The 27th General Hall of Fame

[Miss Vicky]

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

Safety Last! (Fred C. Newmeyer and Sam Taylor, 1923)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0014429/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1)

Date Watched: 01/13/22
Rewatch: Yes.

I originally watched this in 2019 in preparation for the pre-1930s countdown (which I think I ended up not voting in) and was largely unimpressed. I liked the stunts well enough (though for me they pale in comparison to Buster Keaton's The General) but found the comedy aspect lacking. I rated it a 3- at the time.

Watching it again tonight, I liked it even less. Not only did the comedy still not work for me, but one particular scene that I hadn't remembered from before left me with a queasy feeling. That cat gag is not okay. (https://cinemacats.com/safety-last-1923/) Handling cats like that is not okay. Ever. And that puts this in the running for last place on my ballot.

1.5-

[cricket]

Jeez that was quick!

[Miss Vicky]

Jeez that was quick!

It's pretty short and it's on YouTube.

[ueno_station54]

https://cdn.onebauer.media/one/empire-tmdb/films/14334/images/hf1x5jzC48vhVnQ05ziVtGRo6yf.jpg?format=jpg&quality=80&width=960&height=540&ratio=16-9&resize=aspectfill
The Secret of Roan Inish (John Sayles, 1994)
I had recently watched The NeverEnding Story and was still in that vibe so I decided to start with the seemingly only family film of the nominations. To be honest I don't even really know what to say about this other than that its nice. It's a nice time, I like that its nice, but I don't really know what its offering other than that. There's a couple moments where the magical elements really feel like something (the boat in the fog and the ending scene in particular) but I don't know, I guess I wanted more magic and whimsy. Was also hoping the atmosphere would have swept me up a little more than it did. Never quite "felt it" like that, y'know? Yeah idk its nice and i liked it. Also I'm jealous of the girl's hair.
3

[cricket]

It's pretty short and it's on YouTube.

In case this helps for Apocalypse Now-

"The animal (a water buffalo, or carabao) was killed - but not for the film. The tribe in the film was a real indigenous tribe that lived in the area, and they had already decided to slaughter it. Coppola merely decided to film the event and edit it into the film."

[Miss Vicky]

In case this helps for Apocalypse Now-

"The animal (a water buffalo, or carabao) was killed - but not for the film. The tribe in the film was a real indigenous tribe that lived in the area, and they had already decided to slaughter it. Coppola merely decided to film the event and edit it into the film."

Yeah, I'm aware of that, which is the reason why Safety Last! might well place below it. Since apparently the concept of Safety Last applied to animal actors as well. But the fact that the buffalo in Apocalypse Now was not slaughtered for the film won't make it any less disturbing to watch. Outside of an animal rights documentary, I don't want to see that s***.

[Siddon]

My Dog Skip (2000)
Haven't seen this before. A little googling mentions animal cruelty but a cursory reading of reviews doesn't say whether that cruelty is real or fake. Not looking forward to this.



All of the violence in the film is off screen

[TheUsualSuspect]

Geeze, Jaws, Raiders, Witness and Apocalypse? Wow.....


Love True Romance too.

[Citizen Rules]

84370
My Dog Skip (2000)

I had to pause the movie while watching it and the scene it paused on was that one right up there. I though to myself damn that's a great image. Well low and behold I find that image was also used for advertising the movie.

Luckily there was no real animal violence and all the fake violence was done off screen, so yeah for that. I liked this and it reminded me of TV's The Wonder Years, even though I never seen that show...don't ask how it can remind me of it, it just does. At the start of the film I thought for sure this was a lesser known Ron Howard film complete with brother Clint. But nope Ron didn't direct it.

The kid was good, the dog was good, the film looked good and had a nice smooth pacing...what more could I ask for.

Thanks Siddon

[PHOENIX74]

Citizen Rules - I don't know if you remember our conversation about my next nomination at the end of the 26th HoF, but little did we know we'd be trying to nominate the exact same film in the 27th. Had Raiders lined up since then, and got a shock when edarsenal let me know that my nomination had already been nominated. I bet you that doesn't happen too often. Anyway, in my opinion, if you ignore the rest of the hoopla and franchise after it, Raiders of the Lost Ark is probably the best film ever made - so 👍 to that particular one. Jaws was always going to come later on down the track from me, but it's been bumped up to this crowd of pretty big films.

Safety Last! I've always been curious about. I think I've only ever seen one Harold Lloyd film, and I believe it was a talkie that utilized some previous silent footage of his - never seen one of his good ones. Nice to see the silent era represented again, and always nice to see a film I've been meaning to see anyway in a Hall of Fame.

Magical Girl I know nothing about, but looks good. I have not seen any of Carlos Vermut's films, so this might see me veering off in a direction I would normally never have gone, ala Vera Chytilová with the last Hall of Fame.

Baby Face I haven't seen, but I believe I recently bought on DVD, so if that's actually true I did so because I have a strong yearning to see it. A good sign.

Apocalypse Now - I can finally dust off the deluxe special edition Blu-ray and not only watch the film but give all the special features a good go and reacquaint myself with this classic, which I've of course seen a few times.

True Romance I was once crazy over. I guess it's time to refresh my memory and see if I still see as much in it. I don't think I've sat down and watched it again properly for a decade or two.

My Dog Skip - I think I mentioned already that I might be shocked and appalled by Siddon's pick, which was deviously teased as some kind of hard-to-watch horror film. Now I have to watch My Dog Skip instead.

Midnight Cowboy "Eeeeeverybody's talkin' at me....I don't hear a word they're sayin'....." Yeah - this is a classic. I've seen it many times.

Witness for the Prosecution - Saw this for the first time only a few months ago when it cropped up on a 'Top 100' thread. Was mightily impressed.

Dolores Claiborne - I haven't seen this for ages - but I still remember the scary sick lady reaching out...Not a bad film to catch up with again.

Cure - Never heard of Cure but I'm excited about seeing it as it looks 100% fantastic.

The Secret of Roan Inish - I have no idea about this whatsoever, but it's highly rated. Perhaps this Hall of Fame's biggest mystery as far as I'm concerned.

L'amour braque - This will be my introduction to Andrzej Zulawski - crumbsroom has given my great hope that it might be a good direction to go in by adding his opinion here.

[CosmicRunaway]

I've been meaning to watch Cure for awhile now, so if I'm able to join that'll be quite convenient for me haha.

