22nd Hall of Fame [Archive] - Page 2

CosmicRunaway

05-10-20, 07:58 PM

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=64378

Shine (1996)
Directed by: Scott Hicks
Starring: Geoffrey Rush, Noah Taylor, Armin Mueller-Stahl

Shine being a biography about a relatively famous pianist was initially a little concerning to me, because I've never had a deep understanding of music. I couldn't tell you the difference between Classical and Romantic Era musicians. I've sat in front of my speakers, listening to recordings with my eyes closed for hours trying to figure it out, only to come away more confused than I was before. Bach, Mozart, Chopin, Stamitz - it all sounds basically the same to me. I'd never heard of Rachmaninoff and his demanding Concerto before this film, and was surprised to learn he hadn't been dead for centuries.

But luckily this film isn't really about the music, and doesn't require any knowledge of it. The focus is on what triggered David's breakdown, and his struggles overcoming mental illness. It also showcases how having the right (or wrong) kind of emotional support can have a dramatic effect on one's quality of life. The piano was the centre of David's greatest triumphs and tragedies, but playing ultimately allowed him to express himself after his speech became increasingly difficult to understand. It was a surprisingly engaging story, which was elevated even further by its award-winning performances.

Geoffrey Rush has received a lot of recognition for his portrayal of David as an adult, but I think Noah Taylor deserves more credit than he's gotten. We learn the most about David's history and downfall with Taylor, and I was quite invested in the character because of him. It probably helps that his part of the plot more heavily features Armin Mueller-Stahl, who was simply fantastic here. There is some debate as to how accurate many of the depicted events are, particularly involving David's relationship with his father, but this is a biopic, not a documentary, so I wasn't expecting the film to strictly adherence to the truth anyway. It's a good film regardless, and I'm glad it was nominated because I definitely wouldn't have watched this on my own accord.

edarsenal

05-10-20, 11:21 PM

I'm pretty excited about revisiting this film, VERY glad you enjoyed Cosmic!!

edarsenal

05-10-20, 11:24 PM

Yup, I watched it too. Not sure if I posted about it or not. So I technically still finished it.

I'd love to revive the thread with a cool director we haven't done sometime.

If you're still taking special guests I'd love to do a dissection with you guys too :)

But I would love to see y'all revive it and maybe with ahwell as guest! Would be awesome.

I remember the occasional reading of that thread -- some really great reads! I think the last ones I read you guys were doing some Pre-30s films, CANNOT for the life of me remember which Director was showcased, but I do remember CR was a guest.

MovieMeditation

05-11-20, 10:18 AM

Shine

64474

I had never heard of David Helfgott let alone heard of this film. I often like to go in blind with my movies, but since my ears were deaf to who Geoffrey Rush was in fact portraying while playing, I might have made it more difficult for myself than needed be… IMDb didn’t help much either, sporting a general summery that did not mention the true circumstances of this story. I thought this was a fictional work, though when actually watching it, I began to feel like this story might not have blossomed from merely a fragment of imagination…

In fact, the film didn’t seem to blossom at all, since it sort of failed to lay out the seeds needed for the story and characters to grow and unfold naturally. Something about the first half of the film felt like a job halfway done. David, an individual of both literal and cinematic potential, didn’t quite get the set off needed to emphasize the setbacks that preceded the otherwise brilliant character acting by Geoffrey Rush. However, I did like how the film opened in medias res with David racing through the rain as this mysterious figure with disfigured speech, who has lost his way literally as well as in figure of speech. Unfortunately, the film quickly fell into the banality of biopic storytelling, which in my opinion even had a slight feel of departure from realism at times. I don’t know if it was deliberate, as a way to direct attention to David’s distressing situation and complicated mindset or if it was more a “product of its time” problem. It wasn’t exactly distracting, just peculiar at times...

The themes of a child being raised by a strict father in a poor environment and a story about being pushed towards perfection isn’t exactly cutting-edge, but it is of course common for talented individuals to have such childhood. Therefore, I wouldn’t necessarily say I have a problem with the themes of the plot, but rather the treatment and structure of them. Because while Armin Mueller-Stahl did a terrific job as the father being both proud and disappointed, angry and affected, torturing and tortured, his arc could have been written more nuanced. Even so, he was almost a central character of the story, which makes sense because of the strong bond and eventual break between the father and son that is indeed extremely important for the story, but still doesn’t quite justify a film that should focus the most on David Helfgott – and that rest of the cast also fell totally into the background didn’t exactly help the situation either.

I honestly feel like the film fast forwards through some very important areas of David’s life story and I didn’t really receive proper understanding of who he truly was or the exact circumstances about his illness. While Geoffrey Rush perfectly embodies David’s speech pattern and mannerisms, the way the film portrays his particular sickness seems more like the director trying to read musical notes rather than playing them. It quickly begins to feel like an encore rather than something from the core. If it wasn’t for Geoffrey Rush, I wouldn’t have connected nearly as much with David as I did. It feels as if the incomplete picture of his past never propels the character to a potent start and I’m left with a build-up that evaporates before it really gets going. And when Geoffrey Rush finally rushes in – brilliant as he is – he is left with barely anything to go on. It’s a shame, because there was an interesting angle present during his early years, as well as his time as a teenager, which could have created a much stronger fundament for the rest of the film.

64385

Admittedly, some later elements do elevate themselves and pull you in because of its connection with the past, but I feel like the emotion could have been greater and more powerful with a more precise plotting of his life… because honestly, David Helfgott is a very interesting and inspiring individual, who despite his talents and immediate affection for music seemed to aspire to satisfy someone entirely different than himself… his father. David is the product of poor upbringing in a poor environment, who quickly comes to have people around him who are constantly trying to “enrich” his life, but never lets the child, teenager nor man have a saying in any of it. He is the product of a power struggle between a father, a musical teacher and David’s own inner demons, who all fight for just a fragment of his musical and mystical mind. David is pulled in countless directions by people who find an interest in him, but despite a very long detour – that contains both an attempt at detachment, an unplanned derailment and a climax that ends in apparent happiness and closure – it is most of all a tragic story lying beneath the beauty.

What is happiness truly for this man? What kind of life is meant for him? Music was on his mind, for good and for worse, but then mental illness hit him and threw him off course. But was music ever truly his passion and course of action or did it in fact lie with the father’s love for music and David’s love for his father and the attempt to make him proud? Was that his true and perhaps only drive? And even for the sudden success so late in his life, has he truly accomplished what he wanted? Is sudden musical acclaim the success of David as a person or David as a personification of a musical talent beyond compare? In the end, with his father gone and his mind more or less the same, who is he really playing for and who of importance are paying attention to what really matters? So as with David Helfgott, the film itself also seems to find its greatest success a little too late and personally I feel very conflicted about such a fascinating story fumbling around in formulaic territory, tiresome clichés and all too confident character framework for most of the movie, holding it back from ever truly lifting off the pages and well… shine.

3+

CosmicRunaway

05-11-20, 11:11 AM

I honestly feel like the film fast forwards through some very important areas of David’s life story and I didn’t really receive proper understanding of who he truly was or the exact circumstances about his illness.
It really did seem to skip over what happened to him post-breakdown and pre-Jeffrey Rush. His mental state deteriorated a lot in that period, and we don't really get any explanation. There are some hints, like David telling Beryl that the doctors said he shouldn't play the piano any more, so I assume he was depressed, unable to play, and was surrounded by people who were reinforcing a negative mindset. It would've been nice to see that progression, but I guess the film wasn't interested in that part of David's life.

Music was on his mind, for good and for worse, but then mental illness hit him and threw him off course.
Was this meant to rhyme? It almost sounds like a song itself haha.

MovieMeditation

05-11-20, 11:15 AM

It really did seem to skip over what happened to him post-breakdown and pre-Jeffrey Rush. His mental state deteriorated a lot in that period, and we don't really get any explanation. There are some hints, like David telling Beryl that the doctors said he shouldn't play the piano any more, so I assume he was depressed, unable to play, and was surrounded by people who were reinforcing a negative mindset. It would've been nice to see that progression, but I guess the film wasn't interested in that part of David's life.
Yeah exactly. Because I definitely understood what had happened once you saw all those signs and literally drove out of a mental facility. But it's not so much the explanation of whether he's mentally sick or not, but more the expansion of said sickness - like actually getting some specifics either literally or through visuals or whatever. I felt it just jumped past such a monumental thing way too quickly and the audience just had to be like "oh, well okay, I guess we just have to accept that this is his situation now". It just didn't feel complete.

Was this meant to rhyme? It almost sounds like a song itself haha.
Haha well yes and no I guess. I always like the write with a flow and a good word scheme, so some sentences do naturally sound melodic sometimes. :p

edarsenal

05-11-20, 03:56 PM

MovieMeditation

05-11-20, 04:12 PM

Incredible write up MM, and I'll be thinking of the many points you made during my watch.
I DO remember the jump from teenager to an adult when I originally saw it, so I'll see how I feel about that this time around.
Thank you. It was a nice nom from you. :up: I would never had watched it my own and I would never have heard about David Helfgott. I looked up some videos of him after, which made the movie and Rush’ performance even more interesting. So overall this nom did what a HoF film should do.

Miss Vicky

05-11-20, 05:21 PM

Man, I know it's only been about a week but I feel like I've fallen way behind. I turned in my Westerns ballot so I'll try to get something watched and written up for this soon.

Citizen Rules

05-11-20, 06:04 PM

I haven't even started yet. I will soon though.

ahwell

05-11-20, 06:15 PM

Man, I know it's only been about a week but I feel like I've fallen way behind. I turned in my Westerns ballot so I'll try to get something watched and written up for this soon.

Same, I've been watching lots of Westerns but I will definitely be getting on this soon, once I turn in my ballot.

CosmicRunaway

05-12-20, 04:55 PM

I just finished rewatching The Matrix. I probably didn't need to since I know it so well, but I wanted to anyway for my own amusement. I still remember how I felt about the film when I first saw it in theatres, and now 21 years later it's nice to know that my opinion hasn't changed very much.

I wanted to see if I still had a copy of the paper I wrote on it some years back, but then I checked the calendar and realized that it was over a decade ago, since I took that class (Philosophy in Film) sometime around 2007. Maybe after I write my review I'll pull out my old laptop and see if it's there, and then probably cringe at whatever I wrote. Maybe I can even post an excerpt and we can all laugh together haha.

rauldc14

05-12-20, 08:57 PM

Blue Ruin

https://www.bfi.org.uk/sites/bfi.org.uk/files/styles/full/public/image/blue-ruin-2013-001-dwight-checking-rear-view-mirror.jpg?itok=LqjGm74J

I can often be a fan of film of revenge, Man on Fire being the perfect example. For me in my revenge flicks I often look toward nice action scenes, interesting dialogues, or a really kick-ass story.

None of this applied for me at least with this watch unfortunately. I think my biggest problem was I didn't care for the main characters performance. Macon Blair just didn't do it for me at all. It strangely reminded me of my reaction to Being There with Peter Sellers. Actually his emotions kind of reminded me of Sellers and it just didn't work at all.

I also didn't really care for the violence scenes. Not that they were too gross for me but they just seemed style over substance, kind of like how I feel with Tarantino sometimes. I feel I'm making what could be strange comparisons for some people but oh well.

On the bright side the film looked really crisp and I thought that the director had flashes of potential with some of his scenes. I'd like to still see more of his work.

2.5

rauldc14

05-12-20, 10:25 PM

I'm going to aim to get to The Last Picture Show tomorrow.

MovieMeditation

05-13-20, 03:10 PM

I really liked Blue Ruin on first watch but have no idea if I’ll like it just as much this time around. I hope so.

rauldc14

05-13-20, 03:22 PM

The Last Picture Show

https://static.rogerebert.com/uploads/review/primary_image/reviews/great-movie-the-last-picture-show-1971/hero_EB20040704REVIEWS08407040301AR.jpg

I had only seen this film one time prior actually. On this second watch I came away super impressed and very happy I nominated it. Although not sure how well it will fare as I can see some people not really caring for it.

The idea of the story is really cool. A town that feels like there's nothing there for everyone filled with a bunch of people who seem to be at crossroads in life. Just the idea of it is super appealing to me.

The cast is magnificent. The star for me of it all is Cybill Shepard. This is one of those films that is so iconic for me just based off of her screen presence, she looks amazing. But she has acting talent too and played the role very well. She just looked lovely and I'd be lying to say if I wouldn't want to have caught a girl like her back in high school. It was cool to see Bogdanovich (SP) find her for this role. It was cool how he pieced the entire cast together actually.

Jeff Bridges was great too, this was probably one of his first roles and he really showed us the talent that he would bring is for years to come. Had really solid chemistry in the scenes with Jacy, and the bro friend scenes with Bottoms. Bottoms was real good too, kind of shocked he didn't get any award recognition for this. The ones that got award recognition, Ben Johnson I thought made the most of her little role and Leachman which I really really liked. I suppose some could find the character relationship of Bottoms and Leachmans characters strange but I thought it fit the film well. And Burstyn was great too.

I loved how the Hank Williams songs were incorporated into the film too. Hank Williams rules. The use of black and white I also thought suited the film perfectly.

This one bumps up to an all-timer for me.

5

Wyldesyde19

05-13-20, 03:53 PM

Hmmm. Apparently I seem to have been confusing State of Siege With some other French film I watched previously. Reading about it doesn’t sound familiar. So this will be a first.
I wonder what I could have been confusing it with? 🤔
Army of Shadows perhaps? This is going to bother me. Didn’t help it’s been around 10 years now.

CosmicRunaway

05-13-20, 04:24 PM

Since I haven't been able to write more than a few sentence fragments about The Matrix, I decided to go ahead and see if I could find that old paper, since maybe it could give me inspiration or something.

I copied over the folders where I stored all my old school work, but I regret to inform anyone who was looking forward to reading an excerpt from said essay that it no longer exists. The only paper I have from that class is the one I wrote on eXistenZ (coincidentally for the same unit on Simulacra and Simulation).

Going through the old files wasn't a complete waste of time however, because I discovered a lot of amusing things I'd completely forgotten about. For example: I had to write a short assignment on the misrepresentation of underwater archaeology in the 2005 film Sahara. :laugh:

CosmicRunaway

05-13-20, 05:32 PM

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=64506

The Matrix (1999)
Directed by: The Wachowski Siblings
Starring: Keanu Reeves, Carrie-Anne Moss, Laurence Fishburne

I couldn't possibly write anything about The Matrix that hasn't already been said a hundred, or even a thousand times since the film's release over two decades ago. It's an iconic film that was not only incredibly influential to both the science fiction and action genres, but it had a dramatic impact on the special effects industry as a whole. It innovated and popularized many techniques that are still in use today. It's also become so ingrained in pop culture that even people who haven't seen it before can still be familiar with the film's concept of “bullet time”.

The cinematography pretty much speaks for itself. It features a lot of fantastic camera work, great shot compositions, and a recurring visual theme of reflection. The colour palettes used for both the Matrix and the real world work well to enhance the mood, and the slight horror elements in the earlier parts of the film are the perfect companion to Neo's warping perception of reality. Those opening scenes almost feel like they're from a different film than the later action set pieces, but it's a mix of genres that I personally find very compelling.

Hugo Weaving makes for a fantastic villain. For 21 years now whenever I see the name “Mr. Anderson” I read it with his very specific diction. If I could mimic his speak pattern, I'm sure I'd be saying it out loud as well. It was simply an unforgettable performance. Laurence Fishburne's Morpheus is similarly memorable, and the lack of dialogue and requirement to either look slightly confused or to stoically perform stunts turned out to be the perfect role for Keanu Reeves. Everything about the film just appeals to me. I loved it when it was in theatres, and I still love it now.

cricket

05-13-20, 06:54 PM

Wyldesyde19

05-13-20, 07:12 PM

I remember something about the resistance against the Germans. My memory is really hazy since it’s been about a decade since I have seen this film. I was going through a French new wave phase (Bob Le Flambeaur, Rififi, Day for Night and a Few others)
I looked it up and I’m pretty sure I’m confusing the 2 of them.
Either way, I’m actually pretty excited to see this now. Ashamed to say I haven’t seen any films from Costa-Gavras yet

cricket

05-13-20, 07:43 PM

Wyldesyde19

05-13-20, 09:05 PM

It doesn't fit perfectly but perhaps The Battle of Algiers?
I haven’t seen Battle of Algiers yet.
I’m pretty sure I’m confusing it with Army of Shadows. But even then, my memory of it is very hazy.
I’m going to have to do a rewatch of French films from the new wave era regardless, sometime, so hopefully I’ll figure it out eventually.

Citizen Rules

05-13-20, 10:40 PM

I haven’t seen Battle of Algiers yet..Either have I, why doesn't somebody nominate that for an HoF?

Miss Vicky

05-14-20, 12:56 AM

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MovieLog/matrix.gif

The Matrix (The Wachowskis, 1999)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0133093/?ref_=ttsnd_snd_tt)

Date Watched: 05/13/2020
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 22nd MoFo Hall of Fame
Rewatch: Yes.

This film was released in theaters in the spring of my senior year of high school. My friends and classmates absolutely raved about it. So I watched it.

With its slick costumes, Sci-Fi premise, slow-motion stunts, characters with names like "Neo," "Trinity," "Cypher," and "Morpheus," and a soundtrack that features the likes of Prodigy, Rage Against the Machine, Massive Attack, and Rob Zombie, The Matrix came off to me then as tryhard "hey, look how edgy I am!" bulls***. I could not understand what the hell everyone else loved about it. Twenty-one years later, it has left me with that same impression.

There is nothing that I liked about this. Not one damn thing. It's too slick. It's too stylized. It's too cold. It's got so much expositional dialogue it might as well have had a narrator. And all that green tint just made me think of the scum I had to clean out of my family's fish ponds every summer. I didn't give a rat's ass about any of these characters, I didn't give a rat's ass about the story, and the closest thing to emotion it brought out in me was boredom. Absolute, utter boredom.

1

rauldc14

05-14-20, 02:55 AM

I don't expect you to like The Last Picture Show, but I hope to God you think it's better than how you feel about The Matrix

Thursday Next

05-14-20, 11:55 AM

The Matrix (1999)

"There is no spoon."

I was seventeen when I first saw The Matrix, and it was pretty much love at first sight. Sci-fi, action, a dash of romance – what more could a girl want? There was also something about it that spoke to me, the music, the look, the idea of this beyond-world. I watched it many times in the following few years, but despite considering it one of my favourite films, not for some time now. I almost watched it on the big screen last year; a cinema in London was showing it for the 20th anniversary. I decided to go and watch The Dead Don’t Die instead. Wrong decision.

So the question is, would it still hold up all this time later?

The answer – yes, absolutely. The Matrix is a stone cold classic.

This needs to be addressed, so I’ll get it out of the way – I lost a bit of respect for The Matrix when I saw Ghost in the Shell. Not only because it wasn’t quite as clever and original as I’d previously thought, but for the shamelessness of the idea-stealing. So that probably deserves to knock off half a star.

But that aside, this is still a great film. The dialogue is smart with much of it taking on a double meaning, the more you find out about the world. I like that it touches on a lot of different ideas without latching on to one of them and doing the metaphor to death – simulation theory (if it could happen, it almost certainly already has…), Morpheus the god of sleep, determinism, religion (the Christ-like prophesised man who can change things and work miracles). It can even be read as a They Live style ‘he puts on the sunglasses and sees the evil structures of capitalism’ story. Is any of it even real, or is it just Neo’s drug-induced hallucination from the first time he follows the white rabbit… after all, the man at the door says mescaline is the only way to fly, and Neo flies at the end… But at the same time this is all done with a sense of fun.

It’s also a really good action film, from I know kung-fu to guns, lots of guns, and the special effects work well and don’t look dated like a lot of 2000s cgi. The cast is spot-on. Keanu Reeves isn’t Oscar material, but what he does, he does well. The Matrix requires him to be, in the Oracle’s words, “cute…not too bright though”, look generally a bit confused for most of the movie, and do some kung fu. The stand-out is Hugo Weaving’s villainous Agent Smith, his disgusted drawl as he declares that human beings are a disease is brilliant.

I still love the aesthetic of the film, the retro phones, the set design – the stairway, the room where Neo meets Morpheus, the subway station, the tech-noir type club. There are some really well done shots – reflections in buildings and sunglasses, the noir-esque rain as Neo is under the bridge.

