some of it. Mr Freedom was so gung-ho that it was hard not to like this overbearing, one track minded, ultra imperialistic bearer of democracy;)
There's some clever stuff here if you take this moviein context with the time in which it was made, and with the social-political changes that were happening in the world....French students at the time took to the streets in massive protest of the French government's policy which was seen as being nationalistic & imperialistic. The student protesters wanted among other things, self rule for the countries that were under French colonial rule. The protest were so forcefully, that France rewrote it's Constitution.
Today's movie watcher might not be aware of that fact, but the makers of this film clearly had those events in mind, thus labeling the French students as communist ciphers.
And of course Mr Freedom's idea that he will bring democracy to France by bombing half the country to destruction, thus making them negotiate, and accepting a U.S. style democracy, was the U.S. policy in the Vietnam war.
Hint...don't miss the LBJ mask that Mr Freedom has in his secret dressing room. The mask and the JFK wanted for treason poster, both at the start of the film make the intentions of the film perfectly clear.
The actor who played Mr Freedom was perfect for the role and the red headed French woman was a hottie! There's lots of fun crazy costumes and historical references in this strange political satire.
Interesting nom! Now we need to do a 1965-1975 social-political satire HoF, Mr Freedom would be perfect for that.
rauldc14
05-26-18, 05:37 AM
I could use a link to Mr. Freedom if anyone has one.
I'll watch that if I can get access to it or Frances Ha rewatch next.
Citizen Rules
05-26-18, 03:09 PM
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/54ec56d6e4b07c3f656a7f2e/t/59122fd04402439e16e81114/1494364131100/
They Shoot Horses Don't They (1969)
This was a good nom for an HoF and I'm glad it was nominated. It's an important film from a well known director and yet it's not well watched so it's fresh.
But sorry to say I didn't care for the movie. I should have liked this as it's a period piece, which I enjoy, and the story premise is right up my alley too. But the movie just didn't work for me.
It felt like there was a missing 20 minute opening scene that would have set up the motives of the dance contestants. I kept waiting to find out what everyone's backstory was, but it never came. The movie left me emotionally distant. I felt like one of the spectators watching the dance contest...I could see the couples dance, but that's about all I knew of their lives.
I thought Gig Young was the stand out performance here. Red Buttons too, was a good character. But I'm starting to think Jane Fonda might not be all that great of an actress. She always seems to have this one note acting, she's indignant and pissed off in most of her movie roles. Come to think of it, that's the way she came across in real life too. And Michel Sarazin...he seemed like a deer caught in the headlights of an oncoming truck.
With an opening scene that established some character back story and motivation, I think this could have been great...Still, I'm glad it was nominated as it's something I would have chosen to watch on my own.
cricket
05-26-18, 04:28 PM
I feel like their backstories are unimportant as they could be anybody who had fallen on hard times. I understand your feelings though.
I don't but it's repeatedly said in here.
Citizen Rules
05-26-18, 05:38 PM
I don't but it's repeatedly said in here. I don't always feel I need to relate to a character to enjoy the movie. I could name many Hof movies that I liked without being able to relate to the characters. Raul's nom in the 15th L'Avventura, I didn't relate to those characters at all, I mean who could? But still I thought highly of the film and enjoyed watching it.
http://www.imfdb.org/images/0/0c/MrFreedom16.JPG
Mr Freedom (1969)
I didn't hate it!...Actually, I laughed out loud at some of it. Mr Freedom was so gung-ho that it was hard not to like this overbearing, one track minded, ultra imperialistic bearer of democracy;)
There's some clever stuff here if you take this moviein context with the time in which it was made, and with the social-political changes that were happening in the world....French students at the time took to the streets in massive protest of the French government's policy which was seen as being nationalistic & imperialistic. The student protesters wanted among other things, self rule for the countries that were under French colonial rule. The protest were so forcefully, that France rewrote it's Constitution.
Today's movie watcher might not be aware of that fact, but the makers of this film clearly had those events in mind, thus labeling the French students as communist ciphers.
And of course Mr Freedom's idea that he will bring democracy to France by bombing half the country to destruction, thus making them negotiate, and accepting a U.S. style democracy, was the U.S. policy in the Vietnam war.
Hint...don't miss the LBJ mask that Mr Freedom has in his secret dressing room. The mask and the JFK wanted for treason poster, both at the start of the film make the intentions of the film perfectly clear.
The actor who played Mr Freedom was perfect for the role and the red headed French woman was a hottie! There's lots of fun crazy costumes and historical references in this strange political satire.
Interesting nom! Now we need to do a 1965-1975 social-political satire HoF, Mr Freedom would be perfect for that.
sounds awesome
3:10 to Yuma (2007) R
I had mostly positive memory of this but it seems I got it mixed with some other film.
https://images.ctfassets.net/7h71s48744nc/4KXFBzmbSgue0USSgcWOQI/274b5f88c1dd7a17472fcd19a0b3c128/3-10-to-yuma-review-image.jpg
There's an outlaw leader played by Crowe who gets caught and is being taken to nearby town by some folks including a one legged rancher played by Bale. Rancher's had some bad luck and needs the $200 promised for the job. Outlaw's gang is also after them with the intent of freeing their leader.
To very large degree this whole films exists solely to have Crowe and Bale talking to each other. Crowe's character is charismatic, intelligent and sophisticated thief and murderer while Bale's rancher is a simple man who seems to have only two goals in his life - to keep his family afloat and to earn his son's respect. Interaction between the two could have been good but there are few glaring issues.
There's no proper reasoning for taking Crowe to that train to Yuma. It's not a good thing if the very concept of the film feels forced. This is amplified throughout the journey when his escorts start to die but no one seems to care. Only thing that matters is the pretentious dialogue between the two stars.
Crowe's character, Ben Wade, is also too capable in everything for this kind of movie. He's like a western Hannibal Lecter with some real feelings hidden inside - he's smarter, better shooter, more artistic, more everything than anyone else in the film. Yet for some reason he instantly befriends Bale's rancher and risks everything just to make Bale look good in the eyes of his son. The end just doesn't feel natural at all.
Techically the film is very nice. Acting is top notch as well. Everything looks good, sounds good and even the pacing is fine. The only thing that doesn't work is the script and especially the characters whose motives don't make any sense. A film that relies so heavily on dialogue needs characters that feel real and on that regard Ben Wade is, in my opinion, a total failure and drags the movie down with him.
Russell Crowe can't save badly written character that sinks otherwise promising film.
2
Miss Vicky
05-27-18, 03:28 AM
There's no proper reasoning for taking Crowe to that train to Yuma.
What were they supposed to do with Wade once they caught him?
As to the people holding him being killed off, what about them would make you think they cared much for each other? Dan cared about Dr. Potter and that showed, but he hated Tucker and wanted him dead. McElroy was a stranger who was revealed to have a very dark and violent past. Was he supposed to be sad about that loss?
Crowe's character, Ben Wade, is also too capable in everything for this kind of movie... he's smarter, better shooter, more artistic, more everything than anyone else in the film.
:shrug: He's a notorious outlaw. You don't gain notoriety as a criminal by being stupid and lacking skills.
Yet for some reason he instantly befriends Bale's rancher and risks everything just to make Bale look good in the eyes of his son. The end just doesn't feel natural at all.
What exactly was Wade risking? He said himself he'd been to Yuma prison twice before and escaped twice before. His captors certainly weren't going to kill him and neither was his gang. It's obvious that he had no real intention of facing the gallows. It's also made pretty clear that he has no affection at all for the men he leads (and, except for Charlie, they don't hold any real affection for him either) and that he has some desire for a simpler life and has respect for Dan. I'd also say that "making Bale look good in the eyes of his son" is oversimplifying the matter. There was still the railroad man's promise to Dan's family for getting Wade on the train to consider - without that money and without Dan, Alice and the boys are doomed.