I've definitely seen Safety Last!, Raiders of the Lost Ark (one of my all-time favourites), Apocalypse Now, Jaws, and Midnight Cowboy. I'm pretty sure I've seen Baby Face and True Romance as well, but I could be mistaken.

Never heard of Magical Girl, or L'amour braque. The other films I know of, but I'm fairly positive I haven't seen them. Seems like a really solid HoF. :up:

[Captain Spaulding]

If you've never seen Apocalypse Now, I advise against watching the Redux version. It mostly just adds bloat, particularly with the interminable French plantation segment, which brings the pace to a screeching halt. As for the sacrificial water buffalo, those images amount to probably less than five seconds of a 2.5-hour movie.

[edarsenal]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I like the good film more than the good film, but the good film is also worthy of praise.

I hear ya. The good film is pretty good but I prefer the good film a little more but that's just me

[Siddon]

https://zooscope.group.shef.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/My-Dog-Skip-2.jpg

My Dog Skip (2000)

Ebert and Roper in their review of My Dog Skip talked about how much they dreaded having to sit down and watch a Disney boy and his dog film. They were both surprised how the film really was made for adults but told with a veneer of a childrens/family movie. The writer of the book is Willie Morris the youngest editor of Harpers in New York and Morris's skill as a writer is in full display. Each time I watch the film I pick up a different humorous or thought provoking idea.

So the plot of the film is fairly simple, on Willie's ninth birthday in 1942 he is alone. Nobody bothers to show up for his birthday party except for his grandparents, his father is a survivor from the Spanish war, and his mother. Ellen (the mother) against the father (Jack's) wishes gives Willie a puppy. Jack is afraid that Willie can not handle an emotional issues that might arise from having a dog, Ellen feels like it's necessary for Willie he's alone and the puppy fills that loneliness.

Morris is always subverting the narrative in this film. Skip and Willie go on adventures but they are never out of the world crazy things but realistic ones for a nine year old to have. The first big twist of the film is that Skip...isn't really anything special. If Skip was special than this would be a very different film instead Skip is a mediation of what a dog brings to our lives. We see the effects of unconditional love has on Willie as the character is able to grow and gain confidence and friendship with the dog.

Some people might think their is a capped on subplot with Dirk Jenkins, the neighbor that goes off to war. Remember this is a film that takes place during WWII, Jenkins is at first a hero who indulges Willie. As we see in the year something happens with Jenkins but it touches on a major theme of the film..innocence lost. Morris has a lot to say about small stakes things and how they affect our childhood and the nostalgia that we have for it. I really admire the films restraint, segregation and racism is touched on in a very clever way.

In the climax of the film.... Skip runs onto the field, humiliates Willie and Willie beats Skip. Skip runs away from Willie and goes missing for several days. It's a powerful scene because Willie is exposed as the villain of the story...because he's nine and that's what nine year olds do. Skip ends up trapped in a bootleggers crypt...which to be frank...I don't think the bootleggers were real rather they are the workings of the imagination of a nine year old.

Finally the last five minutes of the film are absolutely crushing, if you don't choke up you likely are just heartless. But I think that why the ending works here is because many of us have had dogs and Skip is so realistic that it makes us reflect on our own animals. Willie actually died before the film came out...which is as ironic as it is powerful.

[Torgo]

https://cdn.onebauer.media/one/empire-tmdb/films/14334/images/hf1x5jzC48vhVnQ05ziVtGRo6yf.jpg?format=jpg&quality=80&width=960&height=540&ratio=16-9&resize=aspectfill
The Secret of Roan Inish (John Sayles, 1994)
I had recently watched The NeverEnding Story and was still in that vibe so I decided to start with the seemingly only family film of the nominations. To be honest I don't even really know what to say about this other than that its nice. It's a nice time, I like that its nice, but I don't really know what its offering other than that. There's a couple moments where the magical elements really feel like something (the boat in the fog and the ending scene in particular) but I don't know, I guess I wanted more magic and whimsy. Was also hoping the atmosphere would have swept me up a little more than it did. Never quite "felt it" like that, y'know? Yeah idk its nice and i liked it. Also I'm jealous of the girl's hair.
3Ueno liked my movie!

https://media2.giphy.com/media/1guRIRFV5gN4ikrUakg/giphy.gif

I picked this because I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking it's been a rough year so far. I figured we could all use something heartwarming.

I say this even though the first movie I watched was...

[Torgo]

Dolores Claiborne - 4

I watched this first because I haven't seen it yet, I love Stephen King and I've been meaning to read the book for a while. A-list thriller movies for adults sure seem like an endangered species, don't they? It's as if almost all material like this has been relegated to streaming services and is broken up into miniseries these days. Granted, there are some good ones like Mare of Easttown, but I believe this is one thing the '90s has over this young decade and the last one. I wouldn't say this movie is the best of its kind, but I still enjoyed it quite a bit.

What did I get out of it? Well, it's right there in the repeated line, "sometimes, being a bitch is all a woman has to hang onto." I like how the movie shows what drives Dolores to adopt this philosophy from the very direct abuse she receives from her husband to her more subtle but no less disheartening mistreatment from the bank manager as well as how they’re all seamlessly interwoven into the story. Speaking of seamless, the flashbacks and their transitions are never jarring and the use of different color schemes for each timeline is a nice touch. As for the performances, they’re as strong as you'd expect from this all-star cast, my favorite besides Bates (I can't believe I haven't seen Misery yet) being Strathairn's, mostly because it’s a welcome change of pace to see him play a bastard after years of seeing him play nice guys. The movie has its fair share of cheese, especially in how it spells out its themes. While I do love the "bitch" line, others like "it's because I'm a woman" seem a little too on the nose. Also, I may not be one to judge since I've only been to Maine once, but some of the New England accents are a bit cartoonish. I still think this is a very strong non-horror Stephen King adaptation and '90s adult thriller. One has to wonder, though - and I hope this isn't too much of a spoiler - but is the eclipse the same one in Gerald's Game?

Oh, and while proofreading this writeup, Word warned me that “bastard” may be offensive to the reader, but I didn’t get the same warning for “bitch.” It may have thought I was referring to a female dog, but doesn’t that just say it all?

[Thief]

Hey, glad you liked it! Can't comment on most of your specifics cause, like I've said, I haven't seen it in a loooong time, but I'm looking forward to that rewatch.

[Captain Terror]

Roan Inish is a great "nap movie", which I mean as a compliment. It's very warm and cozy.