Oh, and the music is good, too.

4.5

CosmicRunaway

05-14-20, 01:47 PM

There are some really well done shots – reflections in buildings and sunglasses, the noir-esque rain as Neo is under the bridge.
Neo under the bridge in the rain was the image I first wanted to use for my write-up, but I couldn't seem to get a good capture of it.

ahwell

05-14-20, 02:47 PM

Has anyone been able to find Genocide yet?

Citizen Rules

05-14-20, 03:14 PM

Has anyone been able to find Genocide yet? That's a good question. I just did a quick look and couldn't find it. I do know that IMDB list it as 1982 and not 1981.

If anyone can find a free link let us know.

Citizen Rules

05-14-20, 03:26 PM

I just did a deeper search and still couldn't find a free link for Genocide
@Wyldesyde19 (http://www.movieforums.com/community/member.php?u=104656) Do you have a free link for it?

Wyldesyde19

05-14-20, 03:34 PM

I just did a deeper search and still couldn't find a free link for Genocide
@Wyldesyde19 (http://www.movieforums.com/community/member.php?u=104656) Do you have a free link for it?
I’ll look but if it is too difficult to find, I can change my nomination if necessary. I don’t want this to be a pain for everyone to find, and these should be easy to watch regardless.

Miss Vicky

05-14-20, 03:49 PM

IMDb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082443/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2) has Genocide to watch for free with ads.

Wyldesyde19

05-14-20, 03:56 PM

IMDb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082443/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2) has Genocide to watch for free with ads.
Thank you!
Hopefully the ads don’t take away from the experience.

MovieMeditation

05-14-20, 04:38 PM

INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS

64541
SPOILERS AHEAD
This wasn’t the first Tarantino film I ever saw or found fascinating, but it was the one that made me fall in love with his films and had me impatiently waiting the next one. And while it doesn’t work as well for me anymore, I can’t deny the entertainment value completely or the level of craftmanship on display in selected scenes. It might be a bit of a mess in both style, storytelling and direction, but it keeps me watching and it has a few key scenes that really stands out to me.

The opening scene seems to be a standout even for those who can’t stand the film and for those who stand by it. And I understand why, because while it is a 101 exercise on how to build suspense, the one on one conversation is carefully crafted, and the filmmaking finds a nice balance between playful and skillful. As always with Tarantino, this scene oozes atmosphere already by the arrival of the Nazis, the cue of the music and the movement of the sheet that sets everything in motion. Hans Landa is perfectly portrayed by Christoph Waltz and the character is one of the main reasons to see this film. This whimsy, well-spoken and well-mannered maniac is a joy to watch every time he tortures a person merely by engaging in conversation. The opening scene has a slow burning build-up – both in scene establishment, spoken dialogue and camera movements. The way the camera travels to the other side of the table, once the tables truly begin to turn, and then below the floorboards revealing the hidden Jews is wonderfully executed.

But after that the film never quite finds the same footing – and like Bridget von Hammersmark, her broken leg and their breakneck plan later in the movie, the scenes and sequences sometimes seem thought up and put together on the spot. Maybe more well written and well executed than any other director would be able to do it, but the script that was once considered to be made into a mini-series certainly feels like an episodic pop-up book at times. Almost every scene jumps at you with everything there is to give – guns blazing, blood splattering, dialogue speeding away – but the transitions in between does feel to have been butchered either in editing or even before that. There seems to be a grander story somewhere in here that would make all these scenes flow better. Sure, Tarantino is not new to episodic, multi-plotted movies, but the scale just seems so much bigger in ‘Inglourious Basterds’ than, say, ‘Pulp Fiction’. In a way, he does pull it off better than expected, but there is also something about the tonal or thematic differences between each storyline or character arc that just doesn’t mix as well as it could or should have.

The more I think about the film, the more it bothers me, but once the film is operating at the highest level, I momentarily forget the faults. While it almost seems too much of “the good stuff” to have two lengthy scenes of dialogue-driven, slow-burning build-ups to death and destruction, the opening scene and the tavern scene are still both very, very entertaining. The dialogue flows rapidly and the blood eventually too, but again I can’t help but feel Tarantino is treading waters a little longer than needed be. He does everything extremely well, with great confidence and perhaps an even greater ego, but at close to half an hour worth of characters playing card games, playing mind games and eventually paying the price, is perhaps a bit much – especially when your opening scene already runs close to twenty minutes and is built on many of the same principles.

The climax of the film is fun, but also drops a lot on the floor in favor of fiery entertainment. It never bothered me as much as it did this time, but there is absolutely no security present at a screening where Hitler himself and the entire upper rank is present as well. Two guards up on the first floor all the way to the side, but no guards in the foyer, no guards guarding the main entrance to the screening and not a single guard outside the very theater… even for a movie that has Hitler literally exploding into pieces that is still pushing it for me. Also, as a side note, I feel ‘Nation’s Pride’ is the kind of movie Quentin wants people to make in his honor as well (but with a lot more feet).

I don’t want to sound self-indulgent myself by saying the same thing over and over again so I will just end it here. I really like this film, because it is so much fun and I find a fair number of scenes to be really great on their own, but with the film itself feeling a little wobbly as a whole. The film itself is flawed, but a lot of elements within is executed flawlessly. I just wish Tarantino had made it a mini-series.

4

CosmicRunaway

05-14-20, 04:52 PM

IMDb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082443/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2) has Genocide to watch for free with ads.
I'm not seeing an option to watch it with ads, just a link to Amazon Prime. Is it something only available in the US?

ahwell

05-14-20, 04:57 PM

I'm not seeing an option to watch it with ads, just a link to Amazon Prime. Is it something only available in the US?

I can't find it either unfortunately.

Citizen Rules

05-14-20, 05:13 PM

I found it, but getting it to my TV set to watch might be a challenge.

Miss Vicky

05-14-20, 05:27 PM

I'm not seeing an option to watch it with ads, just a link to Amazon Prime. Is it something only available in the US?

Possibly? I'm not sure.

When I bring up the movie's page on IMDb, there's a big yellow button next to the poster that says "Watch Free On IMDb TV."

64543

CosmicRunaway

05-14-20, 05:32 PM

When I bring up the movie's page on IMDb, there's a big yellow button next to the poster that says "Watch Free On IMDb TV."
No, that's not available to me. There's just a blue link to Amazon Prime. If I click the little dots for "more", there are no other options.

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=64544

Wyldesyde19

05-14-20, 05:41 PM

Miss Vicky

05-14-20, 05:52 PM

Up to you, Wylde.

I already started it on my lunch break and it's pretty good so far so I'll end up finishing it either way.

Wyldesyde19

05-14-20, 05:56 PM

I’ll wait to hear what everyone else wants to do, and more importantly, Raul.

Edit: regardless what is decided, I hope you do enjoy it Miss Vicky

MovieMeditation

05-14-20, 05:57 PM

As long as you don’t pick a 3 hour film I’m fine with whatever. :p

(I haven’t personally even tried to look for your nom yet though so I have no idea if it will be easy or hard to find for me)

Wyldesyde19

05-14-20, 06:04 PM

As long as you don’t pick a 3 hour film I’m fine with whatever. :p

(I haven’t personally even tried to look for your nom yet though so I have no idea if it will be easy or hard to find for me)
For that I’ll pick Shoah now 😈

neiba

05-14-20, 06:13 PM

For that I’ll pick Shoah now 😈

I'd watch that! :p

MovieMeditation

05-14-20, 06:15 PM

For that I’ll pick Shoah now 😈
Luckily it’s too long to qualify. :cool:

(and well... I still haven’t seen it so maybe it would be a good nom for me)

Wyldesyde19

05-14-20, 06:19 PM

Luckily it’s too long to qualify. :cool:

(and well... I still haven’t seen it so maybe it would be a good nom for me)
I’ll divide it in equal parts spread out over the next few HOF. 😏
In all seriousness, once enough have chimed in, including Raul, I’ll make a decision.
Like I said before, I want the films to be easily accessible for all involved.

Citizen Rules

05-14-20, 07:35 PM

So I just tried to watch Genocide on my TV and the video file froze up the blu-ray player and I couldn't shut it off or use any of the remote controls. It just kept trying to load the movie. Finally I had to pull the power cord to get it unfrozen.

MovieMeditation

05-14-20, 07:47 PM

*Citizen puts on Genocide*

*Blu-ray player commits suicide*

ahwell

05-14-20, 08:16 PM

Hmm, I still can’t find it in my phone but I will check my laptop to see if it’s available!

rauldc14

05-14-20, 09:16 PM

I'm good with how the majority feels it should be played out. I haven't searched for it yet myself.

Citizen Rules

05-14-20, 09:36 PM

*Citizen puts on Genocide*

*Blu-ray player commits suicide*That's about it too. I think it had to do with IMDB's using DRM to stop file sharing.

Siddon

05-14-20, 10:01 PM

If this proves too difficult for some, I am not adverse to changing my nomination to make it easier for all to view.
This should be fun for all involved, and I know from recent experience that quality on the net can hinder the progresss. I don’t want to take away from everyone’s enjoyment, afterall.
I have no issue with doing so. Just let me know. 🙂

I say change it...it was a good idea but the only affordable copy I can find online is...VHS

https://www.ebay.com/itm/184250956452?hash=item2ae6367aa4:g:lnwAAOSwz2Vek6i0

Wyldesyde19

05-14-20, 10:12 PM

Citizen Rules

05-14-20, 10:28 PM

Ok guys. A nomination shouldn’t be difficult to hunt down to view, so I’ll change my nomination to one that’s more easily accessible.
I apologize for the issue. Give me a few to think of a suitable nomination.No worries, thanks for being cool about it...and it was a very interesting nom.

ahwell

05-14-20, 10:41 PM

Ok guys. A nomination shouldn’t be difficult to hunt down to view, so I’ll change my nomination to one that’s more easily accessible.
I apologize for the issue. Give me a few to think of a suitable nomination.
Thank you, and sorry😭 I will see if I can ever watch that when it is available since it does look fascinating! (Or maybe if it ever becomes available you can nominate in a future HoF)

rauldc14

05-14-20, 11:53 PM

Look forward to the backup nom though

rauldc14

05-14-20, 11:54 PM

BTW, like the bold idea of nominating a Doc too. I'd like to see more of that and animated films in the generals personally.

rauldc14

05-15-20, 12:05 AM

I would like to watch Dronningen next if someone has a link for me

MovieMeditation

05-15-20, 03:48 AM

I would like to watch Dronningen next if someone has a link for me
This post and W19’s nomination tracking difficulties does make me wonder how easy or hard it will be to get a hold of my nom.

It won a lot of international prizes though, including a Sundance award, so I’m thinking it should be available somewhere to rent or stream or something like that...

rauldc14

05-15-20, 04:09 AM

New replacement nomination: Waco The Rules of Engagement (1997)

CosmicRunaway

05-15-20, 06:22 AM

I say change it...it was a good idea but the only affordable copy I can find online is...VHS
We've still got a working VHS player hooked up to an old CRT tv that is out in the living room (but off to the side). That said, I don't remember the last time I watched a VHS tape haha.

This post and W19’s nomination tracking difficulties does make me wonder how easy or hard it will be to get a hold of my nom.
This reminds me that I didn't track down your nomination after. Other than Genocide, it was the only one I didn't immediately find, but I haven't thoroughly searched for it yet so I'm not concerned. I'll take a look later today.

New replacement nomination: Waco The Rules of Engagement (1997)
The previous nomination was a little more appealing to me, but this new one is on Youtube, so it should be much easier for everyone to watch. :up:

CosmicRunaway

05-15-20, 06:27 AM

I haven't written anything about it yet, but I'd just like to apologize in advance for my review of The Last Picture Show. I watched it yesterday afternoon, and it's just not for me. Sorry Raul.

MovieMeditation

05-15-20, 06:58 AM

This reminds me that I didn't track down your nomination after. Other than Genocide, it was the only one I didn't immediately find, but I haven't thoroughly searched for it yet so I'm not concerned. I'll take a look later today.
I found some links. If they don’t work try to directly search for them on the given platform. It might be a regional thing if the links don’t work. Actually I would probably recommend you go to each platform and search for the movie yourself (Queen of Hearts). Perhaps to ensure that english subtitles are available.

YouTube
https://youtu.be/PK0xK4wcU2k*

PrimeVideo
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07ZLL3QFC?camp=1789&creativeASIN=B07ZLL3QFC&ie=UTF8&linkCode=xm2&tag=justwatch09-20*
OR
https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B07ZLKDMNL/ref=atv_dp_share_cu_r*

And it seemed to be available through the likes of iTunes/AppleTV, Direct tv, Google Play and Vudu.

CosmicRunaway

05-15-20, 07:31 AM

Citizen Rules

05-15-20, 12:04 PM

That Youtube link is just saying "video unavailable" but if I go to the same video via the search bar, it prompts me to log in and correctly shows the trailer with the option to rent or buy it. Weird that the direct link doesn't work, but at least the film is indeed there haha.

It is unfortunately not available on Prime Video here though.

I've literally never heard of Vudu before. Apparently it's blocked outside the US anyway, which would probably explain why haha.I have two links: one has English subs but is poorer video quality. The other is HD quality but you have to add your own subs in. I also looked and found two files for English subs. If anybody needs these let me know.

Thursday Next

05-15-20, 12:20 PM

Genocide is on Amazon to rent for me, but maybe there are different movies in different countries. Is it officially being replaced with Waco: The Rules of Engagement? Queen of Hearts is also on Amazon.

I can't get hold of State of Siege anywhere, it doesn't seem to have been released on region 2 dvd and isn't on streaming anywhere. Any ideas?

Citizen Rules

05-15-20, 12:22 PM

I can't get hold of State of Siege anywhere, it doesn't seem to have been released on region 2 dvd and isn't on streaming anywhere. Any ideas?I have a link that includes English subs. I'll PM you.

Wyldesyde19

05-15-20, 01:51 PM

The previous nomination was a little more appealing to me, but this new one is on Youtube, so it should be much easier for everyone to watch. :up:
I agree, Genocide is actually much better, And I apologize for having to yank it, although Waco itself is also a great doc about the abuse of authority and it’s consequences.
In the future I’ll have to consider how accessible my nominations are to all involved. I saw I could rent it on prime and didn’t think any of it beyond myself.

Wyldesyde19

05-15-20, 01:54 PM

BTW, like the bold idea of nominating a Doc too. I'd like to see more of that and animated films in the generals personally.

Agreed, I may have mentioned it before, but docs and animation both aren’t well represented so far in the General HOF. Expect a few from me in the future.

CosmicRunaway

05-15-20, 05:03 PM

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=64566

The Last Picture Show (1971)
Directed by: Peter Bogdanovich
Starring: Timothy Bottoms, Jeff Bridges, Cybill Shepherd

I always seem to struggle with coming of age dramas, and find them rather difficult to sit through. It's incredibly rare for me to find the stories or characters even remotely engaging. I do understand the appeal to viewers who had similar experiences themselves, but I've yet to truly connect with any of the ones I've seen. Unfortunately The Last Picture Show didn't manage to break that trend, so it wasn't a film I particularly enjoyed watching.

That's not to say that I think it's a bad film though, because it's competently shot and well acted. It did amuse me slightly to see Jeff Bridges so young again, since I'm more familiar with him post-Lebowski. The main problem was that I just didn't care for any of the central characters, so I wasn't interested in anything that happened to them. Ruth was really the only person I had any sympathy for, but that wasn't enough to carry the whole film.

I wasn't impressed with the cinematography either. I might've found it more visually appealing had it not been filmed in black in white, or if it instead had less natural looking lighting. The realism does actually suit the tone of the film, but it would've been nice to have some breathtaking imagery I could appreciate, since the narrative wasn't able to grab my attention. This is just the wrong kind of film for me, so while I didn't like it, I don't despise it either. It's just a bit disappointing that I'd much rather watch Voyage to the Planet of Prehistoric Women.

Wyldesyde19

05-15-20, 05:11 PM

You should see Bridges in Thunderbolt and Lightfoot with Clint Eastwood.

MovieMeditation

05-15-20, 05:11 PM

I’m currently watching Last Picture Show too.

Chypmunk

05-15-20, 05:15 PM

I’m currently watching Last Picture Show too
Ooooo, I never knew it had a sequel :goof:

(sorry, it's far too late to start a fillum and I'm bored lol)

CosmicRunaway

05-15-20, 05:24 PM

You should see Bridges in Thunderbolt and Lightfoot with Clint Eastwood.
This is probably going to be a controversial opinion, but I don't like Clint Eastwood. :eek:

MovieMeditation

05-15-20, 05:28 PM

This is probably going to be a controversial opinion, but I don't like Clint Eastwood. :eek:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b1/20/87/b120870638402a6e76ebf12d78d2e08d.gif

Wyldesyde19

05-15-20, 05:30 PM

This is probably going to be a controversial opinion, but I don't like Clint Eastwood. :eek:

We can’t be friends anymore......

CosmicRunaway

05-15-20, 05:38 PM

...I do like Jeff Bridges enough to own R.I.P.D. on BluRay though. :lol:

MovieMeditation

05-15-20, 05:41 PM

...I do like Jeff Bridges enough to own R.I.P.D. on BluRay though. :lol:
Alright son, you better do your username good and get waaaay off this forum real quick.

Wyldesyde19

05-15-20, 05:42 PM

...I do like Jeff Bridges enough to own R.I.P.D. on BluRay though. :lol:
Try again 😆

ahwell

05-15-20, 05:45 PM

This is probably going to be a controversial opinion, but I don't like Clint Eastwood. :eek:

wait till raul sees that.:D

I don't know him enough to decide whether I'm a fan or not. I did love Unforgiven, though.

CosmicRunaway

05-15-20, 05:52 PM

wait till raul sees that.:D
He's already going to be disappointed with what I wrote about his nomination, so it probably won't be that much of a shock haha.

CosmicRunaway

05-15-20, 05:57 PM

Also, proof I'm not joking. #noshame :cool:

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=64574

MovieMeditation

05-15-20, 06:03 PM

Also, proof I'm not joking. #noshame :cool:

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=64574

I’m ashamed even just having my fake face next to that bunch of shyte.

Wyldesyde19

05-15-20, 06:04 PM

Also, proof I'm not joking. #noshame :cool:

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=64574

Pretty sure this a ban worthy offense. You can join Zotis/Zaris in the corner of discontent until you acknowldge what you have done.

Miss Vicky

05-15-20, 06:06 PM

This is probably going to be a controversial opinion, but I don't like Clint Eastwood. :eek:

I don’t mind him as a director and have immense respect for what he did to help make changes in how animals, particularly horses, are treated on film sets. But as an actor? Nope. Don’t like him at all.

CosmicRunaway

05-15-20, 06:09 PM

I’m ashamed even just having my fake face next to that bunch of shyte.
I never claimed it was a good movie. But I do own it, and am willing to admit it haha.

edarsenal

05-15-20, 07:41 PM

I've seen RIPD a couple of times, enjoyed it too

rauldc14

05-15-20, 07:55 PM

This is probably going to be a controversial opinion, but I don't like Clint Eastwood. :eek:

Boo. This saddens me.

Miss Vicky

05-16-20, 02:32 AM

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MovieLog/blueruin.gif

Blue Ruin (Jeremy Saulnier, 2013)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2359024/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1)

Date Watched: 05/15/2020
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: The 22nd MoFo Hall of Fame
Rewatch: No

This is a pretty straight-forward film about a man forced to confront his past in order to exact revenge on the man who he believes murdered his parents. With such a premise it could have been something really great. It could have had a protagonist I could've really gotten behind and those acts of vengeance could've felt a whole lot more satisfying. Unfortunately, however, the protagonist we get is a traumatized shell of a man who is just too empty to garner more than a vague sense of sympathy from me.

I did appreciate though the casting choice. Star Macon Blair lends a sense of authenticity to the lead role as the somewhat dumpy-looking every man, Dwight - a man turned killer without any combat training or past experience. But, again, that emptiness of the character prevented me from ever being truly invested in him.

Overall, Blue Ruin is a solid film and it held my interest for its 90 minute run, but this is not something I'm likely to ever revisit and I've probably been a bit generous with my rating.