Obviously you're entitled to your opinions and I'm in no way saying that the film is flawless, but I can't agree with these particular criticisms.
What were they supposed to do with Wade once they caught him?
In Bisbee(?) there was a debate whether to kill Wade there and that idea was discarded on silly notion of his gang destroying the city in that case. Instead they decide it's better for few men to transport him to another town. It would have been safer, easier and more logical for the Pinkerton to just kill him in Bisbee.
As to the people holding him being killed off, what about them would make you think they cared much for each other? Dan cared about Dr. Potter and that showed, but he hated Tucker and wanted him dead. McElroy was a stranger who was revealed to have a very dark and violent past. Was he supposed to be sad about that loss?
I didn't mean them caring for each other but not caring about the fact that Wade was killing his escorts and thus proving himself to be a legitimate threat. Yet no precautions are taken at any point.
:shrug: He's a notorious outlaw. You don't gain notoriety as a criminal by being stupid and lacking skills.
Sure, but in my opinion he was too much a superman. Prince had all the qualities needed to gain notoriety. Also Wade did some really stupid decisions considering how smart he was otherwise.
What exactly was Wade risking? He said himself he'd been to Yuma prison twice before and escaped twice before. His captors certainly weren't going to kill him and neither was his gang. It's obvious that he had no real intention of facing the gallows.
But it wasn't mentioned if he was facing gallows the previous times or just serving time. I doubt that during that era it didn't take years to carry out the death sentence and, with his reputation, it shouldn't be an issue to ensure his captivity for a few days or even few weeks. In my opinion it was a huge risk.
It's also made pretty clear that he has no affection at all for the men he leads (and, except for Charlie, they don't hold any real affection for him either) and that he has some desire for a simpler life and has respect for Dan.
Most of his men were still competent and presumably rather difficult to replace. It makes no sense he destroys his livelihood (on short term, at least) just because Bale's character got killed.
I'd also say that "making Bale look good in the eyes of his son" is oversimplifying the matter. There was still the railroad man's promise to Dan's family for getting Wade on the train to consider - without that money and without Dan, Alice and the boys are doomed.
This one I don't really get. I even said that Bale wants "to keep his family afloat and to earn his son's respect" so no disagreement here.
EDIT: Thought this more while taking a shower and I think I answered a wrong question, kind of, as we were talking about Wade. Up until Bale tells Wade about his son, while being strangled, Wade was going to go back to his gang and, if necessary, kill Bale. So for Wade it was all about how Bale's son would see his father.
Obviously you're entitled to your opinions and I'm in no way saying that the film is flawless, but I can't agree with these particular criticisms.
Of course. Discussion is good and I'm not saying my opinion is correct - it's just my opinion.
Miss Vicky
05-27-18, 05:15 AM
In Bisbee(?) there was a debate whether to kill Wade there and that idea was discarded on silly notion of his gang destroying the city in that case. Instead they decide it's better for few men to transport him to another town. It would have been safer, easier and more logical for the Pinkerton to just kill him in Bisbee.
Given the absolute ruthlessness of Wade's gang, it doesn't seem like a silly notion to me. It was also discarded mainly by McElroy, who had prior experience in dealing with Ben Wade. McElroy and Wade have history.
I didn't mean them caring for each other but not caring about the fact that Wade was killing his escorts and thus proving himself to be a legitimate threat. Yet no precautions are taken at any point.
I'm not sure where this "not caring" is coming from or what precautions exactly you're referring to.
Sure, but in my opinion he was too much a superman. Prince had all the qualities needed to gain notoriety. Also Wade did some really stupid decisions considering how smart he was otherwise.
As second in command, it seems safe to assume that Prince's notoriety would come mainly on Wade's coattails. He may be loyal to a fault, but he's didn't strike me as being a true leader and certainly not the brains of the operation. As to his decisions, to me his mistakes help to make him human. I'm not sure what you're wanting from the character here. Do you want a true superman or a flawed person?
But it wasn't mentioned if he was facing gallows the previous times or just serving time. I doubt that during that era it didn't take years to carry out the death sentence and, with his reputation, it shouldn't be an issue to ensure his captivity for a few days or even few weeks. In my opinion it was a huge risk.
It also wasn't mentioned how long he served before escaping either time. You'd think they'd have done a better job of ensuring the captivity of someone who'd escaped previously, but they apparently did not since he made it out a second time.
Most of his men were still competent and presumably rather difficult to replace. It makes no sense he destroys his livelihood (on short term, at least) just because Bale's character got killed.
On the other hand, it was already established that he had no qualms about killing his own men and he showed far more respect for Dan than he ever showed for any of them.
[COLOR="Red"]EDIT: Thought this more while taking a shower and I think I answered a wrong question, kind of, as we were talking about Wade. Up until Bale tells Wade about his son, while being strangled, Wade was going to go back to his gang and, if necessary, kill Bale. So for Wade it was all about how Bale's son would see his father.
But even at the end, it's unclear as to whether Wade will actually go to Yuma. He gets on, but then gets back off again and seems clearly conflicted when facing William. He only makes his final decision when William turns away and goes to his dying father. At that point, Dan had already redeemed himself in his son's eyes so boarding the train at that point would have no effect on how William regarded Dan.
First I want to make one thing clear - I am nitpicking. At times I wish I wouldn't (I'd actually be able to enjoy far more movies then) but I can't help myself.
Given the absolute ruthlessness of Wade's gang, it doesn't seem like a silly notion to me. It was also discarded mainly by McElroy, who had prior experience in dealing with Ben Wade. McElroy and Wade have history.
But this isn't logical. If they seriously fear that Wade's men would destroy the town as revenge then how can they expect the escort to succeed? And whether it succeeds or not, why wouldn't the outlaws still take their revenge on the town? Wouldn't the only way to escape that fate be letting Wade free?
I'm not sure where this "not caring" is coming from or what precautions exactly you're referring to.
Even after killing the first escort he's still kept practically free (loose chains in front). As a result in Apache lands he very easily gets a weapon (and could have escaped at that point but, again for no reason, chose not to).
As second in command, it seems safe to assume that Prince's notoriety would come mainly on Wade's coattails.
I said he possessed all the traits gaining notoriety would require - prone to violence and means to deliver it. Of course his reputation in the story comes largely from Wade but my meaning was that one doesn't need to be a Renaissance man to gain notoriety, violence and cruelty will do just fine.
As to his decisions, to me his mistakes help to make him human. I'm not sure what you're wanting from the character here. Do you want a true superman or a flawed person?
I mostly want consistency. Whether he's a highly intelligent and calculating leader who has successfully robbed 22 coaches, kept his position as a gang leader and manipulates everyone around him with impeccable insight to other peoples' minds or then you could make him a more flawed man but it's pretty hard to be both. I find it unconvincing that all his supposed flaws miraculously manifest when, and only when, near Bale.
It also wasn't mentioned how long he served before escaping either time. You'd think they'd have done a better job of ensuring the captivity of someone who'd escaped previously, but they apparently did not since he made it out a second time.
Kind of yes, but we don't even know what he was doing time for. Maybe he wasn't considered that dangerous back then.
On the other hand, it was already established that he had no qualms about killing his own men and he showed far more respect for Dan than he ever showed for any of them.
Unless I'm mistaken he didn't kill any of his own men before the end (that one guy in the beginning was shot by a Pinkerton hiding in the wagon). I don't recall any obvious shows of disrespect either.
But even at the end, it's unclear as to whether Wade will actually go to Yuma. He gets on, but then gets back off again and seems clearly conflicted when facing William. He only makes his final decision when William turns away and goes to his dying father. At that point, Dan had already redeemed himself in his son's eyes so boarding the train at that point would have no effect on how William regarded Dan.