[Miss Vicky]

"sometimes, being a bitch is all a woman has to hang onto."

Hmmm...

[Torgo]

Hmmm... Stephen King's words. Not mine. :D

[cricket]

Apocalypse Now

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/50/2d/57/502d57bea0037761ea776c6831912fe5.gif

Was supposed to watch Roan Inish but got in a fight with my wife so I took off to the theater room in my building to see what was on Netflix. I found Redux and thought great, I've never seen that version before so I put it on. I've seen the original cut many times but it's been many years. My opinion was always that it was an absolutely brilliant movie until it bogs down in the last third. I was very interested to see what I thought after so much time had passed.

Redux adds about 45 minutes and it's not to the film's benefit. There are two major scenes added. The first one is completely pointless and quite frankly not good. The second one does have merit, but not enough to need to add to an already long runtime. Since it's been so long since I last watched it I was unsure of what else was added. There were little moments scattered throughout where I thought, hmmm, I don't remember that, but nothing that stood out to me as an issue or big difference either way. I will pretty much ignore Redux in my assessment of the movie.

I enjoyed the last part of the movie more than I had at any time in the past. Unfortunately there were moments and scenes prior that I didn't care for as much. There were multiple times when I thought what I was seeing was a little bit much or a little bit silly, not bad in a vacuum, but more with how these times fit into the film as a whole. Most notably was the entire segment with Robert Duvall. He was fantastic and it is entertaining throughout his time on screen. I just felt this time that it was out of place as far as the overall tone. It's just a personal preference. The film is not as consistently dark as I remembered. The thought that I was watching a consistently imperfect film stuck with me throughout. The good thing is that when I woke up this morning, all I could think about was what the film did right and damn it does a lot right. With certain scenes, moments, and shots, this film reaches highs that rival those of any film ever made. There is some incredible stuff here, and that's why I will mostly overlook what I perceive as flaws when I think back about it. Even though my opinion of it has gone down to some extent, I will always think of it as a great film. At least until the next time.

4+

[cricket]

Seen all but the last 2 but haven't seen anything that recently except for mine.

Actually I'm not sure about Baby Face and My Dog Skip.

[Miss Vicky]

https://media2.giphy.com/media/1guRIRFV5gN4ikrUakg/giphy.gif

Completely OT, but can I just say how much I love when people use this gif? Because holy s***. :randy:

Anyway, carry on.

[TheUsualSuspect]

I love that a lot of people have not seen my nomination.

Gonna get started on this on the weekend.

[cricket]

It doesn't appear that anyone has seen my nomination. It's not an extremely well known film but I expected that someone would have. Maybe JJ.

[jiraffejustin]

It doesn't appear that anyone has seen my nomination. It's not an extremely well known film but I expected that someone would have. Maybe JJ.

Nope

[cricket]

Nope

Good. I was actually thinking of nominating that one word title movie that you recommended to me not long ago. I'm going to save it for a HoF in the future that you're not in.

[jiraffejustin]

Good. I was actually thinking of nominating that one word title movie that you recommended to me not long ago. I'm going to save it for a HoF in the future that you're not in.

Not if I beat you to it ;)

[ueno_station54]

i'm not surprised no one had seen my pick but seeing a few people say they'd never seen any Zulawski films has me worried lmao. his style can take a minute to get used to is all i'll say.

[cricket]

i'm not surprised no one had seen my pick but seeing a few people say they'd never seen any Zulawski films has me worried lmao. his style can take a minute to get used to is all i'll say.

I didn't recognize the name but I see he directed Possession, which I love and quite a few here have seen. I recognize a couple of other titles in his filmography but I don't think I've seen them. Now I'm pretty hyped to watch Mad Love.

[Thief]

i'm not surprised no one had seen my pick but seeing a few people say they'd never seen any Zulawski films has me worried lmao. his style can take a minute to get used to is all i'll say.

I know Possession is probably his most popular, or the one that gets mentioned more often, but would you consider Mad Love a good "first film" to get into his filmography?

[ueno_station54]

I know Possession is probably his most popular, or the one that gets mentioned more often, but would you consider Mad Love a good "first film" to get into his filmography?
uhhh, maybe?? it might be more accessible than his more well known works just by virtue of the genre its in.

[Citizen Rules]

@Citizen Rules (http://www.movieforums.com/community/member.php?u=84637) - I don't know if you remember our conversation about my next nomination at the end of the 26th HoF, but little did we know we'd be trying to nominate the exact same film in the 27th. Had Raiders lined up since then, and got a shock when @edarsenal (http://www.movieforums.com/community/member.php?u=50536) let me know that my nomination had already been nominated. I bet you that doesn't happen too often. Anyway, in my opinion, if you ignore the rest of the hoopla and franchise after it, Raiders of the Lost Ark is probably the best film ever made - so 👍 to that particular one. Jaws was always going to come later on down the track from me, but it's been bumped up to this crowd of pretty big films.
...Wow! you were going to pick my nom Raiders of the Lost Arkthat's funny and a coincidence because when I talked to you in PM and you said you were going for a popular big film, I thought it would be (are you ready?) Jaws. I swear that's true! I almost went with Jaws myself this time. I can see we both have great taste:D

[ueno_station54]

https://www.spiritualityandpractice.com/uploads/film_reviews/images/my-dog-skip-hero.jpg
My Dog Skip (Jay Russell, 2000)
In my review of The Secret of Roan Inish I said I started with that because it was the only family film nominated but I had clearly forgotten about this film so I figured I'd keep the same vibe going. And much like Roan Inish I have almost nothing to say about this because its, y'know, so standard. It briefly touches on some issues of the time (propaganda, segregation) which is fine but doesn't add to the elements of filmmaking I have any interest in. Visually, atmospherically there's not much going on (the music tries but doesn't quite get there) though I liked that deer scene, that had some weight to it. Like there's nothing wrong with it other than being a hair long perhaps, idk its fine. It's fine. How do you write about things when there's nothing of interest in the filmmaking??
2.5

[Wyldesyde19]

uhhh, maybe?? it might be more accessible than his more well known works just by virtue of the genre its in.
I’ve been wanting to dig into Zulawski for awhile, not just for Possession, but On the Silver Globe as well.

[ueno_station54]

I’ve been wanting to dig into Zulawski for awhile, not just for Possession, but On the Silver Globe as well.
omg every time i see clip or gif from Silver Globe i'm like "holy sh*t i NEED to see this".