3.5

rauldc14

05-16-20, 02:58 AM

Yeah that was the bummer for me. The premise seemed intriguing to me and I thought I would really like it.

Will you be following my watching pattern Miss Vicky and is Last Picture Show next?

CosmicRunaway

05-16-20, 06:20 AM

I was a bit disappointed in Blue Ruin when I first saw it too, but the more I thought about it after, the more I appreciated it.

rauldc14

05-16-20, 06:41 AM

I was a bit disappointed in Blue Ruin when I first saw it too, but the more I thought about it after, the more I appreciated it.

I love when that happens actually. It hasn't happened to me on a lot of movies, but it has for a few.

2001 is one I can somewhat think of, as I think I rated it a 6 on first watch but I'd consider it about a 7.5+ now

MovieMeditation

05-16-20, 06:42 AM

THE LAST PICTURE SHOW

64590

I usually love films that feel like a glimpse of a distant time in a forgotten world that once was. And doubling that up with a dose of coming of age drama, I’m usually all for it… However, ‘The Last Picture Show’ didn’t quite do it for me. At least not as a whole. Most of the first hour had me struggling to care much about anything going on. I wasn’t invested in the characters, where they were coming from or where they were going. Of course, I realized, that in reality they weren’t going anywhere and that was kind of the point in a way. But the little moments leading up to all this just didn’t work for me much and the coming of age stuff was only interesting to me when it was coming to an end… when finally reflected upon it began to resonate with me, but we were past the halfway point by then and it was a little too late for me (sort of a like the characters in the film).

If the first half had worked for me then the second half would have hit even harder. Because when focusing on that second half and the transition into bleaker territory then I would certainly say there is something great to be found in this film. The way emptiness and loneliness come crashing down out of nowhere and quickly changes the tone of everything. The confusion about coming of age but also coming to terms with who you are, where you are going and what you are doing with life. How you must abandon something that might already have abandoned you and how the things that used to have meaning now have nothing at all – or perhaps it has taking on a different meaning entirely. All those thoughts, feelings and phases that is constantly changing and the inevitable confrontation of life with little to no comfort. It was almost a constant increase in interest for me, only it occurred to me a little to late. And like the characters, I was left with this weird feeling of something having passed me by… and I’m not sure if I missed it or if I’m just missing what was never really there to begin with?

Thankfully, unlike these characters, I have the ability to actually go back and relive the moments. I will probably do that in the future, but for now, this was a frustrating watch for me. I’m not sure if the coming of age stuff really worked for me or if the images of dogs trying to mate or traffic lights going from green to red was really thoughtful, playful or neither of those things. Here’s hoping the first half will work much better for me in the future...

3

Citizen Rules

05-16-20, 01:52 PM

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=64594
The Matrix (1999)

Agent Smith is so cool! Damn what a character with that distinctive way of talking...and with the way he tilts his head I believed he was a sentient program inside the matrix. Kudos to Hugo Weaving for creating one helluva distinct & imaginative character...now that's acting!

While I'm singing the praises of the cast, Morpheus was cool as ice! And what a great casting choice to use Laurence Fishburne, he totally made the role. Morpheus gets those cool shades and all the great lines.

Come to think of it, Agent Smith has cool sunglasses too. To me the best thing about The Matrix is the very unique look the film had. I'm talking about the sets & clothing. I swear for years after this film I seen people dressed in black in those long angle length coats. Even Trinity's short slicked back hair added to the unique fashion style of the movie.

Then there's all those ground breaking special effects that has shaped the direction of movies and even TV commercials for decades. The Matrix was as influential as other great sci fi's like 2001 or Blade Runner.

I wish I could say I liked all the action-fighting sequences but in general I'm not a big action fan, it's just not my thing...Though the action scenes were well done and unique. Mostly I loved the sci-fi concept of The Matrix and the look of the film...and Agent Smith too!

CosmicRunaway

05-16-20, 02:41 PM

Morpheus gets those cool shades and all the great lines.

Come to think of it, Agent Smith has cool sunglasses too. To me the best thing about The Matrix is the very unique look the film had.
I seriously thought you were going to say that the best thing about The Matrix is all the eyewear. :lol:

Citizen Rules

05-16-20, 03:15 PM

I seriously thought you were going to say that the best thing about The Matrix is all the eyewear. :lol:That too!

Citizen Rules

05-16-20, 11:32 PM

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=61084
Joker (2019)

I watched this only a couple months ago so I'm going to pass on rewatching it. Initially I was not interested in this movie as I thought it would be hyper violent. But I decided to watch it for the 2019 MoFo Film Awards. Originally I set out to watch all the Oscar nominated for Best Picture movies. I ended up watching only: Ford v Ferrari, Little Women, 1917 and of course Joker. Joker by far was the best of the bunch and that's thanks to Joaquin Phoenix. I do think he's probably the best actor working today. I haven't always enjoyed his movies, but Phoenix is almost always the bright spot in the films he's in.

So when watching Joker I was very impressed with both the film and Phoenix's portrayal of a man suffering from an emotional/mental condition compounded by the **** that he gets kicked into his face on a daily basis. The introspective look at Arthur Fleck, aka Joker, was what struck me as the most poignant part of the film.

I know some people hate this movie and I think I know why. It's because of 'expectations'. A lot of the negativity the film got was from Batman fans who expected a continuation of the Joker character they knew from the various Batman sequels. When the film wasn't as they had expected then then were disappointed. That happens with many films...preconceived ideas can kill a film...However with me, I've not seen any of the Batman movies say for the first two and I don't like superhero flicks, so when I seen this was an intelligently made film about a man suffering with a troubled life, I liked it! I almost wish they hadn't named it Joker and tied it into the Batman universe. Of course that was done to sell tickets, but the film works wonderfully on it's on accord. In a way Joker reminds me of a silent film we seen in an HoF called Laugh Clown Laugh (1928) (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0019074/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1) it's about a man who has a condition where he can't stop laughing.

Gosh I didn't mean to write that much! Below is my original review.

Brilliant first hour! The film held me spellbound like few films do. I was very focused on the story of the mentally ill Arthur Fleck and his continual downward spiral into something very dark and disturbing. And yet I liked Arthur, or at least I had great sympathy for him. In the first hour of the film three key ingredients came together: a disturbing story of the ultimate underdog...and a music score that accentuated the emotions of the scenes...and the third key component is Joaquin Phoenix who in my opinion is the best actor working today. Phoenix is able to dive into his roles and bring a resonances that makes us believe his angst, even when his character is unsavory as is the Joker. That first hour gets a 5/5+ rating. And Phoenix well deserved the Oscar for Best Actor.

However, and you know there had to be a however! Like most all blockbuster Hollywood movies Joker goes to far over the top and lost it's balance in my eyes in the second half. The first killings in the subway was justifiable (in movie standards) as Arthur had just been attacked and beaten. But the next two killings were more for shock value and gore and lost any empathy I had for the character. I get it that the target audience like that type of shock/gore, but it's too bad because what I seen building in the first hour was washed away by the super-hero movie craze of the second half.

Don't get me wrong there was still moments of genius in the second half but to much of it relayed on Scorsese's The King of Comedy (1982). I couldn't believe how similar the two were. Now if someone tells me the director/writer Todd Phillips was a fan of The King of Comedy and was paying homage to it...then cool. But otherwise it looks pretty close to plagiarisms to me. Maybe not by legal standards but as far as creative script writing goes, pffft.

I rate the second half at 3/5

I'll balance out the two ratings and my official rating:rating_4

Miss Vicky

05-17-20, 01:41 AM

Citizen Rules

I was really surprised when I looked back at your review thread and saw that you'd seen and, for the most part, enjoyed Joker. I was not expecting that at all so it was a very pleasant surprise.

It's interesting that you point out the similarities between Joker and Laugh Clown Laugh because Todd Philips has actually said that he took some inspiration from another 1928 silent film, The Man Who Laughs (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0019130/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1), about a disfigured man who is unable to stop smiling even though he experiences deep sorrow.

Also, I still haven't got a clue what movie you thought I was going to nominate and it's bugging me!

ETA: Your post comment. That movie never crossed my mind and it isn’t one that I’m likely to ever nominate. I love it, but not in a way that I would consider Hall of Fame worthy.

Thursday Next

05-17-20, 02:36 PM

CosmicRunaway

05-17-20, 03:47 PM

I also watched State of Siege earlier today. I probably won't get anything written tonight though, since I only just realized that tomorrow is a holiday, so now I need to go to the shops before they close.

I've been getting groceries every two weeks instead of every week during the pandemic, but I'm still not used to buying for those extra days in between trips so I've been stretching things pretty thin. Poor students on primarily prepacked ramen diets probably have more in their cupboard than I do right now haha. I would just go Tuesday morning, but I actually have to go to work for the first time in 2 months since we're getting ready to reopen, assuming restrictions lower in June as planned that is.

We always get groceries early in the morning, so going at night is going to be really strange. If you're wondering why I keep going on about this instead of just leaving, it's because I'm waiting for my brother to finish eating, and he's the driver. At this rate I could write something about State of Siege after all. :suspicious:

MovieMeditation

05-17-20, 05:16 PM

Blue Ruin has been rewatched. That’s 5 watched so far (8 if you count those I have already watched, but will most likely rewatch).

That’s 3 new watches and 3 rewatches left for me. :up:

rauldc14

05-17-20, 08:10 PM

Watching Dronningen tonight so I'll be at 4/11.

Miss Vicky

05-17-20, 11:05 PM

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MovieLog/lastpicture.gif

The Last Picture Show (Peter Bogdanovich, 1971)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0067328/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0)

Date Watched: 05/17/2020
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: The 22nd MoFo Hall of Fame
Rewatch: No

While it was kind of neat to see so many familiar faces when they were young, the novelty of that wore off pretty quickly and the film didn't have a whole lot more to offer for me.

I disliked or was apathetic to nearly all of the characters, with Mrs. Popper being the one possible exception. But even then I didn't feel much and I had trouble sticking with the film.

Which is not to say that the film isn't well made or that it doesn't achieve what it aimed to achieve. It does well to set a mood of despair and longing and of the slow death of the characters' childhood. The black and white images and the constant nasal droning of old time country music also do well to evoke the time and place in which it is set.

The problem is I don't like that nasal droning. I find it irritating. And a whole lot of nothing really happens in the movie - which isn't necessarily a bad thing. That sort of thing can work quite well when I'm invested in the characters. But I wasn't invested in them. I spent the entire film feeling nothing but detachment, which was maybe the point, I don't know, but it's not a film for me.

3 out of 5 out of respect for the things it does well. If I were giving it a rating based purely on my enjoyment, it'd get maybe a 2.

3-

rauldc14

05-18-20, 08:35 AM

Thought maybe you'd like the sexual scenes. Oh well

Miss Vicky

05-18-20, 11:02 AM

Thought maybe you'd like the sexual scenes. Oh well

None of the men were hot. :shrug:

CosmicRunaway

05-18-20, 11:25 AM

None of the men were hot. :shrug:
https://media.giphy.com/media/F3G8ymQkOkbII/giphy.gif

(I do agree with you though haha)

rauldc14

05-18-20, 11:28 AM

That was a good one, CR.

Anyways, hopefully the negativity is over for Last Picture Show. I think CR, Ed, and Ahwell will really like it.

CosmicRunaway

05-18-20, 11:32 AM

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=64648

State of Siege / État de Siège (1972)
Directed by Costa-Gavras
Starring: Yves Montand, Renato Salvatori, O.E. Hasse

State of Siege is a film that blends fact and fiction into a sort of educational thriller. It has the look and feel of a documentary without an interview crew or narrator, and is a fictional retelling of an incident that happened during a real guerilla campaign. I hadn't heard of the film before it was nominated, and had no idea what the plot was going to involve. Halfway through watching it, I realized that I still didn't really know what was going on, because I have practically no knowledge of Uruguay or its history, and didn't even realize it was the country in question.

The film doesn't outright explain the political situation, so it would certainly benefit from audiences who are already familiar with the setting. It does however provide the necessary context for viewers to quickly assume that there's an unpopular, oppressive government involved, so it's easy enough to follow the narrative from there. I did still get the impression that I was missing out on something though, especially before I realized the story was being told out of sequence.

After the initial confusion, I did find the narrative and the manner in which it was being told to be quite interesting, and I felt as though I might've learned something along the way. It has this old, dull look that reminded me of the films we often watched in primary and elementary school. I'm not sure if it was just the technology used, or if it was an intentional choice to make the visuals look similar to stock footage, but the aesthetic ultimately lends itself well to the film's mix of real and fictional elements.

Miss Vicky

05-18-20, 11:32 AM

Hey, at least you know it won't be last on my ballot.

MovieMeditation

05-18-20, 11:33 AM

I didn’t love Last Picture but I certainly didn’t hate it. I wouldn’t even say I was negative towards it. I was mostly indifferent about it except for some of the later parts of the film.

It’s a good nomination and it seems to be an important film for many reasons. So I’m glad I finally saw it.

Siddon

05-18-20, 11:35 AM

State of Siege (1972)

I’d never heard of this film at all before this hall of fame and probably wouldn’t have watched it if left to my own devices. I’d heard of Costa-Gavras and his film Z, but I’ve never seen that either. They don't seem to be very easy to get hold of. I don’t know what I was expecting, having only the title to go on, but it somehow wasn't quite what I expected.

I feel like the context of the political situation needs some kind of explanation when attempting to describe it, but as I had only the faintest idea of any of the context before watching it, I’ll refrain from any attempts at explanation. Perhaps there is more to be got out of this film if you are more knowledgeable about the situation, but I found that I could follow what was happening from how it unfolded on screen.

There was something about this that felt like a dramatization of a real event, and yet when I read about it, it seems that it wasn’t exactly a true story, but based on similar events in order to illuminate the wider story of what was happening with the Uruguayan government, the guerrillas and the American involvement.

There was something about this film that reminded me of Army of Shadows – not just the subject matter of kidnap and resistance cells, also the pace and the cool blue-grey colour palette. I liked the way it was shot. I thought the way they conveyed the flashes of torture was well done, it wasn’t exploitative or lingering on it but got across the reality of the way it had been used by the police.

I think the flaw for me in this was that it was so focused on the political situation that there was very little attempt to make any of the characters into characters, to understand their motivations, quirks, relationships or personalities. Except perhaps for the journalist. Perhaps it just wasn’t that sort of film, but it did come across as a little cool and impersonal.

I think it was a very interesting film and I’m glad it was nominated. Thanks also to Citizen for helping me find it.

Sounds about right couple things

1. The situation needs explanation...Gavras is like Tarantino this all his work could kind of fit together. I chose State of Siege because this was the most accessible of his work. Z, The Confession, and Missing are all basically in the same universe and the same style.

2. Character work...is really not the focus of the story at all, for that you want to go with Missing about a Father who goes to South American country to look for his son and how he deals with the politics. It's a Jack Lemmon film and they gave Costas is Oscar for it.

State of Siege is a film that blends fact and fiction into a sort of educational thriller. It has the look and feel of a documentary without an interview crew or narrator, and is a fictional retelling of an incident that happened during a real guerilla campaign. I hadn't heard of the film before it was nominated, and had no idea what the plot was going to involve. Halfway through watching it, I realized that I still didn't really know what was going on, because I have practically no knowledge of Uruguay or its history, and didn't even realize it was the country in question.

I would say it's a neonoir, but that's a great term...and Gavras is nebulous because he jumps from state to state to tell his stories. It's more about the ideas and less about the specifics and minutia.

State of Siege - Uruguay
Confession - Czechoslovakia
Z - Greece
Missing - Chile

rauldc14

05-18-20, 11:42 AM

Hey, at least you know it won't be last on my ballot.

Actually, with a 3 minus, I'm assuming it may be in the middle.

rauldc14

05-18-20, 11:59 AM

Dronningen (Queen of Hearts) *SPOILERS*

https://i1.wp.com/image.tmdb.org/t/p/w500/3xqkD4QaB9qYrOgcc5YdfMvof7Z.jpg

I had never heard of this film from last year and it was quite a surprise. It's amazing the range of emotion that this film covers for the viewer. At times it made me feel uneasy, sad, happy, and downright uncomfortable. And that's I think just what it was trying to do.

What a performance by Trine Dyrholm as Anne, wife of Peter. The range of acting she displays in just one movie is really incredible. The rest of the cast, had they been as great as she was, could have really elevated the film, but I didn't care for their performances as much. Not that they were bad or anything, they just didn't stick out. Gustav just seemed like a rather cold character to me with not all that much to offer which was a real bummer.

Plenty of beautiful film shots. The forest scenes we're definitely really well shot and beautiful. The sex scenes we're very uncomfortable given the situation of the story. It sounds strange but they were filmed very well, are we sure they didn't have an existing career prior to this :laugh:

Great direction by a relatively new director, May El-Touky, who looks like she did one film before this. She could have potential to be real good in the future.

The subs I had weren't great though, couldn't even get the lyrics of Tainted Love right, but what do you do. I'm not gonna lie I was at first ready to give this like a 3-3.5, but I think it needs to raise a bit. That ending was something that bumped it up quite well.

My question to those when you see it, near the end Anne sees Gustav in the mirror. Was it a flashback or what was going on there?

4-

Well done, MM.

MovieMeditation

05-18-20, 12:14 PM

Dronningen (Queen of Hearts)

4-

Well done, MM.
Aww thank you!

Now I'm getting even more bummed I didn't like Last Picture Show more:(

It's so nice to take these chances with the HoFs and see them received well. Mostly my noms seem to be received well - I think The Square was one of those that didn't really click with most.

Anyway, I'm glad you liked it. I will refrain from commenting further right now as I really want to rewatch the film before I take up a discussion on it. :up:

Wyldesyde19

05-18-20, 01:28 PM

That was a good one, CR.

Anyways, hopefully the negativity is over for Last Picture Show. I think CR, Ed, and Ahwell will really like it.
Having seen it previously, I can safely say you can add my review, when I get to it, amongst those that are favorable.
I doubt my opinion will have changed a decade later.

rauldc14

05-18-20, 01:47 PM

Having seen it previously, I can safely say you can add my review, when I get to it, amongst those that are favorable.
I doubt my opinion will have changed a decade later.

Good to hear!

CosmicRunaway

05-18-20, 02:35 PM

I just noticed that I've unintentionally followed a pattern (1 rewatch, 2 new viewings, 1 rewatch, 2 new viewings), so I guess I should continue the trend and go with either Inglorious Basterds or I, Daniel Blake next.

CosmicRunaway

05-18-20, 05:25 PM

I did decide to watch Inglorious Basterds after, pretty much as soon as I posted the above comment. I liked it a lot more than I did the last time. Not that I really disliked it before or anything, I just had a lot of issues that prevented me from really enjoying it. Those things didn't bother me so much this time, so the rewatch was a good decision. :up:

Also, I was kind of dreading the runtime, but it didn't really feel like 2.5 hours, so that's another bonus.

rauldc14

05-18-20, 08:20 PM

Waco: The Rules of Engagement

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcTyzT8JnYunPlfj4PAY6mAuRgBXORznDSZBRo7LThQ_ZGew-ftC&usqp=CAU

Liked I said, it was pretty cool to see a documentary get nominated in a Hall of Fame. Makes these things feel a bit more diverse and while I believe it would be tough for one to win due to so many people having differing interests as far as those go, still a bold move.

Going in I didn't read anything about this and I knew nothing of it. I was too young to remember anything like this going on and this happened back when there wasn't media overload anyways like there is today. We wouldn't miss one story like this these days.

The Branch Davidians seem like some crazy people to me, obviously haven't done all my research but that's how I feel currently. This whole situation that was displayed was just unreal, but as for the format of the doc and how it was unfolded while it was pretty well done at the same time it didn't do anything that really glued me to caring about what actually happened. Some of the stuff was talked about too long that I lost some interest (like, did the tank set the building on fire or was it a plan for Mass suicide). Still, a historical documentary is usually something that I can get into, and I was almost there. It does a decent job of giving us a message of how crazy people can ruin innocent children and women's lives, and that makes me feel pretty uneasy, so it did a good job with that.

And who knew Biden would be seen in this film. I kind of dislike that guy.