In a sense, yes but without him actually getting on board William wouldn't have had anything to show for his father's accomplishments. Yes, he would have known what his father did but in the eyes of the world he would still have been a son of a failed man. It's a matter of perspective whether he needed to get on the train or not to fulfill his observed duty to Dan.
Also, this really hasn't much to do with my complaint which is more about Wade even considering it's worth his freedom and lives of his men to either redeem Dan in the eyes of his son or to secure his family's financial status. When his gang arrived to Contention he was clearly going to leave with them. I think his decision to do otherwise is uncharacteristic and not logical.
MovieMad16
05-27-18, 08:05 AM
Just to assure that this goes through
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSvTyFSpvu8PczdPodeMQf-UuHnznw4dLXdfuX_7ZKsR1XOqcOx
Connor Macgregor Reviews...Frances Ha
INTRO: I went in with low expectations for this film, not really thinking much about it or looking into the background in many ways. But man was I surprised. Really, really surprised.
SUMMARY: Frances lives in New York, but she doesn't really have an apartment. Frances is an apprentice for a dance company, but she's not really a dancer. Frances has a best friend named Sophie, but they aren't really speaking anymore. Frances throws herself headlong into her dreams, even as their possible reality dwindles. Frances wants so much more than she has but lives her life with unaccountable joy and lightness.
GRETA GERWIG: By far the main draw of this film is Greta Gerwig who plays Frances. She's a real, ditzy, quirky filled character with lots of personality and a happy go lucky attitude to life. While she might not be everyone's cup of tea, I found the character lovely to watch. She's not perfect, her life is very disorganised, and she really struggles to establish a social circle outside her best friend Sophie. Yet the character is positive, a go-getter, someone who never gives in to the sadness and melancholy of life. Greta Gerwig's performance is great, and very memorable.
PERSONALITY: Something also very important to talk about is the film's personality as a whole. The choice to go Black & White was brave, but also fitting. I couldn't imagine seeing this film in colour and it having the same effect on me when watching it again. The choice of music is fun and funky. I've never heard of David Bowie's Modern Love, so that was a fun listen to have in this film. I love the way the film is shot too, harking back memories of Woody Allen's Manhatten in a lot of ways. Strangely, I also really enjoyed the way the film was paced. It was natural, not forced, yet you had the idea that a lot of time had passed in such a small running time. Finally, there's the themes too. The fracturing of a friendship; New experiences; Living in New York. A lot of these are relatable and can be felt by many who've watched the film before.
OVERALL: Frances Ha is just a wild, fun, yet poignant film in many ways. It deals with friendship and surviving in an expensive and brutal city like New York, with collective and quirky performances from all side. Definitely an underrated gem.
RATING: 100% - A+
Miss Vicky
05-27-18, 02:42 PM
But this isn't logical. If they seriously fear that Wade's men would destroy the town as revenge then how can they expect the escort to succeed? And whether it succeeds or not, why wouldn't the outlaws still take their revenge on the town? Wouldn't the only way to escape that fate be letting Wade free?
Maybe the outlaws would, maybe they wouldn't, but they would at least be distracted for awhile by chasing after Wade's captors. Kill him on the spot and death and destruction would immediately follow. The men also seemed to have a decent amount of faith in their switcheroo scheme.
Even after killing the first escort he's still kept practically free (loose chains in front). As a result in Apache lands he very easily gets a weapon (and could have escaped at that point but, again for no reason, chose not to).
But he did escape in Apache territory. Once he got the gun, his first priority was in taking out the Apache that were shooting at him. Then he made his escape, but only after failing to procure the keys to the cuffs.
I said he possessed all the traits gaining notoriety would require - prone to violence and means to deliver it. Of course his reputation in the story comes largely from Wade but my meaning was that one doesn't need to be a Renaissance man to gain notoriety, violence and cruelty will do just fine.
Being prone to violence would not be not enough to gain notoriety as an outlaw - you have to successfully do that multiple times and either not get caught or to not stay caught for long - hence the need for intelligence and skill.
Being a renaissance man might not be required of any outlaw, but it certainly would be the traits that earned Wade the position of gang leader.
I mostly want consistency. Whether he's a highly intelligent and calculating leader who has successfully robbed 22 coaches, kept his position as a gang leader and manipulates everyone around him with impeccable insight to other peoples' minds or then you could make him a more flawed man but it's pretty hard to be both. I find it unconvincing that all his supposed flaws miraculously manifest when, and only when, near Bale.
Except we see almost nothing of him when he's not near Bale so we know very little about him beyond that relationship. We do know, however, that he'd been captured by law officials at least twice before, so this wasn't his first time slipping up. He's also still human and all humans are flawed.
Kind of yes, but we don't even know what he was doing time for. Maybe he wasn't considered that dangerous back then.
Yes, his prison time is a big question mark, but it seems to me that his two previous successful escapes would be enough to give him the confidence to believe he could do it a third time.
Unless I'm mistaken he didn't kill any of his own men before the end (that one guy in the beginning was shot by a Pinkerton hiding in the wagon). I don't recall any obvious shows of disrespect either.
I think you need to watch that scene (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3CevILyvApw) again. The Pinkerton did not kill that man, Wade did.
As to disrespect, besides showing a willingness to kill anyone who screws up, he calls them all animals. Also, once the gang discovers they've been duped and it isn't Wade in the coach, it's only Charlie who is willing to go back the other way to save him. The others argue that it's too far to go and that Wade got himself caught and Charlie has to convince them to go with him. Charlie is the only member of that gang who shows any loyalty to anybody else in it.
In a sense, yes but without him actually getting on board William wouldn't have had anything to show for his father's accomplishments. Yes, he would have known what his father did but in the eyes of the world he would still have been a son of a failed man. It's a matter of perspective whether he needed to get on the train or not to fulfill his observed duty to Dan.
Now you're changing your argument. You said that he only did it to make Bale look good in the eyes of his son, but the son's mind had already been changed. If that's the case then it was only William who needed to know of Dan's courage and he saw it with his own eyes. No proof to show required and the eyes of the world be damned. But if he doesn't get on the train, there's no payout for Dan's family. They'll lose their home and Dan's death will be in vain.
Also, this really hasn't much to do with my complaint which is more about Wade even considering it's worth his freedom and lives of his men to either redeem Dan in the eyes of his son or to secure his family's financial status. When his gang arrived to Contention he was clearly going to leave with them. I think his decision to do otherwise is uncharacteristic and not logical.
I disagree. At that point, yes he intended to go with them, but he changed his mind multiple times between their arrival in Contention and him actually getting on the train. He was clearly conflicted between a desire to do something good and to be free again. Also once he'd decided to kill Charlie, he had to kill the rest of the gang or they would've turned on him.
rauldc14
05-27-18, 03:14 PM
Glad you loved Frances Ha, MovieMad16 !!!
I don't want to dance circles around each other's opinions here. We clearly see Wade differently and I doubt either of us is going to change our respective opinions. Just few more notes and I'm done.
I think you need to watch that scene (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3CevILyvApw) again. The Pinkerton did not kill that man, Wade did.
You're right. I somehow interpreted that wrong. To me it makes his sudden attachment to Dan even weirder.
As to disrespect, besides showing a willingness to kill anyone who screws up, he calls them all animals.
Did he say that to anyone other than Dan? I didn't see that as a show of disrespect per se but stating a fact - Wade knows his men are different from him but based on everything the film shows he does respect his veteran, core crew for at least their abilities to realize his plans. The man he shot failed (literally) to gain his trust and was killed.
Also, once the gang discovers they've been duped and it isn't Wade in the coach, it's only Charlie who is willing to go back the other way to save him. The others argue that it's too far to go and that Wade got himself caught and Charlie has to convince them to go with him. Charlie is the only member of that gang who shows any loyalty to anybody else in it.