[pahaK]

I’ve been wanting to dig into Zulawski for awhile, not just for Possession, but On the Silver Globe as well.

I didn't even realize that it's the director of Possession. Kinda makes that nom more interesting, eh.

[Wyldesyde19]

I didn't even realize that it's the director of Possession. Kinda makes that nom more interesting, eh.


It’s almost worth joining for this nom alone. But I’m likely going to pass, this time.

[Wyldesyde19]

omg every time i see clip or gif from Silver Globe i'm like "holy sh*t i NEED to see this".

It’s the same for me, only Posession even more so. The fact it has a very delicious Adjani also helps.

[Allaby]

I just finished watching L'amour braque (1985). Directed by Andrzej Zulawski, this odd film has a convoluted plot involving bank robbers and beautiful women. Zulawski has a distinctive, madcap style and directs the film with abandon and flair. For me, it didn't always work. There are strong moments and successful elements to the film, but other parts that don't gel. This is definitely a mixed bag for me. The story feels unnecessarily complicated and the dialogue didn't help much. The women in the film were beautiful (and not afraid to show it off ;)) and the moments of violence pack a punch. I wasn't really impressed with the style of acting here. L'amour braque feels like the type of film where the parts are better than the whole. That being said, this is the first film that I have seen by Zulawski and I am glad that I saw it. I can see this being a love it or hate it film for a lot of people and will be interesting to see everyone's response to it. Although I didn't love it, there is enough good stuff here, for me to give it a positive rating and ranking. 3.5

[ueno_station54]

I wasn't really impressed with the style of acting here.
yeah its like that in all his films.

[jiraffejustin]

Possession is one of the greatest films ever made and Isabelle Adjani is basically the perfect woman

[CosmicRunaway]

I'm tempted to just join instead of waiting until later next week to see how busy my course is actually going to be.

Tuesday night I had time and rewatched my potential pick, and I'm in the mood to watch one of the nominations now.

[Citizen Rules]

edarsenal is Takoma11 still in the HoF? The first post says she's Pending Reveal. Just wondering.

[CosmicRunaway]

I sent in my nomination! If you haven't heard of it before, try not to spoil yourselves on the twist as it really changes everything.

A note to those of you who don't watch horror comedies: you may find the first shot of the film (which continues uncut for nearly 40 minutes 😲) a bit rough to sit through, but trust me that there's a payoff later on. I wouldn't nominate a schlocky low budget horror flick in a General HoF. In fact, there's a reason why I called this a "horror" film (with quotes) earlier in the thread. You'll probably be surprised.

[ueno_station54]

I sent in my nomination! If you haven't heard of it before, try not to spoil yourselves on the twist as it really changes everything.

A note to those of you who don't watch horror comedies: you may find the first shot of the film (which continues uncut for nearly 40 minutes 😲) a bit rough to sit through, but trust me that there's a payoff later on. I wouldn't nominate a schlocky low budget horror flick in a General HoF. In fact, there's a reason why I called this a "horror" film (with quotes) earlier in the thread. You'll probably be surprised.
One Cut of the Dead?

[CosmicRunaway]

One Cut of the Dead?
I wasn't sure if Ed wanted to post the reveals himself, but the cat's out of the bag now I guess haha. This is what I sent in my PM:

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BY2RhNTVhMTEtMzgyNi00NDg1LWIwYjktOTcxNDQyM2ZjNDE1XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTY1NzY2NA@@._V1_.jpg

One Cut of the Dead / Kamera o Tomeru na! (2017)
Directed by: Shin'ichirō Ueda

I have a link if anyone needs it. It's on Amazon Prime too (in Canada at least)

[ueno_station54]

I wasn't sure if Ed wanted to post the reveals himself, but the cat's out of the bag now I guess haha. This is what I sent in my PM:



I have a link if anyone needs it. It's on Amazon Prime too (in Canada at least)
sorry if i spoiled the reveal. hoping to be pleasantly surprised because every detail i know about the film is a negative lmao. thanks for mentioning its on canadian prime and saving me time looking for it <3

[CosmicRunaway]

thanks for mentioning its on canadian prime and saving me time looking for it <3
You might also need Shudder or AMC (since Amazon has that annoying internal subscription thing now), but you do get a free trial for each, so if you haven't redeemed it you don't need to increase your Prime membership.

[Citizen Rules]

...I have a link if anyone needs it. It's on Amazon Prime too (in Canada at least)I'll take a link if you got one for a free version🙂

[Thief]

I just saw that a couple of months ago, so if that film is in, I can say I already have one in the bag :D

[Allaby]

I just watched The Secret of Roan Inish (1994). This is a delightful film directed by John Sayles and starring the adorably charming Jeni Courtney as Fiona, a young girl who learns about a local legend that may be connected to her family. I thought this was an enjoyable, well written film. It's very good natured and has a sweet gentleness to it. The cinematography is beautiful and the music was quite lovely too. In her debut, young Jeni Courtney is wonderful and very likeable. The adults in the cast were fine too. This was a pleasant film that children and adults could appreciate. 4

[CosmicRunaway]

I just saw that a couple of months ago, so if that film is in, I can say I already have one in the bag :D
It is definitely in! I actually just finished my write-up for it, but I should probably wait for Ed to officially announce it before posting. :lol:

[Takoma11]

I love that a lot of people have not seen my nomination.

I've seen all but three or four of the films here, and Cure is the one I'm most excited about revisiting.

Having recently watched Kurosawa's Pulse I might give that one a slight edge, but they are both really great.

[jiraffejustin]

I wouldn't nominate a schlocky low budget horror flick in a General HoF.

:(:(

[jiraffejustin]

Safety Last!: Never seen. Of the big 3 silent comedians, Lloyd is the one I've seen by far the least of, hell, I think I've seen more Max Linder than him. That said, I'm a big fan of Keaton and Chaplin, so maybe this will be for me.

Raiders of the Lost Ark: Seen this maybe 10-11 years ago. I know Indiana Jones is an icon, but I didn't hold this in the same regard as other beloved franchises. Fine is how I would describe this movie back then. Maybe I'll appreciate it more now.

Magical Girl: I don't know that I've heard of this, but it is a cricket nom, so it'll be worth watching.

Baby Face: ueno said something about girlboss with this one, but apparently that's a good thing? girlboss is not a term I like, so I am worried. I assume this is a pre-code film? I need to see more of those than what I've seen.