3

CosmicRunaway

05-19-20, 04:20 PM

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=64704

Inglorious Basterds (2009)
Directed by: Quentin Tarantino
Starring: Christoph Waltz, Brad Pitt, Mélanie Laurent

Inglorious Basterds has an impressive, tense opening that arguably sets expectations for the rest of the film a little too high. That introductory chapter is so successful thanks to Christoph Waltz, whose outstanding performance rightfully won him a number of supporting actor awards. The cinematography and direction certainly contributed as well, but I'd still be drawn in by Waltz even if the mise-en-scène was terrible.

That leads me to the one problem I've had with Inglorious Basterds every time I've watched it, and that's Brad Pitt. I just do not like him or his character. I'm not a fan of Eli Roth's performance either, but luckily he doesn't have many lines of dialogue. Pitt, on the other hand, is a fairly prominent figure, and is someone the audience is supposed to be rooting for. While he did still irritate me a little, it didn't detract from my enjoyment of the supporting cast as much as it did previously.

The rest of the performances are great. I'm always excited to see Daniel Brühl and Til Schweiger. Brühl gets a fair amount of screen time, but Schweiger is criminally underused. The comedic elements and occasional bursts of violence are quite entertaining, and the film looks fantastic from start to finish. I doubt I'll ever love this as much as some of Tarantino's other work, but it keeps getting better every time I see it. I wasn't particularly looking forward to rewatching this, but I'm really glad I did.

CosmicRunaway

05-19-20, 04:35 PM

Warning: Potential Spoilers for Inglorious Basterds below!

About the acting, I usually like Fassbender a lot, but here he didn't convince me.
I found him odd the first few times I saw the film, but this time his performance kind of worked for me and I think it might intentionally be a bit bad. He was a pompous, arrogant character whose overconfidence causes his downfall (and unfortunately the death of my man Stiglitz as well). He's trying to be impressive and present himself as something greater than he really is, but is ultimately terrible at it.

We lose Stiglitz though, waaaay to soon IMO as that's probably the only character I felt I wanted to see more from.
Couldn't agree more. :up:

Miss Vicky

05-19-20, 04:35 PM

Shame you don’t like Aldo. I think he’s hilarious.

CosmicRunaway

05-19-20, 04:38 PM

I think he’s hilarious.
Reading the other reviews so far I know I'm going to be in the minority, but there's just something about him I can't stand. I did actually get the biggest laugh out of one of his lines though, the "Like I said, third best" response to Ulmer saying he doesn't speak Italian.

ahwell

05-19-20, 07:41 PM

https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/stardem.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/9/1b/91b8775d-f35a-5f99-a3d1-9cb36d97279e/5c48d82b6bfb7.image.jpg?resize=400%2C618
The Matrix (1999)

I've also felt this movie deserved a better review than my junky old one. But now that I've rewatched it and I'm kind of at a loss for words again. It's just magnificent, fun, mind twisting. Everything I want out of a movie. I love every minute.

I love the characters. I love Neo and I love Trinity. I love Morpheus and I love all the side characters. I even love the villains, they're so cool and mysterious and you just love to hate them.

I love the cinematography. I love that this movie sets up its own visual style, and that it sticks to the grimy, murky colors - it doesn't try to be "beautiful" and in the process becomes absolutely beautiful.

I love the minimalist score. There is a great video on Youtube about this score and how it is absolutely one of the greatest in the last 30 years. It IS. It is heart pounding and catchy and just a masterpiece. Something I would listen to outside of the movie.

I love the Wachowski Sisters and I can't believe I haven't seen another one of their films. They have incredible talent for filmmaking and for making pure, good, ass kicking cinema. There is not much that beats that, and sometimes a good action movie is just the best kind of movie.

I love the story. I love the creativity of the post apocalyptic atmosphere, and how we are constantly questioning reality. I love that this still can be fun and also have dark moments of reality.

"Love" count in this short review: 15. I ****ing love this movie.

4-

ahwell

05-19-20, 07:43 PM

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51eiB2Q66VL._AC_.jpg
Waco: The Rules of Engagement (1997)

Waco: The Rules of Engagement is a documentary about the real life events involving the siege and raid of a group of radical Branch Davidians in 1993. It was a topic I knew virtually nothing about, so I'm glad to have seen this and it is indeed a terrifying and shocking time in United States history.

This isn't really a fault of the movie, but I indeed had to look up the actual events of what happened about halfway through. I don't fault the movie since this was likely designed as a further examination into an event that people were assume to already have background knowledge on.

While we start out learning about the creepy Branch Davidians - and they're Sinful Messiah as a leader, David Koresh, the documentary takes a twist in examining who actually may be the culprit of these events. As we zoom in more and more on little details, the film pieces together the terrifying theory that the government was more responsible for the death of multiple people - including children - than they wanted to let on.

It's almost more relevant today. We live in a shocking day and age, when we know the government is corrupt but we don't know who exactly or what they are doing or why. Everything is a mess. Waco reminds us that things have been a mess for a while.

And in that respect it remains a powerful and important documentary about how the truth is often concealed from us. Documentaries aren't my "thing" but I highly recommend this to anyone who is a fan, or interested in the topic. At the very least, it's criminally underseen on Letterboxd. Check this one out!

2.5+

Miss Vicky

05-20-20, 03:59 AM

64713

Dronningen (Queen of Hearts) (May el-Toukhy, 2019)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8378126/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0)

Date Watched: 05/19/2020
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 22nd MoFo Hall of Fame
Rewatch: No

Dronningen makes for a really interesting companion piece to Jagten (The Hunt), which won the 21st Hall of Fame.

But whereas that other film showed us how false accusations can destroy people’s lives when they are believed, this one shows us what happens when true accusations are thought to be lies. Both films are devastating in different ways, but Dronningen was a far more difficult watch.

Many times I had to fight the urge to turn the film off and I had to take breaks and watch the film in bits and pieces, not because it was ineffective but because it was perhaps too effective. My desire to stop watching is a testament to the quality of the film and to the performances therein. The things that were happening onscreen made me feel physically ill.

Which then makes the film VERY hard to rate. On the one hand, I never want to watch this again and kind of wish I could scrub my mind of it. On the other, its a powerful piece of filmmaking and I have immense respect for it, even if I also want to vomit right now. I guess I’ll sort of split the difference.

3.5

MovieMeditation

05-20-20, 04:34 AM

Damn. I’m not sure what to say, Miss Vicky...

Miss Vicky

05-20-20, 05:00 AM

Damn. I’m not sure what to say, Miss Vicky...

You picked a good one, I just never want to see it again.

rauldc14

05-20-20, 11:17 AM

I'll be watching State of Siege this morning to get me to 6/11

Thursday Next

05-20-20, 12:17 PM

Blue Ruin

"I know this is personal. That's how you'll fail."

There have been a lot of revenge movies, from the ones you root for the hero to destroy his enemies to the ones where it’s clear the revenge is disproportionate, misdirected or tragic, so I wasn’t sure this film would have anything new to say about revenge, but there is something in the sheer ineptness of the revenge-taker in this film which was unique and interesting. Instead of having trained for years in a remote mountain location to become a deadly assassin who serves his dish cold, our protagonist can’t even operate a gun and keeps leaving his car keys places he shouldn’t.

I liked Macon Blair as the main character, he was somehow believable. I didn’t root for him, in fact I cringed throughout a lot of it wishing he would just turn back before it was too late but it was already too late fairly early on.

The violence in this film was shocking, even though you knew it was coming, which was an effective tactic. The stunned look on Dwight’s face when someone’s head explodes, even though he has taken the decision to shoot them. It was just different to movies where the characters gun down their enemies without any sort of effect on them. The odd mix of domesticity and violence exhibited by characters keeping guns taped under their sofas or talking lovingly about them like collector’s pieces was unsettling.

I can’t say I enjoyed this film exactly, as it was one of those films that is an almost stressful experience watching it, but there was a lot to admire in it. There were times when it almost seemed like the set-up for a black comedy, but it never took that tone. I thought it was very well shot and I liked the way the notes of blue kept recurring throughout, but never in a way that was too obvious.

I’m not sure where this will end up on my final ranking, I think it is one I’m going to have to digest.

MovieMeditation

05-20-20, 12:28 PM

BLUE
64720
RUIN

Actually, this was a watch from the past with potential to become a new favorite and like the character in the film, I have been waiting impatiently to finally make my move. As it happens though, someone made the move for me and here we are in this Hall of Fame reviewing this film. So… was it worth it?
*SPOILER REVIEW*
What I like really about this film is the way the story is presented to us. It is a revenge thriller with reservations but not restrictions, which relies on realism and not reassurance. It isn’t a tumble through terrorists or mercenaries that relieves our protagonist with every powerful kill he makes, as the popcorn-munching audience applaud, watching our hero juggle around with justice. This is not a glorified revenge tale with a capable killer, but instead an everyday man wanting to do what he feels is right. As one of the characters says at one point “you are weak”. And he is. But then again, he is also simply “human”. It is easy for us to identify with his mindset because he is so mindful about what he does and never achieves perfection in what he does. He stumbles a lot along the way. And I love how no one here is downright good or bad. You can make assumptions based on partial information or your perception of the people you see on screen. But there is no evidence on display for the murder case or what kind of past these people have.

And it isn’t just evidence being left out, it is actually a lot of vital information – but most of which we get as the story progresses. Little by little we are shown who Dwight is, where he is in life and who or what is important to him. Small visual cues, character choices or changes in the story. All this helps us understand where Dwight has been since the murder, while the decisions leading up to his eventual doom draws a very visible line for us to follow and eventually piece together. Also, I really love Macon Blair as Dwight. He is doing a lot of acting with his eyes that even Tom Hardy would respect and there is just something about this low-rank office worker look that really works for me. He is the unlikely “hero”, but he is also weird enough to make his journey fascinating and he fails sufficiently so we can suffer through the situations with him and understand his frustrations and struggles every time his plan doesn’t pan out.

The violence is definitely not style over substance for me. I think it falls more in the vein of, say, someone like Michael Haneke and “that scene” in Caché, for example. Not as impactful or gut wrenchingly gruesome, but it has the same awkward abruptness, which makes it feel so real and spontaneous. It is ugly, messy, clumsy and almost misplaced. I also love the tension added to many of these scenes, which almost gets simpler as the story progresses, but all the more effective for it. Dwight being alone in the house of the enemy in the end, waiting while contemplating, considering and reconsidering… and as his friend told him earlier “speeches will get you killed.” And so, it did. Once again, the film is consistent about its display of violence, of character and of story. It is still not a glorifying revenge tale with definite kills that dwells in violence. It is tragically human, unambitious and terribly bittersweet within the hopeless downfall of everyone and everything.

And the postcard being pushed through in the end, arriving just a little too late, both solidifies and questions everything. We are left feeling blue with the inevitable collapse of our main character. Was it all for nothing? Had anything changed if nothing was delayed? Like the postcard, is Dwight’s purpose past the point of relevance? Does Dwight’s doings have any actual meaning or is his memory just a piece of mail on the floor of an empty house? Was it a critical and necessary journey or just a depressing downfall… that has left us as with him… in blue ruin.

4.5-

Thursday Next

05-20-20, 12:43 PM

I love the Wachowski Sisters and I can't believe I haven't seen another one of their films. They have incredible talent for filmmaking and for making pure, good, ass kicking cinema. There is not much that beats that, and sometimes a good action movie is just the best kind of movie.

I find their movies can be very hit and miss. There's nothing else quite like The Matrix (even the Matrix sequels. Perhaps especially the Matrix sequels...).

I like Bound, although that's not a pure action movie, it's a lesbian crime thriller. It has a lot in common with The Matrix visually, though, I think.

Cloud Atlas, which they co-directed with Tom Tykwer, is one of my absolute favourite films, but it won't be for everyone. Sometimes I think of nominating it for a HoF, but I know it would be very divisive. It might also be too long...

I enjoyed Jupiter Ascending, although it is in no way a good film, but Speed Racer made my eyes bleed.

ahwell

05-20-20, 12:55 PM

I find their movies can be very hit and miss. There's nothing else quite like The Matrix (even the Matrix sequels. Perhaps especially the Matrix sequels...).

I like Bound, although that's not a pure action movie, it's a lesbian crime thriller. It has a lot in common with The Matrix visually, though, I think.

Cloud Atlas, which they co-directed with Tom Tykwer, is one of my absolute favourite films, but it won't be for everyone. Sometimes I think of nominating it for a HoF, but I know it would be very divisive. It might also be too long...

I enjoyed Jupiter Ascending, although it is in no way a good film, but Speed Racer made my eyes bleed.

Oh gosh, Speed Racer is the one I'm most hyped for. They all look crazy and cool in their own way.

rauldc14

05-20-20, 01:42 PM

State of Siege

https://images.justwatch.com/backdrop/9307002/s1440/state-of-siege

Like when I watched Costa Gavras' Z, this was really a tough watch. Perhaps it was even tougher than that one actually. Political foreign films seem to be something that I just cannot get into for whatever reason, maybe just blame it in my shallow scope of personal film viewing if you wish to.

Biggest problem for me is that I really don't care one way or another what the outcome of Santore's character was. Whether that makes me an ass or not remains to be seen. It sounds like this was based loosely on true events. I think maybe the film would have been better off being a real true story and digging in better to some of the characters feelings and prospectives but it comes off as rather cold and standoffish to me.

The criterion copy that I had watched had the film looking really good, so that's my plus out of all of this. Really neat color restoration and I loved the look of the background drops.

Lastly, I can't wait to hear how Miss Vicky reacts to this film. Never have I been so confident that she will dislike a Hall of Fame film so I look very forward to seeing her review.

Sorry Siddon, but the film just wasn't up my alley.

2-

MovieMeditation

05-20-20, 01:53 PM

I love the Wachowski Sisters and I can't believe I haven't seen another one of their films.
You love the Wachowski Sisters but have only seen a single film of theirs? Maybe you should lower your “love counter” by at least one. ;)

But of course it’s cool still to love them for what they did with The Matrix. It’s just that while their other films do have fans, it’s mostly the first Matrix that people agree is truly great. But I’m looking forward to hearing what you think when you see some of their other work. :up:

rauldc14 I never made it past 20 minutes of ‘Z’ so I’m kinda scared for what I will think of State of Siege since it indeed looks really similar.

rauldc14

05-20-20, 01:54 PM

I like Z better, but I didn't like either.

Wyldesyde19

05-20-20, 01:57 PM

The Matrix

Nothing to really delve in here as everyone has covered it sufficiently.
What we have is a really good film full of religious, mythological and philosophical themes, from the names (Neo, Trinity And Morpheus, himself a reference to the Greek deity of dreams), to the scenes (the rebirth of Neo), to the dialogue.
They’re all really well done, even if isn’t very subtle. But this isn’t a subtle movie.
The movies moves at a fast pace, filled with great action scenes and sleek cinematography. And the acting. We all know the players by now and the quotes associated with them. They’re all well chosen and well acted.
But what keeps this film from being truly great is the last 30 minutes which go on too long, and is over produced.
For some reason someone decided more bullets = more $. Sad part is they were probably right, but the film suffers during those extended parts nonetheless. *
So what we have here is a good movie that falls just short of being great. But regardless, it’s that rare thing indeed.....a sci fi action film with a brain.
And most importantly, it actually works.

ahwell

05-20-20, 02:02 PM

You love the Wachowski Sisters but have only seen a single film of theirs? Maybe you should lower your “love counter” by at least one. ;)

But of course it’s cool still to love them for what they did with The Matrix. It’s just that while their other films do have fans, it’s mostly the first Matrix that people agree is truly great. But I’m looking forward to hearing what you think when you see some of their other work. :up:

rauldc14 I never made it past 20 minutes of ‘Z’ so I’m kinda scared for what I will think of State of Siege since it indeed looks really similar.

Nah, I love them as people. https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/may/18/lilly-wachowski-ivana-trump-elon-musk-twitter-red-pill-the-matrix-tweets case in point. which may seem odd but they're two filmmakers I really look up to, and I definitely am excited for their other films.

MovieMeditation

05-20-20, 02:08 PM

Nah, I love them as people. https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/may/18/lilly-wachowski-ivana-trump-elon-musk-twitter-red-pill-the-matrix-tweets case in point. which may seem odd but they're two filmmakers I really look up to, and I definitely am excited for their other films.
I see. Fair enough then. :)

CosmicRunaway

05-20-20, 03:38 PM

There's nothing else quite like The Matrix (even the Matrix sequels. Perhaps especially the Matrix sequels...).
As discussed earlier in the thread, there is only one Matrix film and any sequels you remember existing are just a bad dream. ;)

I enjoyed Jupiter Ascending, although it is in no way a good film, but Speed Racer made my eyes bleed.
My room mate walked out of Jupiter Ascending around the "I love dogs" line. I did manage to sit through the entire thing, but I'm not sure if I would be willing to watch it again. I think you're the first person I've ever seen or heard say they actually enjoyed it haha.

CosmicRunaway

05-20-20, 03:56 PM

It was amusing to see back-to-back reviews of my nomination haha. I wish I had something constructive to comment, but all I really have to say is that I agree with everything that was written.

I'm glad you still enjoyed the rewatch MovieMeditation!

The violence in this film was shocking, even though you knew it was coming
I think I said almost the exact same thing in my write-up. We know it's coming, and Dwight knows it's coming, but it's still somehow surprising to everyone haha.

I think it is one I’m going to have to digest.
That's pretty much exactly how I felt the first time I saw it too. Hopefully it sits well with you in the long run!

MovieMeditation

05-20-20, 06:50 PM

Aight, Joker has been rewatched. Gonna do review for that and The Matrix soon hopefully.

7 down. 4 to go.

I’m actually surprised it’s going this well for me. I feel like I’m in a good flow. Hopefully it lasts. I’m starting back up on work Monday. Hopefully I’ll be more or less finished by then. :up:

Miss Vicky

05-20-20, 07:09 PM

Aight, Joker has been rewatched. Gonna do review for that and The Matrix soon hopefully.

I saw your Joker rating on Letterboxd. Looking forward to the review.

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/JoaqGifs/joaqapproves.gif

edarsenal

05-20-20, 07:56 PM

That was a good one, CR.

Anyways, hopefully the negativity is over for Last Picture Show. I think CR, Ed, and Ahwell will really like it.

I have been curious to see it ever since it's disqualification in the 70's HoF, so we'll definitely see how it works out for me. I do have a good feeling seeing I do like the Bogdanovich films I have seen: Paper Moon, What's Up Doc?, and Mask.

rauldc14

05-20-20, 09:09 PM

edarsenal

05-20-20, 09:13 PM

https://66.media.tumblr.com/14462c279cf741a61e745d24fae588a3/tumblr_o2ui3vsdlH1rfd7lko1_400.gifv

Shine

Cecil Parkes: No one's ever been mad enough to attempt the Rach Three.
David: Am I mad enough, professor? Am I?

I'm unsure which I found more exciting, to see this film effect me as much, perhaps even in a more profound way than when I first saw it back in '96 or my discovery, as I researched David Helfgott and find out that he is still alive, still touring and still so wonderfully off-center with such a delightful soul/demeanor.

A fragmented film, that mirrors David's fragmented existence along with a few motifs, such as water/rain where David feels such free abandon in, we witness three separate actors playing him at three points of his life: childhood, late teens/young adulthood and in his forties. All three actors doing some extraordinary work as they delve into the madness/genius of this beautiful soul and pianist.

Such creative geniuses such as David have always fascinated me. Their creativity stemming from, and at times, assisted by whatever "demon" or mental illness that plagued them, or, when at conflict with that aspect of themselves, that the "salve" is creativity itself.
To see a fragmented mind that meanders as it does, focus so intensely and with such precision when performing some of the most difficult concertos imaginable. My god, I am moved, inspired and enamored.
It also does my heart good to see that the beauty within, eventually find a haven and the freedom to, run in the rain, to jump on a trampoline wearing only a long coat and nothing else, to find love and to be happy. In his life and in his passion; playing such captivating concertos.

edarsenal

05-20-20, 10:16 PM

https://media0.giphy.com/media/EEijR7o7kZI1q/source.gif

Inglorious Basterds

Col. Hans Landa: [to Perrier LaPardite] I love rumors! Facts can be so misleading, where rumors, true or false, are often revealing.

For quite some time I have held this film just beneath the echelon of huge favorites of Tarantino films, this recent viewing may have cracked open a hole in the floor of that echelon.