Charlie is definitely the most loyal of the outlaws but there must have been some sort of loyalty to keep them together for such a long campaign of robberies. This also has nothing to do with Wade who clearly thinks high enough of his men to have unwavering faith that they'll come to his rescue.
Now you're changing your argument. You said that he only did it to make Bale look good in the eyes of his son, but the son's mind had already been changed. If that's the case then it was only William who needed to know of Dan's courage and he saw it with his own eyes. No proof to show required and the eyes of the world be damned. But if he doesn't get on the train, there's no payout for Dan's family. They'll lose their home and Dan's death will be in vain.
I don't think it's changing the argument, honestly. Unless Wade gets to that train Dan has objectively failed.
I disagree. At that point, yes he intended to go with them, but he changed his mind multiple times between their arrival in Contention and him actually getting on the train. He was clearly conflicted between a desire to do something good and to be free again. Also once he'd decided to kill Charlie, he had to kill the rest of the gang or they would've turned on him.
And my point is that I never got a satisfactory explanation why, suddenly at this very point, his will to do good overwhelms everything else. In character driven film I want to understand the motives but I just don't see the reason for Wade's actions. Maybe it's my inability to understand people in general or a flaw in the script but regardless it's kind of ruining the film for me.
Miss Vicky
05-27-18, 10:11 PM
http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MovieLog/waituntildark.gif
Wait Until Dark (Terence Young, 1967)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062467/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1)
Date Watched: 5/26/18
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 16th MoFo Hall of Fame, nominated by HashtagBrownies
Rewatch: No
This was a solid film, but I have very little to say about it. The performances were strong, the story was interesting, and there was a fair amount of suspense to it. I never found myself bored, but I also never felt any emotional connection to its characters and nothing about the film stood out as anything particularly special or surprising. An entertaining watch, but not a film watching experience that is likely to stay with me or make me want to revisit it.
3.5+
rauldc14
05-28-18, 12:36 AM
Frances Ha
https://static01.nyt.com/images/2013/05/16/arts/video-frances-anatomy/video-frances-anatomy-videoLarge.jpg
I nominated this because I thought it was a great piece of writing. The characters are written to make them interesting to me. Frances is an excellent character and it was a great job of natural acting by Greta Gerwig. I also thought Sophie was splendid as her best friend and it was a performance worthy of praise from Mickey Sumner.
Getting back to the writing, I love how simple the story is. I also like how it doesn't hold anything back. It isn't any type of intricate plot at all, we just see Frances going through an interesting period of time in her life. There is so much going on but it is kept simple. I love seeing Frances' relationship struggles and then seeing it all tie back together in the end. I have to give a lot of props to not only Gerwig, but Baumbach too. They both have a great future ahead of them and I love forward to seeing how their futures play out.
Was the black and white cinematography a good choice? I don't think it really hurt anything, but I think it would have been a good film regardless. Overall, a favorite of mine from this decade of film.
4.5
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qZGUMzdrwfA/UtpeqJHXCwI/AAAAAAAAMw0/3AMA0qNpRVA/s1600/poison+5.png
Poison from the Fairies is a mexican horror film from the 1980's. It tells the story of two girls, Flava and Veronica. The film has a great opening and great closing but the middle is rough. The problem with this is the film is in essence a two person story and making a horror film with two characters...children at that is very difficult.
I enjoyed the setting and when the film does special effects they work pretty well. Though to be frank I'm a little confused why this film received a Hall of Fame nomination. While it wasn't bad I doubt the story or film will leave much of an impact on me a week after seeing it.
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (2006)
This is my second watch of this (the first one was around the time it came out) and I had already read the book before watching the film. My opinion pretty much holds up. It's rare of me to like a movie adaptation of any book I like and this is one of the most honourable exceptions.
What I liked the most was how they made you imagine feel the smells. In the book it's quite easier to do than on film but I think they succeeded here!
The atmosphere in general is exactly what I think it should be: dark and gritty but always with some kind of hidden sensuality, and that's praise to a very solid cinematography.
The acting is quite good, I kinda like the main character and of course Dustin Hoffman, which never hits a wrong note! I also loved the sountrack!!
And of course, there's that last scene which is always a great one to revisit!
3.5
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (2006)
This is my second watch of this (the first one was around the time it came out) and I had already read the book before watching the film. My opinion pretty much holds up. It's rare of me to like a movie adaptation of any book I like and this is one of the most honourable exceptions.
What I liked the most was how they made you imagine feel the smells. In the book it's quite easier to do than on film but I think they succeeded here!
The atmosphere in general is exactly what I think it should be: dark and gritty but always with some kind of hidden sensuality, and that's praise to a very solid cinematography.
The acting is quite good, I kinda like the main character and of course Dustin Hoffman, which never hits a wrong note! I also loved the sountrack!!
And of course, there's that last scene which is always a great one to revisit!
3.5
I'm reading the book right now. Saw this when it was new and I remember liking it so decided to read the book before rewatch. I'm not entirely sure how I feel about the book, really, but I've only read about a quarter now (it feels lighter and far more sarcastic than my memory of the film).
Frances Ha (2012) n
Based on reviews here I was expecting this to be good even though the subject isn't really my cup of tea.
https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/b376019d80442c340a41c94b9626d89ab6090201/r=x329&c=580x326/local/-/media/USATODAY/popcandy/2013/03/08/greta-16_9.jpg
Oh boy, this one is really difficult to rate. On one hand I can acknowledge the overall skill and quality in every aspect of it but, due to reasons I'll get into later, I wasn't as entertained as I had hoped. I'm really happy that I saw it though.
At it's core Frances Ha is very simple and familiar story about young adults trying to find their place in the world. Most, if not all, of its characters are balancing somewhere between childhood fantasies and realities of adulthood. What separates it from other similar films is its clever and different script: it's jumpy and fragmented, without much to hold on - just like its characters it's trying to find its own place and meaning. I really liked the script and its controlled chaos.
Technically the film is also very solid. I think black-and-white cinematography was beautiful and fitted the film really well giving it kind of a timeless feel. Acting was really good too.
So why didn't I enjoy it? I found practically every character in the movie extremely annoying and couldn't care less what happens to them. Don't get me wrong, I think the characters were brilliantly written and they felt real - it's just me and my dislike of people like them (people in general, I suppose). Fortunately the film's fragmented style meant short scenes because I'm quite sure I would have gotten a headache from prolonged dinner discussions.
Technically brilliant but characters that really piss me off prevent any sort of attachment to the story. If I wouldn't rate films purely on entertainment value I could see myself giving this full points but as I do...
3
cricket
05-29-18, 08:29 AM
3:10 to Yuma
http://theactionelite.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/showtime_svod-131808-Full-Image_GalleryBackground-en-US-1483994509464._RI_SX940_-1864x1048.jpg
I was a little skeptical because Unforgiven is the only western I love post 1970's. I guess you could count Django Unchained and The Hateful Eight as well, but I kind of look at Tarantino movies as their own genre. After thinking about it though, I haven't seen many modern westerns and there's some big ones I still need to see.
I hardly remember the original except I know I thought it was average to mediocre. I think those are the movies that should be remade, movies that have a good premise but fail to meet their potential. Usually, remakes have no chance of equaling the original. I see those as pointless and blatant cash grabs. For instance, the recent Magnificent Seven. Remakes should be able to improve upon the original. On the other hand, the original 3:10 to Yuma is considered a bit of a classic, so in this particular case it's just a personal outlook.
I didn't think this was a great movie in any way but I thoroughly enjoyed it. My wife was pointing out some things that she didn't think made sense, and she was probably right. Yet, I look at this movie as purely an entertainment piece, and those aren't the kinds of movies I pick apart. It was easy to enjoy since I already like Crowe, Bale, and Foster. My wife wasn't familiar with Foster, even though she's seen movies with him, but she couldn't stand him in a good way. Bale was good in the less juicy role. The other two are the guys that are fun to watch, to be expected being the bad guys. The rest of the cast was solid. I thought a strong female role was missing, not uncommon for westerns, but a strong female presence will enhance any movie. Good action and banter, my wife and I both had fun with it.