Apocalypse Now: My own nom. Rewatched it last year and liked it even more than before. It takes place during Vietnam, but the war is just a setting in this film. I don't even remember the water buffalo scene that well, and like I said, it's been less than a year since I've seen this film. This ain't no Touki-Bouki.

True Romance: Tarantino's involvement didn't get me to see this ten years ago when I was pretty into Tarantino, and now when I think of Tarantino's involvement, it doesn't matter as much. This could go either way for me.

Jaws: I don't remember the last time I saw this, but it's been more recent than Indy. I love this film.

My Dog Skip: Never seen it. This is the film that was hyped up right? I mean, I know it was a joke and all. I could be sensitive to this story because my dog is getting old. I assume this is about a boy and a dog as the boy grows up and the dog ends up dying? Then that's the part near the end where we are all supposed to be sad because we've been either emotionally manipulated or somehow it was handled in a smart way where we are sad and manipulated, but it was earned? Or maybe I am wrong about all of that.

Midnight Cowboy: I know this is supposed to be a famous movie, but I don't really know anything about it. There is something gay about it... I think. I don't know. One of them is a prostitute or something.

Witness for the Prosecution: It's Wilder, so I expect it to be worth while.

Dolores Claiborne: I know nothing.

Cure: I like this a lot, but I found it kinda clinical. I am thinking I might end up really loving it this time around.

The Secret of Roan Inish: It's about Irish folklore or something?

L'amour Braque: I love Possession, so hopefully this will be in the same stratosphere

One Cut of the Dead: I know nothing.

[edarsenal]

edarsenal is Takoma11 still in the HoF? The first post says she's Pending Reveal. Just wondering.
Spoke with her early this morning. She is IN. I'll adjust that on the first page.

[CosmicRunaway]

:(:(
Not saying I don't love them, I just know a General HoF is not the best place for one. Sorry to disappoint if you were hoping my nom would be that 100%.

[Citizen Rules]

Spoke with her early this morning. She is IN. I'll adjust that on the first page.:up:

[edarsenal]

It is definitely in! I actually just finished my write-up for it, but I should probably wait for Ed to officially announce it before posting. :lol:
Let 'er rip, my dear, let it rip.

Looked this one up: It cost $25,000 to make and earned $250,000 with some 27 awards and 7.7 Score on IMDb. Not too shabby.
And considering we've had low-budget films like Florida Project without ever seeing or hearing about it, (I'll take the fall if I'm wrong) this could be a worthwhile nomination for a General Hall of Fame.

[cricket]

One Cut of the Dead is already on my watchlist so I'm pleased to see it here.

[CosmicRunaway]

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=84401

One Cut of the Dead / カメラを止めるな! (2017)
Directed by: Shin'ichirō Ueda
Starring: Takayuki Hamatsu, Yuzuki Akiyama, Harumi Shuhama

Putting aside everything else about One Cut of the Dead, you have to admit that it takes an impressive amount of ingenuity behind the scenes to produce a 40-minute long zombie film in a single shot. When you watch it for the first time, it's clearly not perfect as there are awkward moments, odd performance choices, and some things that seemingly appear without explanation. You may wonder if it's a bad script, poor directing, or was this just the best take they managed to get?

In reality, this is actually two different film experiences in one. The first scene works independently as a short horror flick that's obviously not going to appeal to everyone, however there is a time skip immediately after that provides a second narrative that eventually alters how the opening is perceived. It's really difficult to describe without getting into spoilers, so I'll just say that the genre dramatically changes as well.

While I originally enjoyed One Cut of the Dead, rewatching it with the knowledge of how it concludes actually made it much better. If you love all the genres in the film's distinct halves, it's incredibly entertaining. However people who want an actual horror film are going to be disappointed, and those who can't stand schlock might find the opening insufferable. It's a fairly niche film, but one that's certainly worth checking out for the sheer amount of work that went into making it.

[CosmicRunaway]

Went to edit a typo in my review and accidentally deleted it lol. It's back up now, as if nothing ever happened. :shifty:

Looked this one up: It cost $25,000 to make and earned $250,000 with some 27 awards and 7.7 Score on IMDb. Not too shabby.
It was also filmed in just 8 days, which seems short to me considering all the preparation that goes into filming a 35-40 minute long shot.

[ueno_station54]

https://images.mubicdn.net/images/film/25484/cache-36468-1639673267/image-w1280.jpg?size=800x
L'amour braque (Andrzej Zulawski, 1985)
Oh I could not wait to see this again even though it was maybe only 3 weeks ago the first time I saw it. Just one of those films that was some indescribable quality that makes it click with me. I think everyone has those maybe. I don't really know why but its a work that leaves me feeling warm and happy inside, despite not being a warm or happy film. Thinking this might have to go on the favourites list now, I don't think I can leave off a film that makes me feel this way.

I guess I should talk about the things I like in the film that I actually can quantify in someway. Obviously the most notable element is that trademark, unhinged Zulawski energy. Like just about everything I've seen from him the film feels like its about to burst at the seems, the chaos just so barely controlled. The film was a lot easier to follow the second time around (unfortunately) but its still wild enough to make up for that and I think it being a more fun film than the previous Zulawski films I'd seen is probably why it appeals a bit more to me. His first three films are quite heavy and I just personally prefer fun things for the most part. Its so zany and loud I'm not even bothered by it having a more concrete narrative than his other works (stories, ick!) and I love, love, love the borderline nonsense dialogue, something I always love in films, easy vibe points. Its a blast start to finish and barrels through its runtime. Love it! Also, Sophie Marceau is 100% transition goals. She's just iconic here <3
rating_4

[Miss Vicky]

Welcome Cosmic!

Never heard of One Cut of the Dead until now. Most of the horror movies I like are horror comedies, but on the other hand it's a very rare occasion when a foreign comedy works for me. I hope I like it.

[Takoma11]

Welcome Cosmic!

Never heard of One Cut of the Dead until now. Most of the horror movies I like are horror comedies, but on the other hand it's a very rare occasion when a foreign comedy works for me. I hope I like it.

For what it's worth, I've heard nothing but very positive word of mouth for One Cut of the Dead.

[CosmicRunaway]

Just finished watching Cure, but it's a bit late so I'll wait until tomorrow to write something about it. It's probably best to let this one sit for a little while anyway.