Reason being: that while Tarantino's trademark episodic film making has pretty much nailed it from his very first film, (and my favorite of them all) Reservoir Dogs (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105236/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1), with Basterds, there is a stumbling that has caused it to reside beneath the others. Much like the hidden family beneath LaPardite's floorboards.
Why it worked so well with others, the most famous being Pulp Fiction (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110912/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0) is the use of placards. Placing the end of one episode and the beginning of another. We do not have it here and because of it, I have stumbled over the switch-overs instead of glide over them.

BUT,

Surprisingly, there was a gliding over and sans stumbling whatsoever, this time around.
Could it be I have watched this enough times since the first time in the cinema that I instinctively know where one episode ends and the next begins? And therefore my perception has already made the transition without need of a placard?
Could be.
In fact, it's most likely.
I think it is, anyway.

Which is great, because it is a helluva film with all the nuances and devices that I've come to love from the very first time I rented Reservoir Dogs and was so frickin happy to see actual "dialogue" as opposed to "catch phrases" that had become such a horrible staple in the 80s Action genre. And while, at times, in some of his films, conversations DO get a bit long in the tooth, (for me it was Death Proof (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1028528/?ref_=nm_flmg_dr_6)) the ends to that means, aka the sh#t storm that erupts, is always a great payoff. And, of course, we have it here, in the incredible opening scene that some critique as placing the bar far too high for the remainder of the movie; to the tavern that is, to Aldo's agitation, in a BASEMENT.
Like so many Tarantino flicks, there are "moments" that stick out and make me smile just thinking of them.
Landa smoking that humongous Sherlock Holmes pipe that dwarves LaPardite's pipe. To Hitler's tantrum, pounding on the desk, raging, "Nein! Nein! Nein! Nein! Nein!"
Which is one of those "lines" that gets repeated in our household A LOT.

So, along with being a film I've enjoyed, multiple times, previously, I have an extra thanks for this specific viewing that has allowed me to glide over the bumps.
https://media.tenor.com/images/e3e181df11ae1fcd5017bd98f226206a/tenor.gif

rauldc14

05-21-20, 01:19 AM

36 reviews already! Only 85 to go!

Miss Vicky

05-21-20, 04:55 AM

64747

Waco: The Rules of Engagement (William Gazecki, 1997)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120472/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0)

Date Watched: 05/20/2020
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: The 22nd MoFo Hall of Fame
Rewatch: No

I find documentaries to be a significant challenge for me to rate and review. In a normal film, I can talk about acting performances, cinematography, plot, dialogue, etc. But here? I’m not sure what to say or even really how I feel about it.

I didn’t enjoy it. That much I know. While the subject matter had the potential to be interesting, this film seemed to linger too long on each point and goes a bit too deep into the minutiae of it all and I was quite bored with it.

I started this film knowing that the events at Waco involved a standoff between a religious sect and the ATF and that in the end a lot of people - including many children - lost their lives over it. I also knew that there was some dispute between the two parties as to who exactly was responsible for those deaths and how the events really unfolded. After 2 hours and 16 minutes of arguments, photographs, thermal video analysis, and interviews, I came away feeling like I’d learned nothing more. I still don’t know which side to believe (though I suspect that the real truth lies somewhere in the gap between both accounts). All I know for sure is that this is a tragic event in American history and that someone is to blame for all those innocent lives lost, but I knew that before I pressed play.

2.5

ahwell

05-21-20, 03:12 PM

https://media3.giphy.com/media/eHRwLGsS6QDViZhp2P/giphy.gif
Joker (2019)

A couple of months back I watched Joker, and, well, hated it. I was pissed that it got a Best Picture nomination and I didn't find Phoenix's performance all that great.

Well, if you want to hear what I hate about Joker see my other review. This time I'll be pointing out some things I like about this movie. Every movie I watch is a product of love and work by hundreds or maybe even thousands of people for months or years at a time. No matter how much I may dislike a movie, there is always credit to be given to the people who were clearly passionate in making it.Upon rewatch, I still don't love Joker, but I was overly harsh. I've bumped it up a half star and I have a lot of positive things to say this time.

Joaquin Phoenix, of course, is the thing that holds Joker together. I didn't think his performance was great last time, but this time it all clicked. Every scene he's in he steals - and that's 99 out of 100 scenes. He lost weight and changed his body to play the Joker. He gave it his all. That's commitment. And he won a deserved Oscar.

Without touching on the score (which I still, admittedly, do not like), the sound editing and layout is fantastic. I'm not an expert, but the sound here is great and I love the mix between knowing what is inside Arthur's head and what is actually happening.

I think this time around I was more on board with how the themes were presented as well. Joker doesn't have to be about how we live in a society. To me, it works better as a comment on the loneliness of the individual, especially when that individual craves community. Sure, Taxi Driver did it already and probably did it better. But there's something unique about Joker. There is a raw power in it that Taxi Driver doesn't quite achieve.

So there is a quiet beauty to Joker. It's a loud and in your face movie, sometimes to the point of being obnoxious. But beneath is a bruised butterfly, something so beautiful yet slowly and painfully dying. We look on with fear and horror, yet we somehow cannot bring ourselves to save it.

I still have a lot of problems with Joker. But every movie has problems, and perhaps I was unfair to this movie back in December. At the end of the day, Joker is simply unique and fresh, something that will not be for everyone but is still a movie I'm glad I experienced.

2.5-

ahwell

05-21-20, 03:14 PM

https://66.media.tumblr.com/726df2f8085b2be4a8509087ca952918/tumblr_plyc32c4ca1v03jtfo1_r1_500.gifv
Queen of Hearts (2019)

If you're a fan of the disturbing, infuriating atmosphere of The Hunt (2012) watch this 2019 Danish movie that pretty much reverses the plot of the Hunt.

With the Hunt, the accused offender is the protagonist - he is entirely innocent, yet a little girl is the victim who made up the crime. She is the "victim" and everyone - rightfully - believes her. In the Hunt, while certain people do awful things, the victim is believed and the townsfolk do not overlook the matter, even if they take it a bit too far.

Queen of Hearts, unfortunately, works the opposite way. What I find particularly fascinating about this is that the female director of Queen of Hearts - May el-Toukhy - chose to make a story about a male victim rather than a female victim. Of course, a victim is a victim but it is uncommon to see a movie about an empowered female abusing a young man (or, ick, boy in this case). And complaints could certainly arise from a movie about a male victim directed by a woman (much like the criticism of Bombshell for having been directed by a man). However, el-Toukhy handles the subject with maturity and, dare I say, elegance. This feels like a story that could happen, and probably unfortunately has!

So, yes, Queen of Hearts is about a married woman - Anne - who has a relationship with her underage stepson - Gustav. No, that's not the worst of it. Then, when Gustav tries to talk about her abuse, no one believes him, and Anne manipulates him and destroys his life. Without spoiling it, things spiral downwards into a bleak and infuriating ending.

What el-Toukhy does so well here is completely pull the rug on Anne as a character. She gets us to have feelings for her - at the beginning she is kind, successful, caring, and loving. She is confident and composed. Friendly yet quiet and not obnoxious.

Yet as we get further and further down the road our feelings begin to change. Anne, as a character we once felt sympathy for, turns into, quite frankly - a bitch - by the end. She breaks the law multiple times and then throws her victim under the bus for her personal benefit. Again, quite frankly, **** her.

So yes, everything here is ramped up to the highest level in terms of our feelings. If you can stomach stories about abuse - and much much more graphically than the Hunt, then check out Queen of Hearts. It's criminally underseen on Letterboxd, and I'm so excited to see what El-Toukhy will be doing in the next years - she has serious serious talent as a filmmaker!

3.5-

Citizen Rules

05-21-20, 03:21 PM

Joker (2019)
A couple of months back I watched Joker, and, well, hated it. I was pissed that it got a Best Picture nomination and I didn't find Phoenix's performance all that great.

Well, if you want to hear what I hate about Joker see my other review... Ah, ya can't get off that easy;) I want to hear what you hated it about. I want specifics!:D Seriously, you soft peddled that, so how about anteing up and posting your other review.

ahwell

05-21-20, 03:25 PM

Ah, ya can't get off that easy;) I want to hear what you hated it about. I want specifics!:D Seriously, you soft peddled that, so how about anteing up and posting your other review.

sksksksks ok you asked. Here's my alternate review from a couple months back:

What a disappointment. I was really looking forward to this one, but it was a boring, tired movie with nothing new or interesting to say.

I didn't think it was going to be as similar to Scorsese movies as some people say, but damn, this movie is King of Comedy without the interesting main character, funny script, and tight themes.

The best part about it was the use of one of my personal favorite movies, Modern Times. And that was used more in a way to show the snobbery of the upper class, so that's great. Silent movies = snobs.

Anyways, Phoenix is good. He's not Oscar worthy and I prefer Adam Driver in Marriage Story by a million miles, but I won't let the fact that his performance is overrated affect the fact that it really is quite good.

Script is God-awful. WHAT the **** is this doing with a nomination for best adapted screenplay? Surely the Academy could find some better movie to nominate than to give Joker an 11th nomination.

I just don't see the hype. At all. Or the themes/messages. Idk? Rich people bad. Society bad. Society. Rich. People. Whatever. By the end I get a hollow feeling, the feeling that I just wasted two hours waiting for some takeaway, and I think Kailey was right in her review that I think it's "we should be nicer to random clowns."

Easily my least favorite BP nom so far.

Hey! Cinematography and costumes are pretty great, and while the Hildur's score sucks I always love some Frank Sinatra!

Miss Vicky

05-21-20, 03:46 PM

I'm glad Joker improved for you but I wanted to touch on this bit from your previous review.

The best part about it was the use of one of my personal favorite movies, Modern Times. And that was used more in a way to show the snobbery of the upper class, so that's great. Silent movies = snobs.

While I agree that Modern Times was used to show the snobbery of the upper class, I disagree about the actual message Joker was sending. It's not "Silent movies = snobs," it's rich industrialists watching and laughing at movie about the plight of the working class while either not understanding or not giving a crap about the actual meaning behind that film. It's no accident that it was Modern Times specifically that they were watching.

Wyldesyde19

05-21-20, 03:58 PM

ahwell

05-21-20, 04:01 PM

I'm glad Joker improved for you but I wanted to touch on this bit from your previous review.

While I agree that Modern Times was used to show the snobbery of the upper class, I disagree about the actual message Joker was sending. It's not "Silent movies = snobs," it's rich industrialists watching and laughing at movie about the plight of the working class while either not understanding or not giving a crap about the actual meaning behind that film. It's no accident that it was Modern Times specifically that they were watching.

Yeah that’s a good point, and I definitely agree. And I actually was fine with the usage second time around for that reason.

ahwell

05-21-20, 04:03 PM

In regards to the screen play nomination:
Let’s not forget that Joker also showed how society at large views and treats those with mental illness. It’s been awhile since I saw it, which I will remedy soon, (And Miss Vicky can fill in the blanks and help refresh my memory) but I remember his Social worker (psychiatrist?) was having her office shut down due to cutbacks (?) leaving him no alternative to turn to.
He was literally cast out as an afterthought.
So the screen play nomination was deserving.

Yeah, agreed, but also I don’t understand what that has to do with the screenplay? Sorry, don’t want to come off as aggressive just wondering.

And also keep in mind y’all I was posting my review from months ago, my opinion on a lot of things has changed a lot.

Miss Vicky

05-21-20, 04:13 PM

I think we just need to make ahwell watch Joker again and again until he loves it. If it has enough impact to make him increase his rating by, what? Half a popcorn box each time? That's only 5 more times he has to watch it. :D

Wyldesyde19

05-21-20, 04:19 PM

Yeah, agreed, but also I don’t understand what that has to do with the screenplay? Sorry, don’t want to come off as aggressive just wondering.

And also keep in mind y’all I was posting my review from months ago, my opinion on a lot of things has changed a lot.
No worries, I didn’t take it as aggressive. *
Everything in the movie sprouts from the screenplay. From the dialogue, to the actions and themes and indeed, anything as seemingly innocuous as how one may eat or drink sometimes.
On occasion there might be thrown in on the fly by the actor (Brando was particularly known for doing so), but generally it’s all in the screenplay.

Citizen Rules

05-21-20, 04:23 PM

sksksksks ok you asked. Here's my alternate review from a couple months back:

What a disappointment. I was really looking forward to this one, but it was a boring, tired movie with nothing new or interesting to say.

I didn't think it was going to be as similar to Scorsese movies as some people say, but damn, this movie is King of Comedy without the interesting main character, funny script, and tight themes.

Script is God-awful. WHAT the **** is this doing with a nomination for best adapted screenplay? Surely the Academy could find some better movie to nominate than to give Joker an 11th nomination.

Sorry to do that to you, well Cricket had done that to me a couple times, so I guess that's fair😁 Anyway thanks for posting that:)
It sounds like you really hated Joker on a first watch.

I know you said it was boring and the script sucked. I have a couple questions:

Did you morally/ethically object to anything in the film?

Were you expecting it to be firmly in the Batman universe? And are you a big fan of the Batman movies?

I'm OK with any opinions anyone has, I just curious as to how/why the film failed you at first watch?

ahwell

05-21-20, 04:27 PM

No worries, I didn’t take it as aggressive. *
Everything in the movie sprouts from the screenplay. From the dialogue, to the actions and themes and indeed, anything as seemingly innocuous as how one may eat or drink sometimes.
On occasion there might be thrown in on the fly by the actor (Brando was particularly known for doing so), but generally it’s all in the screenplay.
Ok cool, yeah I meant more dialogue than anything else, which I found really forced. It was trying to be a Scorsese movie (I.e taxi driver which portrays mental illness in a much better way).

ahwell

05-21-20, 04:29 PM

Sorry to do that to you, well Cricket had done that to me a couple times, so I guess that's fair😁 Anyway thanks for posting that:)
It sounds like you really hated Joker on a first watch.

I know you said it was boring and the script sucked. I have a couple questions:

Did you morally/ethically object to anything in the film?

Were you expecting it to be firmly in the Batman universe? And are you a big fan of the Batman movies?

I'm OK with any opinions anyone has, I just curious as to how/why the film failed you at first watch?

1. I think the films intentions were good, but I think it was a really shallow interpretation of mental illness. I can’t really explain myself further than that, but the short answer is no, I don’t morally or ethically object to anything here much.

2. Nope! In fact I have not seen a single Batman movie, just parts of the Dark Knight.

Wyldesyde19

05-21-20, 04:37 PM

1. I think the films intentions were good, but I think it was a really shallow interpretation of mental illness. I can’t really explain myself further than that, but the short answer is no, I don’t morally or ethically object to anything here much.

2. Nope! In fact I have not seen a single Batman movie, just parts of the Dark Knight.

I can agree with the first part. It does come off as shallow on occasion. And Taxi Driver definitely did it better, yes. But I think Joker, despite its flaws, did a good job on shining a light on its subject nonetheless.
It’s nowhere near the same league as Taxi Driver, and in fact I think the comparisons hurt it.
As for the second part? You need to remedy that ASAP. Start with Batman (1989). Then Watch the Dark Knight trilogy

ahwell

05-21-20, 04:37 PM

I can agree with the first part. It does come off as shallow on occasion. And Taxi Driver definitely did it better, yes. But I think Joker, despite its flaws, did a good job on shining a light on its subject nonetheless.
It’s nowhere near the same league as Taxi Driver, and in fact I think the comparisons hurt it.
As for the second part? You need to remedy that ASAP. Start with Batman (1989). Then Watch the Dark Knight trilogy
Yes, I’m highly looking forward to those!!

Miss Vicky

05-21-20, 04:42 PM

Eh, I don't know that you're really missing much by not having seen the Batman movies. I couldn't even finish Tim Burton's Batman the last time I tried to watch it and I grew up with that movie and generally enjoy Burton. I loved The Dark Knight when I first watched it, but have liked it less with each rewatch to the point where now I don't even much like the movie, I just like Ledger's performance.

Citizen Rules

05-21-20, 06:07 PM

1. I think the films intentions were good, but I think it was a really shallow interpretation of mental illness. I can’t really explain myself further than that, but the short answer is no, I don’t morally or ethically object to anything here much.

2. Nope! In fact I have not seen a single Batman movie, just parts of the Dark Knight.Those are perfect answers...I asked because I wondered if you might have objected to the film using mental illness to 'entertain', which you said you didn't. And that aspect didn't bother me either, though I could see some people being sensitive to that issue.

I wish more of the film had been focused on Arthur's mental illness and how he coped (or didn't cope) with society, so I agree there too. I'm not at all a fan of the Batman movies and I've only seen the first couple ones like a million years ago.

Thursday Next

05-22-20, 01:16 PM

The Last Picture Show

"Wouldn't hurt to have a better home town."

I didn’t particularly enjoy this the first time I watched it, but it was a while ago and I couldn’t really remember it in much detail beyond a few scenes. I’m sorry to say I didn’t particularly enjoy it this time either.

Made in the 70s but made to look 20 years older…sometimes it felt like the whole idea was to make it look like a 50s film and then shock you with 70s nudity in a kind of effort to get to get to some kind of grim hidden reality behind 1950s censorship. There was a whole lot of mostly unpleasant sex stuff going on in this film. I don’t know that being graphic about things necessarily makes it more honest than something like, say, Splendour in the Grass. The kissing scenes were weird, why did they all do such weird things with their faces? Was it another attempt to be like 1950s films?

I didn’t much like the look of the film, or the sound, or the pace. There was something a bit oppressive about it which was perhaps intentional, to evoke the bleak and oppressive nature of the town, but stopped me from enjoying it. Just about everyone in this film is unlikable as well, which made it a bit of a slog. Nobody shows the slightest bit of empathy for anyone else (until Sonny near the end with the truck scene and that whole ending felt like one bleak step too far).

It did well in showcasing the hopeless feel of living in a small town without much of a future. It’s mostly about the teenagers, but it was the adults with their disillusionment who provided more of the poignancy. The scene I liked best was Ruth after her hospital appointment, “My god, you don’t know a thing about it.” Basically all the adults talking to the teenagers about life summed up – see also Jacy’s mother telling her to sleep with Duane so she’ll see he isn’t anything special, or Sam the Lion saying marriages are unhappy about 80% of the time. This was the polar opposite of rose-tinted nostalgia and it’s interesting to contrast it to something like American Graffiti, released only a year later.

I thought the picture show would feature more in the film, to be honest, given the title. Interesting choice of Red River as the last picture in The Last Picture Show – since it’s basically a film about people leaving Texas.

Thursday Next

05-22-20, 01:21 PM

Question about The Last Picture Show:

Was it Jacy's mother who Sam the Lion had had an affair with, the married woman he talked about to Sonny earlier? What she says to Sonny later certainly seems to suggest so, but in that case why did he leave the Joe Bob the preacher's son all that money? I thought at the time it was because he'd had an affair with the preacher's wife and might have been Joe Bob's real father. Maybe he had affairs with lots of people!

CosmicRunaway

05-22-20, 06:02 PM

So I just watched Dronningen. It is not at all what I thought it was going to be, based on the 3 sunny looking screenshots I saw of it before hand. That's a good thing though, since I thought it was going to be some sappy romantic film haha.

Question about The Last Picture Show:

Was it Jacy's mother who Sam the Lion had had an affair with, the married woman he talked about to Sonny earlier? What she says to Sonny later certainly seems to suggest so, but in that case why did he leave the Joe Bob the preacher's son all that money? I thought at the time it was because he'd had an affair with the preacher's wife and might have been Joe Bob's real father. Maybe he had affairs with lots of people!
I was wondering the same thing. I thought she confirmed that she was the one he took swimming, but I didn't get why he left the money to the preacher's boy. Maybe he had another reason that wasn't explained in the film? It's apparently based on a novel, so there was probably some backstory cut out.

MovieMeditation

05-23-20, 08:53 AM

So I just watched Dronningen. It is not at all what I thought it was going to be, based on the 3 sunny looking screenshots I saw of it before hand. That's a good thing though, since I thought it was going to be some sappy romantic film haha.
I would never ever nominate a sappy romantic film. I can barely stand watching them, so I sure as hell wouldn't be putting y'all through such misery. :p

(but I'll gladly make y'all suffer in other ways though:cool:)

Citizen Rules

05-23-20, 12:59 PM

I would never ever nominate a sappy romantic film. I can barely stand watching them...Boo.