3.5-
Citizen Rules
05-29-18, 01:39 PM
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSvTyFSpvu8PczdPodeMQf-UuHnznw4dLXdfuX_7ZKsR1XOqcOxFrances Ha
Greta Gerwig made this movie! I really liked her and her character Frances. Frances is fun because she seems so real. She's a bit goofy, never focused and hasn't gotten anywhere in her life, but she enjoys life and is a kind soul...I can relate to Frances!
The movie idea was fresh and felt original. In some ways it reminded me of something Woody Allen would have done back in his heyday. I like Woody Allen films BTW. And Great Gerwig reminded me of a young Daryl Hannah. She'd be great in a remake of Splash.
The black and white cinematography made the film for me, along with Greata of course:). If this was done in color I might have felt different about it.
rauldc14
05-29-18, 01:43 PM
Everything should be updated on the first page. Please let me know if I've missed anything.
cricket
05-29-18, 02:02 PM
I don't think she's hot enough to do Splash, and I don't want a remake anyway. There's no current pair that can touch prime Hanks and Hannah.
Citizen Rules
05-29-18, 02:25 PM
I don't think she's hot enough to do Splash, and I don't want a remake anyway. There's no current pair that can touch prime Hanks and Hannah.I bet she could be made up to look as hot as Daryl Hannah...but yeah I don't like remakes generally. Just saying she gives off a Daryl Hannah vibe.
rauldc14
05-29-18, 10:00 PM
Mr. Freedom
https://urielorlow.net/wp-content/uploads/mr-freedom.jpg
There were some good laughs and some good scenes, but overall it was basically a jumbled mess for me. The comedy reminded me a bit of how I relate to Dr. Strangelove in that the humor doesn't always work for me because at times it seems more forced. The storyline is somewhat not there either, and I understand this isn't the only film like that but it would have been interesting to see Mr. Freedom in a more plot driven film. Really did like the actor that played him, I just think that Klein is at fault for me not really liking this film. By the way, found it interesting how they kept spelling freedom wrong, albeit probably on purpose but I didn't really understand the context for that either.
2.5
rauldc14
05-29-18, 11:30 PM
35 reviews down, only 84 to go!
Citizen Rules
05-29-18, 11:39 PM
Those were some skinny blonde cheerleaders in Mr Freedom. Gawds! they were so stupid... and constantly jumping up and down as they followed Mr Freedom around the grocery story, that that scene cracked me up:p Even that picture of them is funny:D And I think I finally figured out what they symbolized too.
rauldc14
05-29-18, 11:49 PM
I liked that scene too, although it's admittedly hard not to.
Those were some skinny blonde cheerleaders in Mr Freedom. Gawds! they were so stupid... and constantly jumping up and down as they followed Mr Freedom around the grocery story, that that scene cracked me up:p Even that picture of them is funny:D And I think I finally figured out what they symbolized too.
That was the US Embassy, it covers a similar theme in Frances Ha with the dinner party and the hot blonde wives with Frances not fitting the mold of the prototypical housewife.
rauldc14
05-29-18, 11:56 PM
I think there is a lot of hidden stuff in Mr. Freedom, so although I didn't enjoy it necessarily I could see myself seeing it again someday.
Miss Vicky
05-30-18, 04:39 AM
http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MovieLog/naked.gif
Naked (Mike Leigh, 1993)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107653/?ref_=nv_sr_8)
Date Watched: 5/29/18
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 16th MoFo Hall of Fame, nominated by neiba
Rewatch: No
Naked is a well constructed film. The performances are very strong (particularly that of David Thewlis) and the dark and grimy look of the cinematography lends itself well to the film's sort of nihilistic tone. I can definitely see why some people would really enjoy it.
However, I'm not one of those people and I struggled to get through what turned out to be a little over two hours of awful people being awful to each other - with only a sprinkling of witty lines and the filmmakers' obvious skill to keep me from absolutely hating it.
3
https://fgmxi4acxur9qbg31y9s3a15-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2017/11/wait-until-dark-2-1024x576.jpg
Wait Until Dark was the best Hitchcock film, Hitchcock never made. Based on a play this one room horror film tells the story of multiple characters searching for a doll filled with heroin.
Hepburn plays a newly blind woman who's husband is going off to take photographs for the weekend. She's then confronted by a pair of con-men who are trying to get her to tell her where the doll is. They believe it's in a safe and they spend quite a bit of time trying to convince Hepburn to open the safe.
As a time killer you couldn't find a better one, basically you get this classic crime caper for the first half and than a horror film for the second one. Having seen all the nominees from this year I would have given Hepburn the Oscar, it's a magnificent performance. I particularly enjoyed the scene when she discovers Mike is a conman.
Citizen Rules
05-31-18, 02:00 PM
44829
Call Me By Your Name
A movie that takes place in a beautiful serene setting, the countryside of northern Italy...where the living is easy, and one can relax, soaking up the sun and enjoying the idyllic nature of the setting. It seems almost dream like, and that's what I think people respond to. But, if you think about the story premise, it's very similar to the real events that brought Kevin Spacey's career to a tumbling halt. At the heart of the story is a fantasy that pedophilia is OK. We have a 17 year old boy who's seduced by a much older man who's very worldly and in control, he's a player and pushes the right buttons to get the boy to fall for him. When he's done with the boy he goes back to his life and gets engaged to be married. For him it was a sexual conquest, but for the boy it was emotionally heart breaking.
I can respect a film like Moonlight, as it seemed like a personal story of a gay youth growing up to deal with the harsh world he was born to. But with Call Me By Your Name, it propagandas us to think older men having relations with minors is OK. It does this mostly at the end of the movie when the boy's father not only approves of the relationship with an adult but admits to wishing he had such a relationship when he was young. In this way the film is like Woody Allen's Manhattan, where a much older Woody has a sexual relationship with a underage teen girl...and no one in the film questions the morality of having sex with a juvenile, which would be illegal. Both films present the film makers fantasy. I wonder if Kevin Spacey finds it odd that Call Me By Your Name earned an Academy Award nomination for best picture, whilst he gets fired from his acting jobs?
For reference here's an excerpt from my review of Manhattan:
https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=31751&stc=1&d=1498146483
Manhattan (1979)
Woody Allen's masturbatory ode to himself...a film that has become seminal in the annals of celebrated and obscure film reviewers around the world...Yes Virginia, there's life outside of Manhattan, but one wonders if Woody is aware of anything outside of his own existence. Nay make that outside of his own fantasies.
For all the cinematic artistry, Manhattan plays out like one of Woody's personal fantasies, that's his auteur's stamp. Woody Allen is Isaac a successful but neurotic New York intellectual who's magnetic to women and despite looking like a peeping tom, manages to marry a young and beautiful Meryl Streep, who we find out turns lesbian and divorces Isaac. The 43 year old then has a fling with a 17 year old played by Mariel Hemingway also 17 in real life at the time of filming.
The much older man involved with a teenage girl could have had so many possibilities for exploration with this taboo theme. Woody, who wrote this film could have shown the relationship as having some type of consequences or made some type of statement.
But instead the movie presents the friends of Isaac (Woody Allen) as having no real objections to a relationship that would be considered pedophile-ism in the real world and could result in statuary rape charges. But no, not here in Woody's make believe world. Woody the person, wants to bring his fantasy to life and so has the characters readily accepting his strange love.
And that's one of the weak points of Manhattan...it fails to explore this relationship and it's consequences. In fact none of the relationships seem to say much about anything, they just simply happen so that Woody can hang his intellectual name dropping script onto the back of the actors.
MovieMad16
05-31-18, 02:14 PM
Interesting perspective Citizen Rules. Thanks for your review.