[Captain Terror]

For what it's worth, I've heard nothing but very positive word of mouth for One Cut of the Dead.
I loved it but I can't say why without spoiling

[Thief]

ONE CUT OF THE DEAD
(2017, Ueda)

https://i.imgur.com/hUToJA5.jpg


"Fast, cheap, but average"



That's how director Higurashi (Takayuki Hamatsu) describes his work to the producers trying to hire him for a special film project. Filmed over the course of 8 days and at roughly $25,000, the actual film is all but one of those things.

Without giving too much away, One Cut of the Dead follows a crew of filmmakers tasked with shooting a zombie film while facing a series of unexpected and often hilarious constraints and problems. The nature and reasons of those constraints is best explained by watching the actual film, and being patient enough to stick with it all the way through the payoff.

For a genre that has been as beaten to death as zombie films, a film really needs to bring it to surprise us. Whether it is by chance or by design, One Cut of the Dead achieves that with a unique script and execution and a lot of heart. The end result is an undeniably fun film that manages to subvert the tropes of not only zombie films, but also of reality/live TV, and filmmaking in general.

If you haven't heard much or anything about this, then give it a chance as soon as possible. Especially if you're a zombie or horror fan, this is a film that rewards you for walking in blind. It is a film that moves at a breezy pace, and even though it may look cheap, average it ain't.

Grade: 4

[Thief]

Welcome Cosmic!

Never heard of One Cut of the Dead until now. Most of the horror movies I like are horror comedies, but on the other hand it's a very rare occasion when a foreign comedy works for me. I hope I like it.

This is one that definitely needs you to walk in with as little information as possible, and one that you might need a bit of patience for its first act. But trust me, the payoff should be worth it.

[Takoma11]

I loved it but I can't say why without spoiling

This is the gist of most of the positive buzz I've heard, LOL. Looking forward to it!

[rauldc14]

I've decided to stick this one out. This will be only the third time I've missed a general. I just think I need a break from scheduled watches and would like to just randomly watch whatever for a while.

I'll be back for the 28th!

[SpelingError]

I've decided to stick this one out. This will be only the third time I've missed a general. I just think I need a break from scheduled watches and would like to just randomly watch whatever for a while.

I'll be back for the 28th!

I hope to see you in some future Halls :up:

[Citizen Rules]

Bummer, but we'll see you in the 28th.

[TheUsualSuspect]

When we rank our films, do we leave our own out?

[TheUsualSuspect]

I've decided to stick this one out. This will be only the third time I've missed a general. I just think I need a break from scheduled watches and would like to just randomly watch whatever for a while.

I'll be back for the 28th!

It's because I rejoined. :(

[Citizen Rules]

It's because I rejoined. :(You're joking? I hope.

[ueno_station54]

I've decided to stick this one out. This will be only the third time I've missed a general. I just think I need a break from scheduled watches and would like to just randomly watch whatever for a while.

I'll be back for the 28th!
bye b*tch <3

[TheUsualSuspect]

One Cut Of The Dead

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81F56fXb2IL._SX342_.jpg

Nominated by: CosmicRunaway
3.5

rewatch

It's extremely hard to pull off something original and surprising these days. One cut of the Dead manages to do that and be extremely funny to boot. A love letter to indie-filmmaking.

It's basically told in three parts and you are thrown into it right from the start. I implore you to stick with it because if you don't really know what you're watching, you might be tempted to turn it off after 20 minutes. But then it switches gears and immediately draws you in. Once you see the reasons for earlier weird mishaps, you fall in love with the film. The movie has charm and champions the art of independent cinema. It made me remember the days of college when we would make movies. The pain one would go through for their craft, hahaha.

Good make-up, well-done single takes and incredible dedication to the "wink", this film is a gem that people should watch and I'm glad was nominated.

[Takoma11]

When we rank our films, do we leave our own out?

You include your own film.

[TheUsualSuspect]

You include your own film.

Oh yeah, I remember now. That always seemed weird to me since people are going to rank their own entry highly. But let's roll with it.

[Citizen Rules]

Oh yeah, I remember now. That always seemed weird to me since people are going to rank their own entry highly. But let's roll with it.Not me,at least not always. There was one time I ranked my own nom like in the middle of the pack just because the other noms were just that good. Often I voted my own nom like 2nd or 3rd, it just depends.

[edarsenal]

I've decided to stick this one out. This will be only the third time I've missed a general. I just think I need a break from scheduled watches and would like to just randomly watch whatever for a while.

I'll be back for the 28th!
I totally understand that. Sometimes it's just nice to watch whatever.
See ya in the 28th, sean!!
Oh yeah, I remember now. That always seemed weird to me since people are going to rank their own entry highly. But let's roll with it.

Not me,at least not always. There was one time I ranked my own nom like in the middle of the pack just because the other noms were just that good. Often I voted my own nom like 2nd or 3rd, it just depends.
I've done the same as well. If I enjoy something more than my own, it does get ranked higher.

[Takoma11]

Oh yeah, I remember now. That always seemed weird to me since people are going to rank their own entry highly. But let's roll with it.

Highly, yes. But I don't think I've ranked my own nomination first in any of the HoFs I've done. Honestly, one of the best things about an HoF is the moment when you realize you've just watched something new that you like even more than the film you yourself put up.

[Miss Vicky]

Eh, if everybody ranks their own pretty high then they cancel each other out.

I vote with my heart rather than with any strategy in mind. Since I only ever nominate favorite movies, it stands to reason that my own nomination will almost always end up #1 on my ballot.

[PHOENIX74]

Been wanting to see One Cut of the Dead ever since reading Thief's review of it a little while back so it's a much welcome addition for me.

[Takoma11]

Eh, if everybody ranks their own pretty high then they cancel each other out.

I vote with my heart rather than with any strategy in mind. Since I only ever nominate favorite movies, it stands to reason that my own nomination will almost always end up #1 on my ballot.

Same, though sometimes I discover a new favorite (like Cranes Are Flying). And sometimes I nominate a B+ fun movie instead of an A+ more serious film.

[Miss Vicky]

Same, though sometimes I discover a new favorite (like Cranes Are Flying). And sometimes I nominate a B+ fun movie instead of an A+ more serious film.

I generally rank films based on personal enjoyment, so that B+ fun movie often ends up outranking the more serious films.

[Thief]

Eh, if everybody ranks their own pretty high then they cancel each other out.

I vote with my heart rather than with any strategy in mind. Since I only ever nominate favorite movies, it stands to reason that my own nomination will almost always end up #1 on my ballot.