I love sappy romantic movies. Think I'll nominate something with Anne Hathaway next time:p

Miss Vicky

05-23-20, 01:35 PM

64825

État de siège (State of Siege) (Costa-Gavras, 1972)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070959/?ref_=ttmi_tt)

Date Watched: 05/22/2020
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 22nd MoFo Hall of Fame
Rewatch: No

I don’t even know what the hell to say about this movie. It took me a long damn time to get through it - much longer than its actual runtime - because I kept dozing off. I slept fine last night and I didn’t feel particularly tired, I was just bored. Extremely bored.

Granted, political thrillers are not generally my cup of tea anyway, but this particular political thriller was severely lacking in character development and also lacking a story that held any interest for me. Not that there was a whole lot of story to speak of. Most of the first half was just a bunch of incessant talking. By the time things actually started happening, I was too disconnected to care.

Not that any of that is to say that this is a bad movie. It may very well be a great movie for someone who does care about the story. But I just couldn’t. I also was not particularly impressed by any of the technical aspects of the film. I have no complaints about the cinematography, set design, score, etc., but have no praise either.

I think the only thing that could get me to rewatch this film would be a really bad bout of insomnia, and then only in the desperate hope of it making me fall asleep again.

1.5

CosmicRunaway

05-23-20, 03:35 PM

Warning: Spoilers for Dronningen below!

My question to those when you see it, near the end Anne sees Gustav in the mirror. Was it a flashback or what was going on there?
I assume it's her conscience feeling haunted by him, since she was indirectly responsible for his death.

CosmicRunaway

05-23-20, 03:44 PM

I have quite a bit written on Dronningen that I'm going to edit down before posting, but pretty much the entire thing is spoilers. I typically try to avoid talking too much about the plot in my reviews, but I'm not entirely sure how to approach this film without discussing what happens.

Miss Vicky

05-23-20, 03:46 PM

Warning: Spoilers for Dronningen below!

I assume it's her conscience feeling haunted by him, since she was indirectly responsible for his death.

That’s also how I interpreted it.

CosmicRunaway

05-23-20, 06:35 PM

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=64833

Queen of Hearts / Dronningen (2019)
Directed by: May El-Toukhy
Starring: Trine Dyrholm, Gustav Lindh, Magnus Krepper

Dronningen is a beautifully uncomfortable film that plays on sympathy and expectations to deliver a poignant message about abuse. From the very first frame to the last, there is palpable tension in the air that generates a feeling of unease. It gives the early scenes a sense of impending disaster, and once the subject matter becomes more troubling, that atmosphere compliments the story perfectly. The lighting is cold at first, though it starts to warm up with more earthy tones once the central relationship progresses, before reverting back to that empty and distant appearance for the final act.

Warning: Spoilers below this point.

These changes in colour mirror Anne's character, as well as her feelings towards her husband and step-son. She is unfulfilled in her marriage, and her interactions with Peter make it clear that neither of them are completely happy. Her situation is framed sympathetically, and the audience is seemingly meant to root for her self discovery and sexual reawakening. Gustav on the other hand is introduced as a bratty, trouble making youth. After initially acting out, he finds acceptance and an opportunity for a new life. He's fantastic with his step-sisters, and has a caring family he belongs with. He slowly becomes more likeable so that there's a greater impact when everything is ripped away from him.

The growth of their relationship is incredibly difficult to watch, but as inappropriate as it is, it pales in comparison to Anne's handling of the situation later on. Given that she works with abused children and young adults, her choices are even more damning. She knows what she's doing is wrong, but doesn't hesitate to turn on Gustav anyway. It's this transition from being a problematic protagonist to a truly vile and despicable human being that really makes the film stand out. It challenges viewers' perceptions, and succeeds in what it set out to accomplish. The tragic ending leaves Dronningen on a grim note, but it's a fitting conclusion to such a dark story.

cricket

05-23-20, 07:35 PM

I'll take a link for Dronningen if anybody has one.

rauldc14

05-23-20, 09:56 PM

I'll take links for Shine if anybody has one.

cricket

05-23-20, 10:48 PM

I'll take a link for Dronningen if anybody has one.

Thanks CR!

Miss Vicky

05-24-20, 04:39 AM

64839

Shine (Scott Hicks, 1996)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117631/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0)

Date Watched: 05/23/2020
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 22nd MoFo Hall of Fame
Rewatch: No

I should probably preface this review by stating that I am not a musician, nor am I a fan of the piano or of classical music in general.

I am, however, a sucker for a good biopic and for a story of someone who rises above adversity. I’m also just a little bit biased when it comes to performances from Geoffrey Rush. Now, Rush is not an actor whose work I actively seek out (mostly because I’m a shallow bitch who loves eye candy and he is definitely not eye candy), but in no performance I’ve seen has he ever failed to put his all into a role. That’s true whether he’s playing the Marquis de Sade (if you haven’t seen it, go watch Quills!), an undead pirate captain, a speech therapist, or a prudish, uptight writer at the end of his rope who stumbles his way into a friendship with an ex-groupie who gives great hand jobs (check out The Banger Sisters for a decent laugh). Shine is no exception and Rush very much earned all the accolades he got for it.

But there’s more to it than just Geoffrey Rush’s jaw-dropping performance. There’s a very human story of abuse, mental illness, passion, and understanding. Ahwell posed the question of whose passion is it? Was it David’s or was it his father’s? The answer that I think is closest to the truth, or at least to the truth as the film presents it to be, is both. I think David and his father shared that passion but his father went beyond just molding and focusing David’s drive to succeed and instead used it as a way to punish and imprison him.

As to the music, once again I know very little about classical piano, but I thought the repetition of Rach 3 and the focus on that as being the thing that drives Helfgott, was very fitting. That piece of music was a poignant representation of Helfgott. It’s passionate, it’s complicated, and it’s got a manic energy that is at once mesmerizing and a just a little intimidating.

The film though, of course, is not without its flaws. It does slide into cliche and it wraps up far more tidily than I would like, but with such a strong central performance these things are easy for me to overlook. And it’s easy because when I watch a film, I ask only one thing of it: Make me care. Make me feel something. And Shine succeeds admirably.

4

P.S. Hey edarsenal - I actually really enjoyed a nomination of yours that wasn't a rewatch! What's the world coming to?! :eek:

MovieMeditation

05-24-20, 08:17 AM

WACO
64840
THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT

I don’t know what this review will amount to because I honestly don’t know how to approach this. And not just because it is a documentary, but because there was a lot about it that I just didn’t like and didn’t care for. So as nicely and inoffensive as I can put it, I really don’t want to waste my time talking about it. This one just isn’t for me. But as already stated by others, I certainly admire the attempt at nominating something different, so for that I have a lot of respect. The film just happened to not be for me.

First of all, while there are many Americans on this forum and I don’ want to get shot for my opinion here, I just can’t stand the “freedom speeches” that so many of the people give in this documentary… that twisted sense of having a right to do whatever you want because you have the “freedom” to do so because you are an American citizen with American rights or whatever. But anyways, I’m sure most commonsense Americans also hate the kind of people who misuse the term or hail it as a holy grail of possibility, which can bend the rules of the law because “rights” and “freedom” are their own law. Jesus Christ. And on the topic of Jesus Christ, I’m really not a religious person myself, though I don’t mind people who just mind their own business and believe whatever they want to believe. It is of course a shame that there are people out there who ruins it for those who peacefully pray or calmly practice their religion… but yeah, this documentary definitely showed everything wrong with religion… and with the American government… and the American gun law and culture… and so on and so forth.

But even for all these eye and ear aching problems – which really isn’t that much a problem of the documentary as a piece of work – then the very biased angle certainly was a problem for the documentary itself. It is one thing to choose the angle you want to focus on throughout the documentary and then to completely wash away important aspects of the bigger whole. This documentary just didn’t focus enough on the Davidians as the “bad guys” or at least the grander discussion present about possible sexual abuse, power abuse and whatnot. It seemed to glance over that way to quickly with some quick “facts” from people that either believed it wasn’t true or that it was actually okay for underage girls to get married when the parents give their consent. There was so much more to all this, but instead the documentary quickly became all about what the government did wrong and how the Davidians were the obvious victims. I felt there was too much left out leading up the actual “main event” of destruction and death and tragedy. And the points made against the government and the ATF, FBI and whatnot seemed to drag on for too long, going over the same points and shoving the apparent evidence in your face. This repetitive pandering just wasn’t as apparent when the other side of the story was discussed. And that annoyed me.

Because yes indeed, this is a great tragedy in American history. Clearly. There is no doubt about it. And there is no doubt either, that a lot of what was done by the government in terms of handling this situation was completely wrong and out of order. Even without all evidence it is clear to see that something was extremely wrong and extremely suspicious when it came to the handling of the situation, as well as the aftermath with them clearly struggling to prove their innocence in this tragedy. And that is honestly also why I’m even more saddened, angry and annoyed that the approach to the tragedy wasn’t more balanced. I don’t like how it tries so hard to shove its opinion down my throat. It just didn’t work for me. I was interested in the overall evidence and the discussions, not the constant attempt at getting me to feel a certain way – complete with the overly manipulative music during the end credits.

I hope I didn’t rub anyone the wrong way with this. I mean, isn’t this what a documentary can do? Make you feel a certain way, whether that is due to the subject matter, the handling of the subject matter or just your own personal standpoint contradicting with whatever you see on screen… I just wish my feelings – and the documentary – had been mainly about the tragedy itself and not the general biased presentation of it. Wacko indeed... whoever or whatever one wants to assign that term to...

rauldc14

05-24-20, 08:49 AM

I see myself nominating a doc somewhere down the line. Like I said I'm really glad it finally happened it just didn't hit on a personal level.

rauldc14

05-24-20, 08:49 AM

Also, I have to go the animation route sometime too, because it's severely misrepresented in the generals.

ahwell

05-24-20, 09:48 AM

Also, I have to go the animation route sometime too, because it's severely misrepresented in the generals.
I’ve nominated two animations in generals so far but they didn’t gel too well... may choose another one down the line.

Wyldesyde19

05-24-20, 01:13 PM

I may be the only one who is impressed by Waco here haha. Oh well, Thems the breaks sometimes.
I do feel Genocide is much better, and there are certainly better docs out there as well, but Waco (and I’ll be reviewing it shortly) is much better I think then some people are giving it credit for.
Documentaries are a tricky thing in general, as they don’t follow any typical formula, which is among the reasons why I love them.
Still....it’s better then Super Size Me haha

edarsenal

05-24-20, 01:28 PM

64839

Shine (Scott Hicks, 1996)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117631/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0)

Date Watched: 05/23/2020
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 22nd MoFo Hall of Fame
Rewatch: No

4

P.S. Hey edarsenal - I actually really enjoyed a nomination of yours that wasn't a rewatch! What's the world coming to?! :eek:

wait -- WHAT?! You enjoyed it?!?!?!?!

https://i.gifer.com/4Gtu.gif

OH NO
You're right - what IS the world coming to?!
Such a phenomenon could have all kinds of unheard of repercussions. . . this could be the very end of the world?!? Dogs and cats, living together, total chaos!!
https://media1.giphy.com/media/3o72F1pKAlawnBQdZS/source.gif

Citizen Rules

05-24-20, 01:43 PM

CosmicRunaway

05-24-20, 04:16 PM

I was thinking about watching Waco next as well, but I should probably wait until I'm in the right mind set to give it a fair shot. Normally I'd rather stare at a blank wall than have to sit through a documentary, even if the subject matter interests me.

Wyldesyde19

05-24-20, 04:34 PM

CosmicRunaway

05-24-20, 05:05 PM

From now on, I’m nominating nothing but docs just for you! MwaHahaha!
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/WeakWearyEuropeanfiresalamander-size_restricted.gif

Citizen Rules

05-24-20, 06:01 PM

I want to see more musical docs:D

Miss Vicky

05-24-20, 11:28 PM

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MovieLog/mildred.gif

Mildred Pierce (MIchael Curtiz, 1945)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0037913/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1)

Date Watched: 05/23/2020
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 22nd MoFo Hall of Fame
Rewatch: No

I don’t really have a whole lot to say about this one. I appreciated the portrayal of an independent woman, but there wasn’t a whole lot else that I liked about it. Well, maybe Ida. She was kind of funny. Everybody else though was pretty s***ty, while not being s***ty enough to root against because they were mostly being s***ty to each other. They all deserved each other as far as I could see.

And while it certainly is not the worst offender I’ve seen, my experience suffered even more so from the stilted acting that was common for the time. It takes me out of a movie anytime someone sheds obviously fake tears (that are not fake within the context of the story) or when two characters are talking and one suddenly stops then a unnatural space of silence happens before the other person starts talking and yet I as the viewer am supposed to believe that the first person was interrupted by the second. And that’s not even taking into account the annoying dialogue, especially between Monty and Mildred when they were at the beach house the first time. I also cringed anytime Butterfly McQueen’s shrill voice was heard. Holy crap that woman is annoying.

But if I’m totally honest I was at least never bored of the film. Annoyed, yes. Absolutely. But not bored. So at least there’s that.

2.5

cricket

05-24-20, 11:54 PM

I thought you'd like that^^more.

Miss Vicky

05-25-20, 12:08 AM

I thought you'd like that^^more.

No such luck, unfortunately.

Just I, Daniel Blake and rewatches of Inglourious Basterds and Joker left now.

rauldc14

05-25-20, 12:33 PM

Shine

https://wildfiremovies.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/shine.jpg

It was weird that this one kind of slipped through the cracks and that I had never really heard of it before this.

I'll be in the minority but I feel like without Geoffrey Rush this film may not really be much. He definitely was the best part of the film, and even then so, he really isn't even in it all that much for playing the lead role and having it cut into basically thirds with kid David and Adolescent David. But he did do a real fine job portraying what seems like a very difficult character, so it was a well deserved Oscar from the looks of it. I feel like David's father did pretty well too, but again, it felt like he wasn't in the film all that much either.

The father/son relationship was the best part of the film for me. Actually, the film felt a bit rushed to me, especially the second half. Of course, I knew next to nothing about the main character going in, so maybe that hindered my enjoyment of it all. And like others, I'm not too big into the piano history type stuff in general unfortunately.

It was a decent film for me, but I wasn't floored. The biopics I've seen seem to be either hit or miss with me. I'll let this one probably stand in the middle though.

3

MovieMeditation

05-25-20, 05:45 PM

I’m probably doing a little break now because of work. Should get one or two done in the coming weekend.

Miss Vicky

05-25-20, 06:55 PM

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MovieLog/danielblake.gif

I, Daniel Blake (Ken Loach and Laura Obiols, 2016)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5168192/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1)

Date Watched: 05/25/2020
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 22nd MoFo Hall of Fame
Rewatch: No

I, Daniel Blake is a bleak film that stands as a searing indictment of a system that is ostensibly designed to help people but actually serves to degrade and humiliate them.

Dave Johns and Hayley Squires are both excellent as two people who form a friendship and bond over their shared troubles. Both are driven to desperate acts to survive and both do what they can to support each other. Both struggle to maintain their dignity.

There is some humor here, the pacing is good, and the film lacks much in the way of filler, but it is a very difficult watch emotionally and I often found myself in need of tissue to wipe my tears. But it’s that sort of thing that makes for a moving and memorable experience and for that I highly recommend it.

As as an aside, the other thing I highly recommend is to turn on subtitles. As an American, I sometimes struggled to understand the dialogue.

4

CosmicRunaway

05-25-20, 07:20 PM

There is some humor here, the pacing is good, and the film lacks much in the way of filler, but it is a very difficult watch emotionally and I often found myself in need of tissue to wipe my tears.
I'm going to wait to rewatch this until my room mates aren't home, because I also cried a little when I saw it the first time. I'm not sure if it'll have the same emotional impact the second time around, but I find that I get more invested when I'm watching a film completely alone.

neiba

05-25-20, 07:47 PM

Citizen Rules

05-26-20, 12:40 PM

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=64867
Waco The Rules of Engagement (1997)

I'm very curious as to what everyone has wrote about this documentary. Myself, I love documentaries, but it's going to be hard to rate this one. The production values weren't high, but yet the subject matter really got to me in a way no film ever could.

The doc was able to present information that made me do a 180 on the Waco incident. Anytime a doc can change your mindset that's powerful stuff. All I had remembered about the Waco incident was that some kook, cult leader held up in a religious compound ended up committing mass suicide by burning their own building. That's what I had though happened...The doc presented evidence, such as the infrared recordings that totally changed my mind.

You know it's hard not to react to the incident, vs purely judging the doc's production values. So I'm not going to try...

David Koresh was a nut case and it never ceases to amaze me how people can follow a nut case right into the grave. I never knew Koresh was a polygamist and was accused of being a pedophile. I can't stand to look at the guy he just creeps me out.

For all the crazy **** that the Branch Davidians embraced, they didn't deserve to be gassed to death & machined gunned down by the FBI! Wholly **** I can't believe the images of the FBI using machine guns on the backside of the compound where no one could see them. I mean the children in there didn't deserve to be cooked alive....When it's all over, it's very telling that the FBI removes the Davidian's flag and runs their own FBI banner up the flag pole. Then the FBI proceeds to alter the crime scene and conveniently lose evidence that could've proved the FBI's wrong doing.

Mind bending stuff!....Thanks Wyldesyde for nominating this illuminating doc!

Thursday Next

05-26-20, 01:15 PM

Shine

"Your first concert in years and you wear odd shoes."

I really don’t know why I’ve never watched this film before, since I’ve always known of it. Anyway, now I have!

Biopics generally are not my favourite sort of film. I hadn’t heard of Hefgott before watching this and I don’t know how close this story is to real life, but it’s almost always better not to know, so I haven’t looked it up.

It’s interesting that Geoffrey Rush won awards for this, since he is in less than half of it. I think the actor who plays the younger David, Noah Taylor, who has been in lots of things since like Peaky Blinders and Game of Thrones, deserves more credit. Although Rush is very good, as always.

I found the first half to be more interesting than the second half. There was more focus and more insight into the characters. I found it quite sad as well. The second half just seemed a bit more disjointed. We never really get any explanation about David’s illness, he just seems to randomly meet people, then move somewhere else - and him getting married seemed to come out of nowhere.

I enjoyed the music in the film, especially the Rachmaninoff.

One sad thing about it for me was that I think my mum would have loved this film, but she died last month and so I can’t recommend it to her.

Miss Vicky

05-26-20, 04:49 PM

I’m really sorry to hear about your mum, Thursday. :(

CosmicRunaway

05-26-20, 04:52 PM

Sorry to hear about your mom. Must've been especially hard with everything else that's going on. Hope you're doing okay.

rauldc14

05-26-20, 05:00 PM

Sorry for the loss Thursday

ahwell

05-26-20, 05:49 PM

https://www.blurayauthority.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/stateofsiegehd_pub.png
State of Siege (1972)

State of Siege is a dark political thriller with the potential to be great; unfortunately, it is not great. But it has some really good things going for it. The camera movements are slick and unique, although they began to grate on me nearing the end. It's a highly mobile style, one that can work for intense scenes but falls flat when we're just looking for a dialogue or character building moment.

Being based on true events, State of Siege strikes up an almost documentary style. It certainly offers very little in the field of character development. While that can be interpreted as a bad thing, it does work quite well in setting up the facts - not emotions - of the situations. Of course, being a fictionalized movie, the viewer should expect emotions.

The first and foremost thing a filmmaker should be out to do is create an emotional connection between the story and the viewers. Plenty of movies based on true events have been able to do that, and plenty have twisted reality to be able to achieve that affect. State of Siege seems unwilling to present anything other than "events" and "facts" and "conversations". It doesn't dive into its characters, and certainly doesn't dive into swirling emotions beneath all of this.

That's entirely fine, since State of Siege, at the end, is intended as a political commentary on the United States governmental and official corruption, especially in Latin/South America. Heck, it's a general criticism of power corruption around the world. That's an important message, and I admire State of Siege for so boldly tackling it. I just wish some emotional tug had been established, allowing the viewer to be more engaged in this important story.

In the end, if you came searching for an intense, politics-first movie-second, thriller, you will get that. State of Siege has a ton of great elements going for it, as I said. As for me, I would have preferred something of a little more substance to draw me in. Still worth a watch for those who think this might be for them!