HashtagBrownies
05-31-18, 04:05 PM
it propagandas us to think older men having relations with minors is OK. ...and no one in the film questions the morality of having sex with a juvenile, which would be illegal.
In most countries the age of consent is actually 17 (Elio's age). So while you can say the age gap is creepy and have a discussion about it, you can't say it promotes illegal and immoral lifestyles.
This film and the Woody Allen situation are totally different. What Allen did in real life was super immoral and illegal. What Arnie Hammer does in this film is legal.
This thread is so full of BS but we've seen it all before.
Miss Vicky
05-31-18, 04:52 PM
I didn't find the relationship between Oliver and Elio to be predatory at all, nor would I say that Oliver "seduced" Elio. The attraction was clearly mutual and Elio was the first to make any overtly sexual move. I think the context of the film needs to be considered, too. It's one of many films centering around a summer fling that happened overseas, which are typically short lived. It also takes place in the 1980s and being in an openly homosexual relationship then carried more risks than it does today.
Also, eighteen being a legal age of consent is not universal among all countries. It's not even universal among U.S. states (in some states, it's as young as 16), so the claim that the relationship is illegal may be completely unfounded.
CosmicRunaway
05-31-18, 05:08 PM
I'm not sure what it was like in the 80s when the film is set, but the legal age for consent in Italy is only 14 or 15.
Is the deadline in August for watching? If so, can I join? I'd be nominating The Killing Fields again.
cricket
05-31-18, 07:03 PM
I don't care anything about legal age; I was uncomfortable with the relationship and I believe it is wrong. I'm in the area of my 30's and I think it would be creepy for me to go with a 21yo girl (unless I was drunk:D). Still, I think it's important to remember that others have different beliefs. It certainly wouldn't stop me from enjoying the movie, especially when many of my favorite characters are murderers, rapists, or child diddlers. I think it was supposed to be borderline, a forbidden romance so to speak, forbidden because not everyone would be ok with it. I thought the movie was a success.
Miss Vicky
05-31-18, 07:14 PM
I don't care anything about legal age; I was uncomfortable with the relationship and I believe it is wrong. I'm in the area of my 30's and I think it would be creepy for me to go with a 21yo girl (unless I was drunk:D).
I wasn't personally bothered by the age difference, but I do understand that some people would be, and I'm okay with that. However, I object to it being called pedophilia as if the difference of a few months (when Elio would turn 18) would actually be somehow substantial and significant. I also object to the assumption that the relationship would have been illegal.
Citizen Rules
05-31-18, 08:10 PM
I bet the film makers set the film in Italy, so that they could show a 17 year old legally having relations with an adult. The way the two actors look in the movie, the 17 year old is skinny and young looking and looks more like 15 kid to me, while the older guy looks like a man who's close to 30. I made the same observation in Manhattan too. Both films seem to want to show a fantasy of an adult with a juvenile. And both movies have the other characters acting as if an adult with a teen is normal.
Miss Vicky
05-31-18, 08:18 PM
I bet the film makers set the film in Italy, so that they could show a 17 year old legally having relations with an adult.
They could have set it in the state of Washington (https://www.thesurvivoralliance.com/forallies/legal-age-consent-50-states/) and achieved the same thing.
That's where you live, right?
cricket
05-31-18, 08:29 PM
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer
https://assets.mubi.com/images/film/22860/image-w856.jpg?1481152454
I didn't really know anything about this going in, but I had the perception that it was a historical biopic about a serial killer. That sounded good to me, but it turned out differently. I don't know if any part of this story is true, but if it is, it must have been altered dramatically. I liked how the movie started, and I actually thought the beginning was quite dark and disturbing. It quickly developed into what I thought was fantasy, and unfortunately that's something I struggle with. I just thought much of this was ridiculous and I couldn't buy into it. Part of that was because of the story and part of it was because of the performances. I thought the lead severely lacked menace and charisma. What great bad guy lacks those qualities? Another thing before I forget; did they all speak English in France back then? I'm not going to complain about that because it's not something I've ever noticed or complained about before. Quills came to mind as an example, and I also thought of Quills because I think Joaquin Phoenix would have been great in the lead role here. Anyway, I do think some authenticity is lost with the movie being in English. Or, maybe I was just searching for something. Back to the acting; while I thought the lead was uninspiring, I absolutely hated hated hated Dustin Hoffman in this. He is one of my all time favorite actors, and he probably had as good a 20 year stretch as any actor ever. Fast forward to the present, and I don't think he's done anything noteworthy in many years. I feel like modern film has passed him by, or he's taking the wrong roles, or something, because I'm just not seeing him the same way. I thought he looked ridiculous, like some kind of weird hobbit, but really all I saw was Dusty Dustin in some awful makeup. Alan Rickman wasn't brilliant but he at least suited the role. The ending to the movie dragged out and I thought it was goofy. Despite all that I hated about the movie, I didn't hate the movie as a whole. There were some very good moments and I liked the locations and filming. It's well made. Sorry, but overall it wasn't for me. Gentleman's rating-
2.5
cricket
05-31-18, 08:33 PM
They could have set it in the state of Washington (https://www.thesurvivoralliance.com/forallies/legal-age-consent-50-states/) and achieved the same thing.
That's where you live, right?
I always thought it was 18 all over America. Don't strippers have to be at least 18? What about Nevada Escorts? It seems strange to me.
Miss Vicky
05-31-18, 08:39 PM
I always thought it was 18 all over America. Don't strippers have to be at least 18? What about Nevada Escorts? It seems strange to me.
Apparently not. It varies from state to state and in some cases the law is different depending on whether the younger person is male or female and depending on the age of the older party. According to LegalMatch.com, "Federal law makes it criminal to engage in a sexual act with another person who is between the age of 12 and 16 if they are at least four years younger than you."
I don't know about the particulars regarding strippers and escorts.
edarsenal
05-31-18, 08:56 PM
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (2006)
This is my second watch of this (the first one was around the time it came out) and I had already read the book before watching the film. My opinion pretty much holds up. It's rare of me to like a movie adaptation of any book I like and this is one of the most honourable exceptions.
What I liked the most was how they made you imagine feel the smells. In the book it's quite easier to do than on film but I think they succeeded here!
The atmosphere in general is exactly what I think it should be: dark and gritty but always with some kind of hidden sensuality, and that's praise to a very solid cinematography.
The acting is quite good, I kinda like the main character and of course Dustin Hoffman, which never hits a wrong note! I also loved the sountrack!!
And of course, there's that last scene which is always a great one to revisit!
3.5
Very happy to hear that this holds up to the novel and yes, it is amazing how they pull off creating scents visually. It's one of the things I so truly love about this film.
And I had a strong feeling you'd enjoy the opening of Perfume, cricket and didn't expect it to hold out for the rest of the film.
Citizen Rules
05-31-18, 09:49 PM
They could have set it in the state of Washington (https://www.thesurvivoralliance.com/forallies/legal-age-consent-50-states/) and achieved the same thing.
That's where you live, right? Yup Washington, where 16 is legal apparently and so is marijuana!
I remember we had a female teacher here that got in trouble for having under age sex with a student. I think her name is something like Mary Kay Layterno (I'm sure the last name is spelled wrong). I think the student was 14 at the time? Though he looked at lot older.
cricket
05-31-18, 10:06 PM
Yup Washington, where 16 is legal apparently and so is marijuana!
I remember we had a female teacher here that got in trouble for having under age sex with a student. I think her name is something like Mary Kay Layterno (I'm sure the last name is spelled wrong). I think the student was 14 at the time? Though he looked at lot older.
When it's a boy and an older female, it's ok.