I don't see any big issue with people voting their pick high on their list, but then again, I didn't go with a "favorite", nor did others. I haven't been here long, but at least in the one or two HoF's that I participated, I don't think I voted for my pick at #1 (don't remember, really). Either way, with the classics that were voted for this one... Raiders, Jaws, Apocalypse Now... I doubt that my pick will be above those.

[Takoma11]

I generally rank films based on personal enjoyment, so that B+ fun movie often ends up outranking the more serious films.

For me it varies. I vote more with my heart than for the sake of technical proficiency. But sometimes a film is really well made AND gets me in the feels, and those tend to rank very high. (Again Cranes Are Flying is my key example of this).

[cricket]

Jaws

https://c.tenor.com/SLh4svK19OYAAAAd/heres-to-swimming-with-bow-legged-woman-toast.gif

Seen this many times with the last time being for the 70's countdown. This is 1 of 3 movies in this HoF that I saw at the cinema, and I was 4 when it came out. I still remember the excitement when the movie started but I was probably too young for it to make an impact, unlike some other films I saw that gave me long term nightmares. I remember liking Jaws 2 more when it came out, but hey I was a kid.

The 1st time aside, I've long been a Jaws fan but it's never reached the level of personal favorite. In the wrong hands this could have easily been a very generic movie. It ends up being well above average in every way for what it is, from the score, to the filming, to having 3 terrific leads. There's also some decent dialogue. Rob Schneider doesn't stand out much too me but I think that's a function of the role because he's good. Robert Shaw and Richard Dreyfuss give the performances that really make the movie. So it's the same old result for me and fortunately that's not a bad thing at all.

4

[edarsenal]

I was actually going to go with this one but instead, I've been playing catch-up in the Twilight Zone HoF.

The dialogue on the boat during the drinking has always been my favorite.

[Citizen Rules]

Think I'll rewatch everything except Midnight Cowboy which I seen fairly recently in the Personal Rec III.
https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=69687
Midnight Cowboy (1969

I like being wrong, I do. It's self renovating to allow one's self the ability to be flexible and to reverse a held belief. And I believed that Midnight Cowboy would be something I'd loathed to watch. That's why I avoided it until now as it was originally rated X.

But as it turns out Midnight Cowboy was tame as an old farm horse. I've seen more provocative stuff in modern R films. More importantly the film won me over with a heartfelt and original story backed up by two standout actors who bring these colorfully interesting characters to life. So yes, I liked the movie and the friendship between Dustin Hoffman and John Voight.

Most people will mention the story, the characters and the actors who played them as being the reason they like the film. And those are good reasons!

But I have two other reasons to admire this film:


The cityscapes as seen through a time machine back to 1960. I love history, I love time and I think about time all the time! There's no time machine that will lets us travel back in time but movies allow us to do just that. I'm not talking about a film that's a period piece. With Midnight Cowboy we see actual events, actual people and events as they occurred in time and captured on film. I loved the look at 1969 New York City. My eyes gobbled up the fashions and the store fronts and the way the world looked back then. All that is priceless to me.



Then there's the cinematic history of Midnight Cowboy. It's not just an Oscar Best Picture winner, it's the one and only X rated film to win an Oscar. It's also the only X rated film to be screened at the White House, and by Richard Nixon no less, wow! It's ground breaking too in it's frank look at New York City's colorful 42nd street circa life in 1969. Midnight Cowboy is probably the first American mainstream film to show gay people so up close and personal. The film captures a microcosmic on events and historical attitudes of a rapidly changing world.

rating_4

[Miss Vicky]

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

My Dog Skip (Jay Russell, 2000)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0156812/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1)

Date Watched: 01/14/22
Rewatch: No.

Although it's barely more than 90 minutes long, My Dog Skip felt more like 5 hours. It was unrelentingly boring and horribly clichéd. It tried so hard to be heartwarming that it viewed more like a satire of Lassie or Leave It to Beaver or some other nauseatingly wholesome tripe than any genuine attempt to tell a believable story. I never once bought any of these characters as real people. I never connected on any level with any of them and the only performances that made any sort of impression on me were those of Enzo and Moose - the dogs that portrayed Skip.

Maybe if I was a young boy or even a dog person I might've been moved by this, but I'm not either of those things and this movie utterly failed to raise the temperature of this cat-loving bitch's bitter little heart.

1.5

[cricket]

That's going to be excruciating for me to watch

[PHOENIX74]

https://i.postimg.cc/d0ym8P3S/true-romance.jpg

True Romance - 1993

Directed by Tony Scott

Written by Quentin Tarantino

Starring Christian Slater, Patricia Arquette, Dennis Hopper
Christopher Walken, Brad Pitt, Gary Oldman, Val Kilmer
James Gandolfini & Samuel L. Jackson

Tony Scott's True Romance is exciting and has flair, but it's the film's many varied characters that shine brightest, with an assortment of personalities jumping to life from the pages of Quentin Tarantino's script and attracting some of the finest acting talent available to sear themselves into the consciousness of those lucky people who saw this in a cinema in 1993. It's a collection of personas that weave themselves neatly into the story of Clarence Worley (Christian Slater) and Alabama (Patricia Arquette) and actually deserve a paragraph each - such is the impression each individual character made on me, and the pleasure I got in watching them.

Christopher Walken plays crime boss Vincenzo Coccotti with style and a towering menace that truly makes him seem like a behemoth and a deadly man to cross. He only has one scene, opposite Clarence's father (played by Dennis Hopper) but that one scene just happens to be a classic - truly memorable, only in a way Tarantino could write - with words biting harder than the punches and cuts do. The entire scene ends with a kind of exclamation point, before Coccotti recedes into a place far removed from that of us mere mortals.

Gary Oldman plays pimp and drug dealer Drexl Spivey, aided with some awesomely effective make-up that transforms him into a scarred and ugly devil. Spivey is white, but thinks that he's black (I know someone who does in real life, which makes this less ridiculous than it seems to others.) His dopey crassness is almost poetic, and his physicality is as menacing as a snarling Pitbull. Oldman really disappears into this violent creature, and some consider this to be one of his greatest acting performances. I concur. I loved watching Oldman as Drexl Spivey, and I'd hate to run into anyone like this in a dark alley. He oozes brutality and sadism, but also the crass idiocy of a man devoted to pain and hedonistic selfishness.