2-

ahwell

05-26-20, 05:50 PM

Oh gosh I'm so sorry TN :/

ahwell

05-26-20, 05:52 PM

https://66.media.tumblr.com/5ed4efbe41eb9ef1dda82f134109cd1a/tumblr_oo8sqcTSgV1t12pdio7_500.jpg
I, Daniel Blake (2016)

I, Daniel Blake can be interpreted as - and, in many ways, is - a commentary on the failure of the government in helping those in need, it more importantly boils down to a tale of love and acceptance. And how we should never judge those around us, instead extending a loving arm.

In that way, IDB is a warm hug. It is a tragic story, and there are some incredibly tough moments to watch (food pantry, shoplifting scenes come to mind) but in a way it's a comfort film. There are some genuinely beautiful moments here where people just do random acts of kindness towards Daniel or Katie. That's seriously inspiring to a grump like me.

I like how each likable character feels real, as in they have flaws and issues. We can sympathize with everyone in this situation. Even the government workers have people coming in every day who can't understand what is going. It is those workers' responsibility to take care of it with patience and understanding... but people aren't that perfect. IDB does not point fingers at people; it points fingers at the system. I applaud it for that.

The heartbreaking ending and powerful scenes are what elevates to this to be a great movie. While there are moments of dullness, and the message can sometimes be too in the face, they are small quibbles. This movie is both incredibly intimate and larger than life.

So it is with I, Daniel Blake in mind that I hope to get out there and help other people; whether it be "defrosting" computer screens or taking people around at a food pantry. I am so so fortunate in my social position right now, and this film shows that it is mostly all by mere chance. None of us choose what we are born into. But those of us who were a bit luckier can always extend that loving hand and help those in need.

3.5+

ahwell

05-26-20, 06:03 PM

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/CookedActiveJaeger-size_restricted.gif
Blue Ruin (2013)

You're angry. So angry that the world is unjust. That you have to live in fear. You want to kill, but you only want to kill the right people. The people that harmed you. They only harmed you because you harmed then.

Violence is a cycle. Jealousy is a cycle. Power struggle is a cycle. Perhaps all the same thing, or at least play off one another. You will never be satisfied with what you have. You will want a piece of the other. But once you have committed your crime, that "other" will want their own revenge. It will continue. You will die alone, without friends, without family - they will all be long gone too.

The characters in Blue Ruin seem happy with dying. Or at least they're okay with it. They see themselves as part of a larger war. Dwight, while he questions his own skill and courage, never questions that what he is doing is "right". His sister, when she finds out what he has done, gasps but is not upset. She, instead, applauds him. By killing a man, he did what was morally "good".

(Mild spoilers in this paragraph) Of course, those morals get turned upside down later on as we realize the real man Dwight was after was already dead. He had been building up hate for Wade Jr. for twenty years. And now, to realize that it was all simply a cover-up. Imagine hating someone for two decades; and only after you have killed them finding out the truth.

Only at the end is there a twinge of absolute sorrow from Dwight at all of this bloodshed. It must stop. It must stop. Yet there are too many holes for it to be stopped. People crave justice, whether or not that justice is truly justified.

So, in many ways, Blue Ruin is one of the saddest movies I've seen. Death, here, is at its most in-your-face. Even in Tarantino or Scorsese movies, a death is something of reverence. Here, it is just another face in a sea of blood and bones.

Perhaps nothing can sum it up better than William Blake's poem (The Poison Tree):

I was angry with my friend:
I told my wrath, my wrath did end.
I was angry with my foe:
I told it not, my wrath did grow.

And I watered it in fears
Night and morning with my tears,
And I sunned it with smiles
And with soft deceitful wiles.

And it grew both day and night,
Till it bore an apple bright,
And my foe beheld it shine,
And he knew that it was mine,--

And into my garden stole
When the night had veiled the pole;
In the morning, glad, I see
My foe outstretched beneath the tree

3-

Citizen Rules

05-26-20, 07:51 PM

So sorry to hear about your mom, Thursday. I hope the future days are brighter for you.

rauldc14

05-27-20, 12:34 PM

Mildred Pierce

https://pimg.mycdn.me/getImage?disableStub=true&type=VIDEO_S_720&url=https%3A%2F%2Fvdp.mycdn.me%2FgetImage%3Fid%3D257707084451%26idx%3D7%26thumbType%3D32%26f%3D1&signatureToken=cpix9GUFJ9OlfcRLuSiLiQ

This one had always been on my radar but I had just never gotten around to it. Finally glad to see I was able to.

The film's strength is perhaps the way that the story is told. A rather bit unconventially and through mainly narrative through Mildred. I like how it goes through the life of the Pierce's and sets up for a very entertaining second half of the film.

While not pure noir, I liked the balance that the film had. And of course the acting was real good in my opinion. Joan Crawford won an Oscar playing Mildred and I think it was deserved. The supporting cast was impressive, of course the actress who played Veta was great but I also enjoyed the comic relief of the character Ida.

I really didn't see the film playing out the way it did either, that was a rather pleasant surprise and I always enjoy when things aren't very predictable. The relationship between Veda and Mildred was perhaps the overall showcase of the film, the two played great off of each other.

I'll definitely make sure to come back to this one some day. I really enjoyed it.

4

Miss Vicky

05-27-20, 01:07 PM

I rewatched Inglourious Basterds last night. Will try to get it written up tonight and maybe rewatch Joker.

MovieMeditation

05-27-20, 05:40 PM

Mildred Pierce has been watched.

Now only 1 watch and 1 rewatch left... State of Siege and Dronningen. I’m severely behind on reviews though. Maybe that’s what I’ll get done in the coming weekend then. :up:

rauldc14

05-27-20, 05:42 PM

I give you a lot of props for being able to review something that far after seeing it. I barely can say much even right after watching it lol.

MovieMeditation

05-27-20, 05:55 PM

I give you a lot of props for being able to review something that far after seeing it. I barely can say much even right after watching it lol.
One word:

Notes.

That said, the two reviews I’m missing outside this one are Joker and The Matrix - both of which I have seen more than 3 times and both of which had the previous watch less than half a year ago... so both are as bright as ever in my mind. :)

ahwell

05-27-20, 06:08 PM

I give you a lot of props for being able to review something that far after seeing it. I barely can say much even right after watching it lol.

I'm following someone on LB who is like 1.5 months behind in reviews (https://letterboxd.com/reibureibu/ if you're curious), I'm like how do they do it???

Citizen Rules

05-27-20, 10:59 PM

Mildred Pierce

This one had always been on my radar but I had just never gotten around to it. Finally glad to see I was able to.

I'll definitely make sure to come back to this one some day. I really enjoyed it.rating_4 Yes! finally someone really liked one of my noms:) Glad you liked it Raul, it's easily a top 25 movie for me. There's also a mini series based on the same novel, with Kate Winslet & Guy Pierce. I seen it and it's pretty good too.Mildred Pierce (TV Mini-Series 2011)

(https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1492030/)

MovieMeditation

05-28-20, 04:33 PM

64950

Mildred Pierce
SPOILERS
When the film started my first thought was “it must have taken forever to cut those waves frame-by-frame coming in over the opening credits” … anyways, after that, the film threw us right into the middle of a murder, which sets the plot in motion and led me to believe a lot of things, though none of them ended up true. At first, I thought this might be a movie where the story reveals the murderer from the get-go, and we are supposed to play catch-up for the rest of the runtime. That was partly true. But Mildred wasn’t the murderer and it really wasn’t about finding out why she killed that guy. It was to find out why that guy was there to begin with. It turned out to be more of a story about all the bullet points that would eventually add up to that very gun and exactly why it goes off.

You can definitely sense this story comes from a classic crime novel. It is filled with twists and turns and distinct characters in descriptive situations – laying out so many threads that there is enough for the entire rug that ends up being pulled away from under our feet. I think this is both a strong and a weak point with the film. It is fascinating and fun to slowly find out about the who’s and the why’s, but in a way, it also felt a bit like overtelling the story. It might be less of a flaw and more of a personal preference, but to me it didn’t screw the story tighter as it went along, but instead screwed around more with the plot than needed be. Simply put, the story could have been told “two or three reveals ago”. But it just wanted to always go that extra step. I understand the ambiguity and the excitement that all this creates – especially in book form where you can draw things out more – but in movie form it all felt a bit rushed or crammed together. I wouldn’t say they failed to make it work, but the plot just felt a little worn out by the end… or maybe it was just myself feeling worn out.

The movie clearly wants to go a long way for the sake of exciting storytelling and the element of surprise rather than the sake of realism and plausibility. The movie really went to the extremes to push all these buttons, but occasionally it just felt too written and not naturally presented – and too serious in subject matter for all the fun it was having with those buttons. I’m fine with that honestly, though I felt like the balance between murder investigation and family revelation wasn’t always perfect. In a sense it’s really one and the same though, which is also what makes this film unique – that the murder mystery is in fact a family tragedy. It is fun to follow every character collide with Mildred’s life and eventually somehow have a place in the midst of this mess. Joan Crawford is very good as the titular character and it almost feels like she was born to play it. Wally is a fun character, but very one-note. In a way, a lot of the characters are sort of one-note. At least they don’t really have the greatest of arcs – most of them are the same people from beginning to end. But they are very alive characters on their own and with a dose of that witty flow and loose dialogue it all works out well in the end. I would have liked Vida to have been introduced a bit better though, even if she works really well simply as a spoiled little brat – and a seriously evil one at that.

Somehow, I kept reading the title of the movie as ‘Mildred Piece’, which in a way still makes sense, since Mildred is persistently giving Vida a piece of her heart only to have that very heart pierced by Vida with every attempt she makes. So, I guess it works fine either way... Overall, I was always entertained but never entirely enveloped in the story. It was a good time nonetheless, I’m glad I saw it.

3++

Miss Vicky

05-28-20, 06:12 PM

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MovieLog/ibburn.gif

Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0361748/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1)

Date Watched: 05/26/2020
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 22nd MoFo Hall of Fame
Rewatch: Yes

I remember watching this movie in the theater with my mom. She HATED it. She was not okay with its rewriting of history. I, on the other hand, loved it instantly. With its potent combination of heart-pounding dread, tragedy, humor and one hell of a bloody and satisfying tale of revenge, Inglourious Basterds is a hell of a fun ride and not once in the countless times that I've watched it have I ever felt its lengthy runtime.

That said, it's not a perfect movie. Like others, I certainly could have done without Michael Fassbender's character and performance and I would have liked to have seen more from badass Stiglitz. However, these are pretty minor complaints. The contributions of the other actors (especially Brad Pitt, Christoph Waltz, Mélanie Laurent, and Daniel Brühl) as well as the getting to watch history play out the way it should have, more than make up for any shortcomings.

4+

rauldc14

05-28-20, 07:17 PM

We are at 53 reviews now. Please let me know if I've missed any of yours.

CosmicRunaway

05-28-20, 08:07 PM

I thought I would need to break Waco up over the course of a few days, but I managed to watch it all earlier this evening. I did take some mini breaks, but only to walk around the apartment or stare out the window (...or into the fridge) for a few minutes. I have no idea what I'm going to write about it though, since most of the things I usually focus on don't really apply to documentaries.

Siddon

05-28-20, 10:59 PM

https://jordanandeddie.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/post11.jpg

I, Daniel Blake (2016)

For whatever reason trying to tell stories of people in poverty has always been exceedingly difficult. In most cases it's reduced to melodramatic horror stories that are completely unrealistic. Also stories like this feel specific to certain regions. I had seen one Ken Loach film before Kes though this genre feels very specific to me.

Daniel Blake who's wife dies and he has a heart attack, he needs to work but his doctor won't allow him to do so. In his attempt to get benefits he fails in doing so because of a lack of computer literacy. Now as an American the story is ridiculous it's his responsibility to take care of himself the government does not help you. In America the dignity you're given is the cops might not murder you if you are lucky. The English entitlement system is a hell of a lot better than ours.

But I know that's not what I should be focused on, the lead performance by Dave Johns is great. I like how the film tries and touches on different types of poor people and the gig economy that we are now living in. I won't get into the ending but the final result felt really on the nose and somewhat manipulative.

Siddon

05-29-20, 02:13 AM

https://i1.wp.com/film-book.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/joaquin-phoenix-joker-01-700x400-1.jpg?fit=700%2C400&ssl=1

Joker (2019)

I'm going to be honest here...I think it was a mistake to nominate this film. Some films really don't hold up on repeat viewings other films you need more time to revisit but for me this was a six month revisit of the film. I know I had positive feelings about it the first time I watched in on IMAX but it's flaws really come out on the second viewing. Also when you repeat view something you want to pick up things you missed...this is a film bereft of subtly.

Arthur Fleck is a psychologically damaged man living in 80's New York during a garbage strike. Fleck is not a trustworthy narrator but that sort of storytelling is very inconsistent his mental issues seem to come and go. He's pitiful one moment and then violent the next but we get so many moments of coherency so as a character study it doesn't really work for me.

Todd Phillips has a flare for creating an amazing Gotham city, it's not the best Gotham and I would have liked to see a slow transition to Burton's Gotham because they had the money but it's still a fully realized world. The soundtrack is also incredible, the choice of music is timeless picking up songs from a forty-sixty year period of time. Phoenix gives a hell of a performance it's his best work. It also has my biggest pet peeve in films this movie has a half dozen evil white men and a half dozen sympathetic minorities. It's just way too much of one note characters that exists solely for audience appeasement.

CosmicRunaway

05-29-20, 06:11 AM

In his attempt to get benefits he fails in doing so because of a lack of computer literacy. Now as an American the story is ridiculous it's his responsibility to take care of himself the government does not help you. In America the dignity you're given is the cops might not murder you if you are lucky.
I thought you were going to say it's ridiculous because you didn't believe he'd be so inept at technology, but nope, you took that straight to the ugly truth instead.

CosmicRunaway

05-29-20, 11:04 AM

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=64965

Waco: The Rules of Engagement (1997)
Directed By: William Gazecki

Waco: The Rules of Engagement appears at first to be presenting its viewers with only the facts of this incident, however a lot of important details are glossed over in favour of showcasing only one side of the story. It's clearly providing a counter argument to a narrative I'm completely unfamiliar with, so it feels as though I'm sitting in on one half of a court case, and leaving the room whenever the opposition starts speaking.

That's not to say that the events it depicts are anything short of tragic however, because they're absolutely horrific and unjustifiable. The problem is that there's just too much missing information and testimony about the religious group in question, and what exactly lead to this escalation. The film spends far too much time focusing on the same details over and over again, when it could've used that opportunity to create a more complete record of the incident.

In lieu of providing the whole picture, the documentary could've been far more effective had its runtime been dramatically cut so that the redundant facts didn't feel so repetitive. There were a good 15 minutes towards the end of the film that I found legitimately shocking and stomach turning, but it quickly got lost in more drawn out hearings. The subject matter clearly had the potential to leave an impact, but unfortunately the manner in which the evidence was presented couldn't hold my attention for long.

ahwell

05-29-20, 11:56 AM

https://i.gifer.com/RWvh.gif
Shine (1996)

While in many ways Shine plays a by-the-books, cliche, and predictable rise-fall-rise plotline, there are a ton of things to applaud it for. Shine is about passion, and finding love when someone you dearly love(d) has forsaken you.

I'm not entirely convinced about the ideology of Shine, however. David, as a young kid, plunks out the notes of Rach 3, and his father comes and sits at the piano with him. "One day, you will play this and make me proud", father says. To him, Rach 3 is a symbol of absolute artistic achievement - being able to play the hardest, most complex, thing, is the highest honor. So in the movie, this concerto is a symbol of corrupted passion. Yet David, later, learns it and it becomes the center of his life. Is it his passion for music or his father's? That should be the burning question the movie asks but it skips over it.

I find criticism with the fact that, to this movie, being able to play the hardest, fastest, piece is being the best. No pianist or musician will tell you that - and no honest musician is out to prove how fast they can play Flight of the Bumblebee, or whether or not they can play "the hardest piece ever written". Many pianists consider Mozart to be one of the hardest composers to play due to the nuanced touch needed, yet in Shine the "professionals" condescend to it; "He'll start with Mozart" says the piano teacher when taking in David. In real life, many pianists would tell David to start with Rach 3 and transition to Mozart.

I'm now getting off track, but, despite these major issues with the film's ideology, it truly is inspiring and wonderful to see a human being get back on track with their life. Especially when played by Geoffrey Rush. His screen presence is certainly Oscar worthy (hey, they got it right that year!) and he controls every scene he's in. I know very little about David Helfgott but Rush pours passion and energy into him, and makes sometimes a poorly-written character pop out as three dimensional.

And, Rach 3 being one of my favorite pieces, it was delightful to hear. The soundtrack incorporated original score with classical tunes that I recognize and love. Some of them were irksome (Chopin wrote far more than one Polonaise) but I can't fault the movie and it doesn't detract much.

So Shine, despite its issues, is inspiring and beautiful. However cliched and predictable it may be, it will never cease to amaze me how people thrive and shine, especially when coming out of dark situations. I guess what I'm trying to say is, Shine reminds me that I really Do love people :)

3-

ahwell

05-29-20, 11:59 AM

https://media0.giphy.com/media/l0HlD6W8ReNiaLhiU/giphy.gif
The Last Picture Show (1971)

It's winter. As far as you can see, everything is covered in white. Sparkling, magical, snow. It lines the rooftop of every house, every street in the neighborhood. Every tree branch. Depending on the density of the snow, there might be snowmen outside. You see kid after kid come to sled at the hill across the street. You sledded there when you were a kid. Your parents sledded there, and their parents. The snow is another sign that; a second has passed, a minute has passed, a day has passed, a year has passed. Time has passed, and once the snow melts it will all pass again.

The Last Picture Show feels timeless because we experience it through three different times of American history. Our time of course; the time this movie was made; and the time this movie takes place in. On a technical level, this is very much a 70s movie. But on an emotional level, this feels like an authentic 50s movie. The cinematography, the script, the acting - you're there, back in time. And in a funny way, that makes it easier to relate to our own time. It's a small dying down. It could be mine, it could be yours. It's all blown away anyways by now. Those high school seniors are all probably dead, or in their 80s/90s. Out with the old, in with the new.

It's spring. Finally, the chattering of the birds returns. And yes, flowers really do bloom. Grass grows. The snow turns into slush, and then into mud, and then into puddles. Nature is stretching her limbs. Wild thunderstorms. And then beautiful soft rains to follow. During those night rains, you look out, across the parking lot right next to your house, at all those gleaming lights up the hill. You know every family in every house, but the "newness" of it all makes you feel dazed and lonely. The dead of winter is gone. Life has started again. And each blossoming bud is a sign that time is indeed passing. Spring is less wistful about it, though; it gets down to the business of living.

In the Last Picture Show all the characters pretend they're looking for sex and love and relationships. But they're all really looking for a way out. There's so much world out there, and to be cooped up in a Texas town all your life must be saddening and maddening. Duane joins the army, not out of patriotism or even money, but out of boredom and frustration. Jacey wants to go to college, but she really just wants to leave her parents and her memories. Both good and bad. Sonny doesn't even know what he wants, but he knows that his time is going by quickly. And if he blinks, he might miss it.

It's summer. Hot, but not just hot. The type of air that sucks all the energy out of your longs. You're trying to get to the swimming pool down the block, but you don't even have the energy to walk there. The grass is yellow and sick. The sun beats down relentlessly. Makes the shade seem like Heaven. You've got nothing to do; school's out. You work at the grocery store, couple hours a day. Your parents worked there when they were in high school. And their parents. Every hot summer night, as a shift ends, you look up to the stars above the store and wonder if your parents and grandparents did the same. If your kids will do the same. And then wonder if it's a bad thing. Change doesn't have to be good. You forget that time is passing during the summer. But it is. It still is.

So as they all split off to their own lives, they realize they'll all come back to Anarene someday. Everyone knows them, everyone talks to them. There's something both exciting and frightening about the big city. The small towns are boring but comforting. Dying, but going out with a smile and a wink. Sonny, and Duane, and Jacey, and the rest of them, have grown up together. Shared laughs and tears and beers and picnics and dances and test scores. Shared their lives. It's scary to go out there and face the real world.