Citizen Rules
05-31-18, 10:21 PM
When it's a boy and an older female, it's ok.hmm:cool:....:)
Mary Kay Letourneau-Fualaau is an American former schoolteacher who pleaded guilty to two counts of felony second-degree rape of a child, her 12-year-old student, Vili Fualaau. While awaiting sentencing, she gave birth to Fualaau's child. She later married him and they're still married.
Miss Vicky
05-31-18, 10:24 PM
http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MovieLog/mrfreedom.gif
Mr Freedom (William Klein, 1968)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0064674/)
Date Watched: 5/31/18
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 16th MoFo Hall of Fame, nominated by Siddon
Rewatch: No
Mr. Freedom is certainly a film with something to say about the violence, racism, hypocrisy, and self-aggrandizing of the stereotypical American and the Red, White, and Blue blinders he wears when it comes to the rest of the world - and I can respect that. I can also respect the work that went into the film's creation.
However, the cartoonish delivery of its commentary on the subject was too extreme for me to enjoy it and its novelty wore off long before the end credits rolled.
2.5
Thursday Next
06-01-18, 04:01 AM
It’s set in Italy because that is where the book is set. Elio is over the age of consent and has consented to the relationship, so it’s not exactly comparable to Spacey’s unwanted advances on underage boys and certainly not to pedophilia.
That said, I can completely understand finding the relationship uncomfortable. Armie Hammer looks way too old to be Oliver while Chalamet looks quite young and therefore the age gap between them looks more extreme than it is supposed to be. I didn’t particularly believe in the love story and found it uncomfortable to watch, but whether that was due to the age gap or the actors’ chemistry I’m not sure. Mostly I didn’t really warm to Armie Hammer.
I think there is an issue of perspective – the fantasy of an idyllic summer romance is supposed to be from Elio’s point of view. I even recall an interview or something where Ivory said something about this. Its about his first fling with this fantasy older man – there’s a significant difference between that and the perspective of an older man on seducing a teenager. I think that idea of perspective is a crucial difference between this and, say, Manhattan. However I don’t think it was entirely successfully pulled off – certainly it’s much less subjective than the book, we’re not as clearly immersed n Elio’s point of view, there’s a certain distance.
I don’t think the film is trying to sell their relationship to us as ideal, though. Doesn’t the last scene make that clear?
(Also, was anyone else reminded of Claire's Knee at any point or was that just me?)
Anyway, I’m not even in this HoF so will stop now. I do have mixed feelings on this movie but I absolutely love the song they used in the dancing scene. Such a great choice of something period-appropriate but not too obvious. Other period details like Elio’s rucksack were spot on too.
When it's a boy and an older female, it's ok.
It was a film on my shortlist
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61dVEtdthoL._SL500_AC_SS350_.jpg
rauldc14
06-01-18, 11:18 AM
Oh, thank God I didn't have to watch Harold and Maude again. Hated that film.
Miss Vicky
06-01-18, 11:32 AM
I thought Harold and Maude was great.
rauldc14
06-01-18, 11:36 AM
I thought Harold and Maude was great.
Oy. You are my polar opposite.
Citizen Rules
06-01-18, 12:54 PM
...I absolutely love the song they used in the dancing scene. Such a great choice of something period-appropriate but not too obvious. Other period details like Elio’s rucksack were spot on too. Good post Thursday. That song, was it the Psychedelic Furs, Love My Way? If so yup, great song! I was thinking of using a line from it for a signature.
Oh, thank God I didn't have to watch Harold and Maude again. Hated that film.Yeah I hated Harold and Maude, one of the most annoying movies I've seen.
Thursday Next
06-02-18, 04:49 AM
Good post Thursday. That song, was it the Psychedelic Furs, Love My Way? If so yup, great song! I was thinking of using a line from it for a signature.
Yes! Great song.
edarsenal
06-02-18, 10:14 PM
Harold and Maude is on my top favorite list
Citizen Rules
06-02-18, 10:49 PM
Harold and Maude is on my top favorite list Maude was OK, but Harold sucked:cool: Though I did approve of the ending:p
I doubt there's every been a movie made that all of us HOFers would love, well maybe The Wizard of Oz;)
Miss Vicky
06-02-18, 11:57 PM
I doubt there's every been a movie made that all of us HOFers would love, well maybe The Wizard of Oz;)
This is sarcasm, right?
I seriously hate that movie. (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1183664#post1183664)
Naked (Mike Leigh, 1993)
I rarely review my own films on these HoFs, but I'll open an exception to this one.
First time I watched it, was a few weeks after my last year's break up (that eventually lead to a pretty horrible year). I think it was the first film I watched in fact, and if there's something about myself that I learned the past year is that I can't enjoy film if I'm not psychologically well, which mostly explains why I have been away from MoFo the past months.
So, the fact that I loved this so much even if I was going through chaotic times always confused me. Either it just spoke to a very particular state of mind I was in that time, or it was really a great film that managed to get to me despite of my state. To confirm which one was true, I rewatched it the week before thIs HoF started and I'm pleased to know it was the latter (although I'm positive that there's some truth in the former). In fact, I even enjoyed it more than in my first watch. I finished it and the first thing I wanted to do was to rewatch it again, which NEVER happened before.
I have been recommending this film to all my close friends who liked cinema since last March and they all said 2 things: "Amazing film." and "The guy reminds me of you". Although I'm not sure if I should be glad to be related to a conspiracy freak with a highly questionable sexual behaviour, I am quite attracted by his persona, the quick and straight answers, his sarcasm and freedom of speech and in a way I can see some similarities, especially with who I've become the past few months.
Of course this would never be possible without a few things: an impeccable script and direction by Mike Leigh (who is becoming one of my favourite directors lately), a brilliant use of soundtrack and a stunning performance by Thewlis, one of the greatest and perhaps most underrated actors in activity.
This second watch also confirmed what I already suspected, Naked is now part of the very restrict club of my 5 rated films. And I'm glad I found it.
Citizen Rules
06-03-18, 01:17 PM
This is sarcasm, right?
I seriously hate that movie. (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1183664#post1183664) Ha:) yup joking. I remember Raul thought everyone would love Wizard of Oz and of course it didn't work out that way. My mom doesn't like that movie either, btw.
cricket
06-03-18, 01:23 PM
I can see some similarities, especially with who I've become the past few months.
You became an ahole?
You became an ahole?
ahahah! he's not a complete ahole xD
I was more refering to the fact that I became more sarcastic while being more outspoken about my thoughts. And I live in a very similar speed as he does...
rauldc14
06-03-18, 08:24 PM
Ha:) yup joking. I remember Raul thought everyone would love Wizard of Oz and of course it didn't work out that way. My mom doesn't like that movie either, btw.
I was seriously surprised it didn't do well even with Miss Vicky hating it.
Citizen Rules
06-03-18, 09:09 PM
I was seriously surprised it didn't do well even with Miss Vicky hating it. Musicals are a tough sell, in Hofs. One of these days I'll nominate one and find out just how bad it does:eek:
rauldc14
06-04-18, 07:38 AM
I've grown to like some Musicals strangely. I've always loved Wizard of Oz though.
Miss Vicky
06-04-18, 11:28 AM
I watched Three Monkeys yesterday. Will try to get a write-up posted tonight. That just leaves Perfume and a rewatch of Call Me By Your Name.
Started Waterloo Bridge couple of days ago but the bad audio quality on Youtube version and English not being my native language made it really hard to follow the dialogue. Hard to concentrate on the film when mostly focusing on what people say (and still missing some). Will try to continue soon(ish).
Citizen Rules
06-04-18, 02:02 PM
Started Waterloo Bridge couple of days ago but the bad audio quality on Youtube version and English not being my native language made it really hard to follow the dialogue. Hard to concentrate on the film when mostly focusing on what people say (and still missing some). Will try to continue soon(ish). I know what you mean about poor audio making the film hard to watch. Can you find Waterloo Bridge online with subs? You can add subs if you have the movie downloaded.