It's autumn. So many colors, all furious reds and oranges and yellows. The trees are dying; but how can they make dying look so beautiful? In a way, autumn is both a death and a start. For those of us stuck in high school, the stress and the grades begin again. You were almost beginning to miss it as the summer came to a close. You see some friends who were away from the summer. Play flag football in the backyard. Go to crappy school dances. Go for long walks. Every day on the walk to school you wonder if your parents and grandparents had walked that same path. If it's their path, is it still yours? How to be independent, and be happy? How to please yourself and others? There's too much to do and too little time. Speaking of time, it's still passing. And now, you really feel it. Every second. Every minute. Every day. Every week. Life is passing by. Keep your eyes wide open, and you might not miss it.

4+

ahwell

05-29-20, 12:01 PM

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/DazzlingClutteredDikdik-small.gif
Mildred Pierce (1945)

A "noir" that's not really a noir, Mildred Pierce is at heart a tale of two women. A mother-daughter relationship that's about as toxic as one can get. Good thing I didn't decide to watch this with my mom on mother's day!

The noir feel to Mildred Pierce has more to do with the structure. It opens with a murder, and as Mildred is investigated, she tells the story of how it happened. Much like the plot of many, many, noirs, notably 1944's Double Indemnity. It came out only a year before this, so the comparison was likely.

But while I think Double Indemnity is the better film, Mildred Pierce is also the more emotional. It works better as a drama, a story of what we go through to please our loved ones, even if they don't love as back. Or how both love and greed blind us in different ways. At the heart is Joan Crawford's performance. She gives it her all, and to me she is ten times better in this than Johnny Guitar. And both performances are fantastic.

Another reason this is an "on-the-fence" noir is because, for much of it, it's a plain drama. It's actually pretty easy to predict the "twist" (although I won't spoil it here), but Mildred opening the restaurant, finding love, and fighting with her children is all more along the lines of a typical family/slice of life drama. If anything, Mildred Pierce is a "mashup" film.

But I suppose the fact that a particular genre can't be placed for Mildred Pierce makes it all the better. It certainly stands out as an early film where women hold the foreground. It shows both the discreet sexism in 1940s American society, as well as the system that causes even mother and daughter to go up against each other. Remember that Veda has been told by society that to be accepted as a woman, she likely must dress up all prim and proper and act like a lady. While I certainly don't sympathize with her and the way she treats her mother, it's also regrettable that the reason she's this way is because of what much of society has told her.

This subtextual commentaries make Mildred Pierce stand out as a true classic. The script is tight and focused, and certain scenes - the death of Kay - and the ending, still hit incredibly hard.

What with this, Casablanca, and Robin Hood, Michael Curtiz is becoming a director who's movies I highly respect. I'm not sure how I like him as a director, since people have pointed out to me that many of his projects were actually studio films that he more or less gave a helping hand to. But nevertheless, his efforts haven't left me disappointed once, and I'm excited to explore more.

3.5+

Miss Vicky

05-29-20, 12:38 PM

It also has my biggest pet peeve in films this movie has a half dozen evil white men and a half dozen sympathetic minorities.

Which ones are those?

Let me see, there's the lady on the bus who tells him to leave her kid alone, the neighbor lady who barely knows he exists, the therapist at the beginning who doesn't listen to him, the records guy just doing his job, and the therapist at the asylum that we meet once for all of a couple of seconds. Did I miss anyone? I suppose you could maybe count the last two but I'd say that's a stretch. The only character I would call sympathetic is Gary and he's white.

Siddon

05-29-20, 12:55 PM

Which ones are those?

Let me see, there's the lady on the bus who tells him to leave her kid alone, the neighbor lady who barely knows he exists, the therapist at the beginning who doesn't listen to him, the records guy just doing his job, and the therapist at the asylum that we meet once for all of a couple of seconds. Did I miss anyone? I suppose you could maybe count the last two but I'd say that's a stretch. The only character I would call sympathetic is Gary and he's white.

I would say the mothers in the story operate as a contrast to Joker's mom, and the film is constantly hitting you over the head with it's white male rage narrative. Hell they even made a song about it...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vT0h0tXXBzc

Thursday Next

05-29-20, 01:07 PM

I just wanted to say thanks everyone for your posts and post comments with sympathy about my mum.

I watched Inglourious Basterds yesterday so will attempt to combine my thoughts about it into some kind of coherent post.

Miss Vicky

05-29-20, 01:28 PM

I would say the mothers in the story operate as a contrast to Joker's mom, and the film is constantly hitting you over the head with it's white male rage narrative.

So normal mothers who aren't horrible to their children "operate as a contrast to Joker's mom"? What? That doesn't even make sense.

Thursday Next

05-29-20, 01:43 PM

Inglourious Basterds

"You're no more German than that scotch."

Just thinking about this movie makes Inglorious by The Wildhearts play in my head, despite it not being one of the anachronistic songs chosen for the soundtrack...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vN2ikgs7Kfc

I had mixed feelings about this the first time I watched it, and they remain fairly mixed!

The first thing I noticed this time around (I blame the Westerns Countdown) is that IB is a Western. Or it wants to be a Western. From the title to the titles, to the opening scene of the enemy approaching from the distance while the young woman is at the pump to the scalping ‘Apache’ Basterds to the Western-influenced sounds and music to the Mexican standoffs – I’m sure someone more well-versed in Westerns could find dozens more examples, but even a Western novice like myself could see it was stamped all over it.

Now that opening scene – the highlight of the film, for sure, which sadly means it’s all downhill from there, but what tension! Brilliant. Christoph Waltz was excellent in this – he speaks four different languages and manages the same smiling menace in all of them.

Then the tone shifts from tension to odd dark comedy, with forays back into long tension filled scenes every so often – the dinner discussing the movie with Landa ordering Shoshanna a milk was another good bit. The funny thing is, I found it jarring at first, but by the end, the comedy was more effective than the drama. I enjoyed the Basterds’ failure to pass themselves off as Italians, but there was certainly an uneven tone overall.

I didn’t like the Basterds themselves, either time I watched this. Somewhere in here, possibly, is a sharp 90- minute film about Shoshanna’s cinematic revenge that doesn’t include them at all. Brad Pitt gives off this smug vibe every time he’s on screen, Eli Roth is awful, and I felt uncomfortable being expected to root for these bastards, who are little better than the people they are killing, when it comes down to it, and their whole 'eye for an eye' philosophy. And the scalping was horrible. Perhaps there was a point being made there about the cycle of violence etc. etc. but this isn’t Blue Ruin, it’s Tarantino so I doubt it. We’re probably supposed to revel in it.

This is a good-looking film, the lighting was great and I liked the look of the cinema. The image of Shoshanna standing by the round window in her red dress with anachronistic Bowie music playing particularly. The idea that cinema itself was the murder weapon and the instrument of revenge - just brilliant! – shame QT couldn’t quite stick to that vision and had to throw in some machine guns. I didn't quite find the fantasy ending satisfying and would have stopped it with the realisation that the flames are real and left it there, that was the mic-drop moment realy. I liked the little clip of Hitchcock’s Sabotage illustrating the explosive nature of film. But was it necessary to name-drop Pabst in every other scene?

The little sections where people’s names appeared and there was a little potted history of them or arrows drawn on to point out particular characters were a good idea in theory but there really should have been more of that sort of thing, doing it so infrequently was just odd. I could have done without the usual Tarantino foot fetish nonsense as well. And the line about respecting directors. And it still irks me that they went to the trouble of getting Michael Fassbender to talk in a slightly off German accent for a plot point, and then cast Mike Myers as a British officer. Why try so hard some of the time? It just added to the general messy unevenness of it all.

Thursday Next

05-29-20, 01:57 PM

Just looked up my previous review (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=13966&page=5) for Inglourious Basterds, and yeah, pretty much agree with myself :lol:

rauldc14

05-29-20, 04:56 PM

The halfway mark was just crossed!

62/121

GulfportDoc

05-29-20, 08:02 PM

Shine (1996)
...
And, Rach 3 being one of my favorite pieces, it was delightful to hear. The soundtrack incorporated original score with classical tunes that I recognize and love. Some of them were irksome (Chopin wrote far more than one Polonaise) but I can't fault the movie and it doesn't detract much.
...
For those who may not know what "Rach 3" is, it's the Piano Concerto No. 3 (1909) written by Sergei Rachmaninoff, which has been traditionally considered one of the more difficult piano pieces in the repertoire.

Ahwell, I have the piece on CD played by Rachmaninoff with Ormandy and the Philadelphia Orchestra. Do you have that one? It's actually available cheaply on Amazon-- probably because it's in mono sound. Wonderful to hear the master play his own piece though!

Wyldesyde19

05-29-20, 08:06 PM

ahwell

05-29-20, 09:07 PM

For those who may not know what "Rach 3" is, it's the Piano Concerto No. 3 (1909) written by Sergei Rachmaninoff, which has been traditionally considered one of the more difficult piano pieces in the repertoire.

Ahwell, I have the piece on CD played by Rachmaninoff with Ormandy and the Philadelphia Orchestra. Do you have that one? It's actually available cheaply on Amazon-- probably because it's in mono sound. Wonderful to hear the master play his own piece though!

I do not have that one but I may have heard it if it's on Youtube, since I obsessively went through a bunch of the recordings on there. Especially when following along with the sheet music it's really ****ing impressive how so many pianists pull it off:eek:

but yeah composers playing/conducting their own music is so amazing to hear, Stravinsky and Copland conducting is also super interesting, although they didn't actually champion their own music imo

ahwell

05-29-20, 09:10 PM

There’s a meme I once saw from a pianist acquaintance of mine about having to have your fingers be crooked and twisted to play his pieces.

https://i.imgur.com/aazQoWp.gif

^^your friend is correct lol. that's a performance of his 2nd piano concerto, which isn't even that difficult by his standards.

Wyldesyde19

05-30-20, 01:51 AM

Inglorious Basterds

Basterds sets the tone for what to expect from this film. Many moments of suspenseful exchanges punctuated by quick and sudden violence. And bloody. But this film doesn’t have much action, as it’s a very dialogue driven film. At least not until the last act anyways.
Take for example:
The beginning scene where Hans Landa (played with equal parts charm and menace by Chris Waltz) breaking La Padite with a casual conversation laced with certain terror.
The scene where Landa questions Emmanuelle/Shosanna about her cinema and how she acquired it while ordering strudel.
The secret meeting between The Basterds and their spy, Hammersmark (played with a certain glam by Diane Kruger) which results in a tense stand-off with SS officer Dieter Hellstrom.
The introduction of The Basterds lead by Brad Pitt as Lt Aldo Raine.
Sprinkle in several great performances (Highlighted by The aforementioned Waltz as Landa), and you have, in my mind, QT’s second best film after Jackie Brown.
If there are issues with it it is Hitlers cartoonish performance, as well as some of the scenes taking longer then they should. Sometimes QT tends to overwrite a scene and thus lingers too long on them. But those are quibbles.
It’s a great film, And one I have seen many times since my first time in the theatre.

Siddon

05-30-20, 11:43 AM

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-C1Xt1XYxpUc/TlfOC33JM1I/AAAAAAAAHiM/JSwzYXkRwTo/s1600/matrix10.jpg

The Matrix (1999)

You know after 20 years of watching bad CGI it's nice to go back and watch a film like The Matrix and appreciate telling a story around the effects you can create vs telling a story and trying to make effects fit the story. The film does have flaws...it feels like the majority of the dialogue is an information dump and college freshman philosophy. Yet the film still works for me because it's also sort of a prototype of Marvel film origin story without actually being based on a superhero. Though you do have to admire the structure and the build.

Laurence Fishburne is very good in this...nobody else is but he carries the film and gives this whole world a sense of gravitas and empathy that sells the film. I also forgot the humor in the film less based on quips and more based on images something you don't see much of today. I also enjoy many of the setpieces, the 2199 world is well realized and it's scenes are for me the most powerful and where I wish the other films would have gone more into.

Siddon

05-30-20, 11:59 AM

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcTXZzn_xdfHYtXQ1ZY6CcNVTY0nWXDgs2m-iBgJmiu3vkDK8mNz&usqp=CAU

Inglourious Basterds(2009)

Tarantino originally conceived of Basterds to be a Band of Brothers esque TV mini-series where I suspect he would got into each of the storys one by one. Well that didn't happen so what we ended up getting was a chapter based huge story that just covered the best bits. This is one of those films where I think it gets better everytime you watch it.

Each chapter is pretty much perfect, Tarantino starts off with the most suspenseful scene in the film and then proceeds to lull you into his Tarantino world for the rest of the film only to jolt you out of it in several parts. Brad Pitt is really good in the supporting role a hillbilly who is both smarter than he appears but also flawed a John Wayne esque character for the modern day.

Tarantino's best job in this film is clearly his casting picking up a troupe of European actors like Melanie Laurent and Daniel Bruhl who manage to give us a very dark twisted tragic romance. Diane Kruger's Bridget Von Hammersmark manages to give the film some old Hollywood glamour...though Fassbender's Erroll Flynn impersonation doesn't necessarily work for me.

But the star of the film is Christoph Waltz who won an Oscar...justifiably for his Hans Landa a Nazi of charm, intelligence and menace. But what I love of Waltz's performance is those moments that he breaks and gives Landa human reactions. I think my favorite moment is when his poker face breaks when he first hears the Basterds speak Italian.

Siddon

05-30-20, 12:10 PM

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RtFzdVbYiV8/WXEn3A_bUBI/AAAAAAAAC08/nLHp5XxIUMoalJA6L9aioXiGNP9Zwo5DACLcBGAs/s1600/mildred%2Bpierce-%2Bblyth%252C%2Bcarson%252C%2Bcrawford.jpg

Mildred Pierce (1945)

I wonder if this is the feminine version of Citizen Kane. This is the story of a mother who divorces her philandering husband and attempts to build up a restaurant empire while dealing with heartbreak and a truly evil daughter. The entire story is also wrapped around a murder mystery which though obvious is still engaging.

It's kinda crazy that Ann Blyth who received an Oscar nomination didn't get a top billing spot on the poster because Scott and Carson are really periphery characters in the great scheme of things. I wonder if we can blame Crawford for that. Joan is good as the titular hero a woman who both drives hard and is also manipulated by the people around her. I like a character with faults like that it adds a different dimension to the film.

I'm not sure what genre I would classify this as...but I suppose we could go with noir...though perhaps more a neo-gothic romance. Curtiz does a great job shooting the film, many scenes are just beautifully rendered and realistic this feels like 50's Los Angeles.

CosmicRunaway

05-30-20, 04:39 PM

I think I'm in the mood to watch Joker tonight, but I don't like moving onto the next nomination before I've finished my review of the previous one, so I'd like to write something about I, Daniel Blake first (since I rewatched that yesterday). I do have a couple of sentences, but nothing cohesive. I think I'm getting progressively worse at writing, so it's probably good that I'm almost finished the HoF haha.

CosmicRunaway

05-30-20, 05:48 PM

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=65008

I, Daniel Blake (2016)
Directed by: Ken Loach
Starring: Dave Johns, Hayley Squires, Kema Sikazwe

Though I, Daniel Blake was one of my favourite films of 2016, before it was nominated I had no intention of ever watching it again. I wasn't sure if it would have the same emotional impact the second time around, and I was worried that the more dramatic elements would feel like a chore. Luckily the film's runtime didn't drag during this viewing, and the scenes that had previously made me tear up still managed to deliver a gut-wrenching punch to my heart. Twice now I've had to pause that scene in the food bank.

The film somehow succeeds at being both a touching story of two people who bond over their shared struggles, as well as a deeply cynical and depressing critique of the welfare system. Those emotional highs and lows make it an exhausting watch, but for all the right reasons. Dave Johns is fantastic as the titular character. His performance appears very genuine, which makes it easy to feel compassion for his plight and to want desperately for him to succeed despite the odds.

Everything from the script to the film's cinematography gives I, Daniel Blake an air of authenticity. Although there's an obvious leaning towards the grim and dreary, the visuals are very much grounded in realism. Not only does it help enhance the atmosphere, but it's a great reflection of the situation Daniel finds himself in. The political commentary is not exactly subtle, but it's quite effective, and highlights how the most vulnerable populations are often given the least amount of consideration. Though I have no desire to watch this for a third time, I'm definitely glad I saw it again.

Miss Vicky

05-31-20, 02:02 AM

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MovieLog/jokermask.gif

Joker (Todd Phillips, 2019)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7286456/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1)

Date Watched: 05/30/2020
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: 22nd MoFo Hall of Fame
Rewatch: Yes

When I chose to nominate Joker for the Hall of Fame, I knew it would come with some backlash. It has generally been a divisive film and I knew too that some people would feel that it's too soon. I knew people would unfavorably compare it to Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy. I knew people would complain that it dares to call itself Joker at all.

I was not, however, expecting someone to call it a "mistake" to nominate the film and the person who said that can shove those words right up his.... Anyway, there's no mistake about Joker. I knew what I was doing when I nominated it and while that person may think that the impact of the film is lost on rewatch, I have found the opposite to be true. And let me tell you, I have rewatched this film. Tonight was at least my fifth or sixth time seeing it and I love it more now than I did the first time. Perhaps even more than the last time I watched it.

I love that it strives for true darkness and realism and not that safe, sort-of realistic PG-13 darkness of Nolan's Batman films. I love that it's gritty. I love that it looks and feels dirty and that all that grime is rendered somehow beautiful by the colors, lighting, camerawork, and score. I love how immersed I feel in it. I love that things are not black and white. I love that there's no hero here. I love how each scene challenges me to decide whether to laugh or to cry. And I love that Oscar-winning (finally!!!) central performance.

People are always quick to point out Phoenix's physical transformation but, while there's no denying the impressive dedication that takes, weight loss alone does not make for a great performance. What makes it great is the range of emotions he makes me feel. I feel sympathy for him. I feel terrified of him. I feel a strange sense of triumph when he finally sheds the last of his former self and fully emerges as Joker (and then I question WTF is wrong with me for feeling that way...). But mainly, I am fascinated. I am mesmerized by the presence he brings to the screen and by how fully realized the character becomes in his capable hands. This is the thing that makes for a great performance. And a great performance like this is what makes for a great character study.

So no, nominating this was no mistake. The Hall of Fame is for films that we believe to be great. And that is exactly how I feel about Joker. Everyone else who signed up is free to disagree. I don't care and I have no regrets.

4.5

CosmicRunaway

05-31-20, 04:56 PM

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=65025

Joker (2019)
Directed by: Todd Phillips
Starring: Joaquin Phoenix, Frances Conroy, Robert De Niro

Joker is a film that I previously had no desire to watch. Even if I hadn't been left wholly unimpressed by its theatrical trailers, the ridiculous outrage from people who hadn't even seen the film was enough to make me distance myself from it entirely. One side claimed it would glorify white male rage and inspire the mentally ill to commit mass shootings, while another group hailed it as being part of some anti-SJW crusade. Not only were they both way off the mark, but the film's only real social impact was on the amount of videos and pictures people uploaded of themselves dancing on outdoor staircases.

I might've been convinced to check the film out sooner had it not been for its director. Todd Phillips felt compelled to trash his critics and dismissively refer to them as “the far left”, while whining about not being able to write comedies any more because of “woke culture”. I decided to boycott his films, and thus had no intention of ever watching Joker. Obviously I wasn't exactly happy to see it nominated for this Hall of Fame, though it gave me an opportunity to try and separate the art from the artist, so to speak. If I can still enjoy Mel Gibson's films despite him being a despicable human being, I can give a chance to one Todd Phillips film. In retrospect, I'm glad that it was nominated, as it turned out to be a very pleasant surprise.

All the negatively surrounding its release, and my previously dismissive attitude towards it perfectly set the film up to shatter my expectations. It doesn't say anything new or exciting with its political commentary, but it's still a relevant message. It showcases the dangers of underfunding social services, and shines a light on the lack of support for the lower class in America. Tension caused by the growing disparity between the rich and poor were ultimately the biggest danger to Gotham, and it wreaks more havoc than the Joker as a villain ever could on his own. It's distancing from the larger DC Extended Universe was definitely a smart move, especially since it's connection to the source material is tenuous at best. It honestly didn't need those elements at all, but of course it probably wouldn't have been as successful in the box office otherwise.