Citizen Rules
06-04-18, 02:19 PM
http://jarviscity.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/poison-for-the-fairies-girls.jpg
Poison for the Fairies (1984) ***SPOILERS***
Poison for the Fairies a psychological suspense film that worked for me. I liked it. It was simple and effective story telling, which made it seem a personal story. I liked that the story was told from the girl's viewpoint and that adults are almost never shown, unless it's their hands or legs. The only time we see an adult's face is in a frightening (to the girls) extreme close up of an adult, when one of the adults surprises them. Even the cinematography (the camera height and angle) is at their level, so that we get a personal tale from their POV, which then matches the style of the story line.
I thought both actresses did a good job and mostly they kept it low keyed which made the film seem realer and more plausible. I liked the story elements how the blonde girl Veronica, comes from a home where her parents both died when she was young, she's raised by the house keeper who's superstitious and the girl latches unto that make believe world of witches. Meanwhile the rich girl with dark hair, Flavia doesn't pray as her mom tells her she's not scared like other little girls so doesn't need to pray. Then as the story proceeds it builds on those differences, until the pay off at the end.
I thought the end worked out well, even though I knew Flavia would end up burning Veronica in a fire at the 16 minute mark in the movie. Which is fine, as getting what I expected is often a plus for me.
I loved the outdoor scenery and sets. The houses were really dressed nicely, with lots of detail. And the old ruins of the church and the lake setting, wow...I want to visit there!
@pahaK (http://www.movieforums.com/community/member.php?u=100614) Thanks for nominating this.
Miss Vicky
06-04-18, 05:06 PM
http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MovieLog/threemonkeys.gif
Three Monkeys Üç Maymun (Nuri Bilge Ceylan, 2008)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1233381/?ref_=nv_sr_1)
Date Watched: 6/3/18
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 16th MoFo Hall of Fame, nominated by Okay
Rewatch: No
Three Monkeys offers up a fascinating premise with a series of situations that are not all crystal clear in terms of their ethics and morality. It's a brooding, contemplative movie that follows the excrutiating disintegration of a family. The idea of it is excellent.
Unfortunately the reality of it didn't work very well for me, but this is less the film's fault than it is mine. I often struggle with keeping focus in slow-paced films (and OMG is this film slow!) and this problem was exacerbated by the summer heat, the foreign language, and my lack of sleep. But I was watching the film via a free trial subscription that was about to run out so putting it off wasn't really an option.
However, the pacing wasn't my only problem. There were other issues that I had with the film that kept me from engaging - like scenes that contained dialogue despite the actors not moving their mouths and the depiction of the younger brother just felt awkward and unnecessary.
Still, I felt a good amount of respect for what the film was striving to achieve and I can definitely see why it would work well for others.
3+
Glad you enjoyed it Vicky :up: :up: :up:
As you said, the film does have a few dubbed scenes, and I can totally see why one would feel that the depiction of the younger brother's mystery was sloppily done (even though I don't share this sentiment). I personally love the slow pace though, as it totally adds to the tense and miserable atmosphere. I can't wait to watch it again, since all these write-ups are making me more and more excited.
cricket
06-04-18, 06:06 PM
Waterloo Bridge
https://diaryofamoviemaniac.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/waterloo21.jpg
I was glad to see this nominated because I quite enjoyed the 1940 version, and I found that I liked it even more in retrospect. This was also very good and I'm not sure which one I like more.
One tiny nitpick and one thing that kept me from completely loving it. The nitpick is that when Roy said he was 19, it kind of made me feel like she was supposed to be an older woman type. I didn't buy that he was 19 or that she was older in any meaningful way. However, I think this was just a personal feeling I got. The one thing that held me back was Myra. I had a very hard time warming up to her character, and I think it completely had to do with how she acted towards her landlady. She owed money and should have had some humility about it. It may be a small thing but it left a bad taste in my mouth, and I think the whole movie would have been that much more powerful if I had more empathy for her character. It certainly wasn't the fault of Mae Clarke because she was great. On the other hand, Roy was extremely likable, and Douglass Montgomery was also very good, as was the entire cast. It was cool seeing Bette Davis before she became a big star. This is a story I like quite a bit and it was an easy an engaging watch.
3.5
Citizen Rules
06-04-18, 06:24 PM
@cricket (http://www.movieforums.com/community/member.php?u=68505)
Glad to hear you liked Waterloo Bridge. I thought it might be interesting for those who seen the other version in the 40s Hof, to contrast and compare. I was surprised at how different the story lines are very from one another.
One tiny nitpick and one thing that kept me from completely loving it. The nitpick is that when Roy said he was 19, it kind of made me feel like she was supposed to be an older woman type. I didn't buy that he was 19 or that she was older in any meaningful way. I took it that she was suppose to be a bit older than him at least that's the impression I got. He felt like a young, naive soldier and her a wordily shop-worn woman.
The one thing that held me back was Myra. I had a very hard time warming up to her character, and I think it completely had to do with how she acted towards her landlady. She owed money and should have had some humility about it. It may be a small thing but it left a bad taste in my mouth, and I think the whole movie would have been that much more powerful if I had more empathy for her character.
I didn't find her likable either or very empathetic which is 180 degres from the Vivian Leigh version.....And I think that's because Mae Clarke is suppose to be self-loathing or at least jaded and hardened from being a prostitute. Which makes her negative about life, other people and herself. That's the vibe I got anyway.
cricket
06-04-18, 06:36 PM
Yea I thought she would have been older but not enough to make a difference, so why even mention it. Not an issue though.
HashtagBrownies
06-04-18, 08:09 PM
45035
A very good film, I might even call it great. I had many different thoughts throughout it. At the start I thought it was a high-concept dialogue film. Near the middle I started to realize that wasn't the case. At the end I understood the film a little better, and after looking on its Wikipedia page I fully understood it.
It wasn't until I went onto the Wikipedia page did I realize this was set in the Depression-era. This info made me completely understand everything in the film I was confused about. Jobs are so sparse people are willing to stay in a grueling dance marathon for two months just to get $1,400, they care so much about the money they don't even bother to get to know the people they're dancing with (A.K.A. Good excuse for no character development). The film's extremely negative tone is justified due to the time period it is set in.
I loved the music and that ambiguous final shot. The racing scenes were brilliant, super intense: My favourite parts of the film. I like the metaphorical irony that our main characters are depressed as they can't work in movies, which are an escape for people in the Depression era, but they end up torturing themselves in the dance competition, which is also an escape for the Depression era spectators.
If there's one negative thing I'll say, it's about the film's length. Much of the middle of it is just dancing without much progression of plot, I started to feel bored during these parts. Maybe it's intentional to get us to relate to our main cast who are starving for sleep and can barely stand.
My second Sydney Pollack film and probably the last I'll see for a while. Great nom Cricket.
4
rauldc14
06-04-18, 08:53 PM
They Shoot Horses, Don't They?
http://www.rowthree.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/theyshoothorses01.jpg
It may have been a decent film, but it was one that didn't resonate with me and it didn't leave a memorable impression either. The characters weren't introduced properly for me and thus I really didn't take any interest to what happened to them. What is probably a great scene for all with them racing around the dance track I found to be rather vanilla and honestly didn't care what happened.
The filmmaking itself I had no problem with. But the story it told was rather dull for me as well as the characters being dull. I may be with Citizen in that I haven't been impressed with Jane Fonda in any of her roles yet. Its a movie that I don't have a ton to say about due to all of this as well unfortunately.
2.5
cricket
06-04-18, 09:25 PM
Sorry you didn't think higher of it. We seem to agree often enough on the forum but I have trouble picking HoF noms you like.
One role you and CR praised Fonda's acting in was in Coming Home.
rauldc14
06-04-18, 09:33 PM
Yeah I was just thinking that. We often agree on film but I've had trouble connecting with your HOF noms. Strange.
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.