Brad Pitt plays Floyd, one of my favourite characters the first time I saw this film. Floyd is simply a complete stoner whose mind has been dulled by the cone he just smoked a few moments ago (he's always just smoked one, or is smoking one.) Despite displaying displeasure once or twice, he seems to be the most friendly and easy-going guy you could meet - and often inadvertently gives the villains in this film a fairly easy time of it. Pitt plays stoned better than I've ever seen anyone else do - not counting Fonda, Hopper and Nicholson in Easy Rider, who were actually stoned when they filmed their scenes. Floyd is slow and confused, but at peace and happy with his lowly lot in life. He provides a great counterpoint to Walken's crime boss.

James Gandolfini plays Virgil, a hitman and violent thug who does dirty business for Vincenzo Coccotti. Ice cold, he nevertheless opens up to Alabama about how hard his first couple of kills were. He's also filled with an inner rage, and finds beating up a young woman to be nothing more than an amusing diversion. You could easily imagine Virgil torturing people, then going to have a meal with his mother and sister - Gandolfini really gives us some depth despite only really having one scene in this film. Of course, that's one good thing about Tarantino's writing that not many people give him credit for. None of his characters are mindless automations only used to forward a plot. They're all people with a degree of depth.

Dennis Hopper plays Clifford, Clarence's father who is introduced to us singing the Burl Ives song "A Little Bitty Tear" which I thought was clever, really clueing us in instantly that his character was somewhat softer, more put-upon, genuine and sad than any of the other characters in this. Ironically for Hopper, he also plays one of the more 'normal' people in True Romance. Living alone in a trailer, he shows real affection for his son, who he is somewhat alienated from. He still has a funny edge to him, tinged with a tired and weary streak that life seems to have added.

Val Kilmer, Samuel L. Jackson, Chris Penn, Tom Sizemore and Bronson Pinchot all have smaller roles, but are great inclusions that I also enjoyed. Jackson, Penn, Christopher Walken and Brad Pitt have appeared in other Tarantino films.

So that leaves the film itself - a story (you could call it a fantasy) about a young guy named Clarence who loves movies and works in a comic shop who just so happens to have attracted a beautiful young woman to marry - she transforms him into someone with fight and vigour. A confrontation delivers an unexpected surprise : a suitcase full of cocaine which he decides he'll sell for a fortune to live the high life for a while. Unbeknownst to him, there are powerful people intent on recovering the drugs, and are hot on the tail of this young married couple. This takes all parties to Los Angeles, as Clarence tries to sell the cocaine to a hot-shot movie producer as the criminals and then finally the cops both close in. Christian Slater is serviceable as Clarence as is Patricia Arquette as Alabama. It just so happens that they're having the film stolen from them by an incredible supporting cast.

The opening act was taken from an early Tarantino short film, and introduces us to Clarence and Alabama, who has been a call girl for a short time before falling for Clarence - meeting him in a movie theater as a customer - but he doesn't know this initially. Their love story is introduced via a narrated intro from Alabama inspired by Badlands - and there are plenty of film and comic book references slipped in, as we'd come to expect from Q. Nothing feels too derivative, and there's enough vulnerability to these characters that they become instantly likeable. Clarence's sudden decision to kill Alabama's former pimp is slightly out of character and improbable - we almost have to come to a realization that he's slightly out of his mind. Clarence's obsession with Elvis Presley has the King talking to him in fantasy sequences (a shame we don't get to see a little bit more of Val Kilmer in this role) and Elvis sometimes encourages Clarence's view of himself as a man with machismo, perhaps trying to compensate for weaker aspects of his personality.

Once the wheels are turning, True Romance is gripping - violent consequences constantly conspire to bring our couple undone as we explore almost every tier of the criminal underworld - specifically in regards to the drug trade. This roller-coaster ride is aided by a soundtrack that is many-varied and takes us in many differing directions. Hans Zimmer doesn't shy away from the romantic aspect of the film in his score, giving us some xylophone music reminiscent of skipping over meadows and rivers in a plinky, dreamy rhythmic kind of way - it perfectly matches the kind of fantasy this film is. Cinematographer Jeffrey L. Kimball is a Tony Scott regular, having filmed Top Gun and his experience mainly resides in the action genre - this perhaps explains how expertly scenes with much movement are provided to us in a clear way. The characters move and strike and we can observe in a steady manner.

The ending of the film is where screenwriter and director differed - but aside from what happens to our characters ultimately, I was just slightly let down by how bombastic and frenzied the final act is. I would have been hoping for something a little more clever than the all-out unbelievable violence the film erupts in with little regard to where the story was taking us. Perhaps it was inevitable, but it just seemed like there was a real lack of ideas left when all of the characters and forces at work converged on the one area. That, and the fact that I would have preferred Tarantino's ending (without saying exactly what that was.) But considering just how good the film was every step of the way there, it only diminished the film slightly in my eyes. When I first saw True Romance I was blown away by it - and I still have a great time when I watch clever scenes with great characters that have amazing actors bringing them to life. It flies along with heart, excitement and exuberance in a simple, yet driven way. You can tell that everyone making it loved the art of making films, and knew what audiences really wanted.

4

[PHOENIX74]

Really enjoyed catching up with True Romance. The scene with Christopher Walken and Dennis Hopper I could watch over and over again :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jsh4SvPdfl8

I was already nervous about My Dog Skip - Miss Vicky has just sent that into outright panic.

[ueno_station54]

https://cdn.onebauer.media/one/empire-tmdb/films/319/images/f7EbIN1bMf8tOtoSmiqd6mO5p4P.jpg?format=jpg&quality=80&width=960&height=540&ratio=16-9&resize=aspectfill
True Romance (Tony Scott, 1993)
Ok so I got the one I was dreading the most out of the way and yeah its not good. Tarantino dialogue, especially early Tarantino dialogue, is my kryptonite. He's just so cringe constantly. Any time he starts going off on some random factoid about some pop culture bs or seeing how many times he can cram the n word into a scene its just so embarrassing. And its sooo long too. Why is this two hours?? Why would anyone watch this when Wild at Heart is right there, and I'm not even that crazy about Wild at Heart. I will say that I like Tony Scott's visual approach more than a full-on Tarantino joint (QT would never dare put some actual grit in a film) and that marimba theme goes hard. It does get better as it goes on (marginally) since there's way less time-filler dialogue scenes that make me want to die and the dialogue is much more palatable when its actually relevant to what's going on and not a 15 minute detour about the origins of Sicilians. Yeah this trash.
rating_1_5

[Miss Vicky]

Fantastic review PHOENIX74 !

[CosmicRunaway]

That always seemed weird to me since people are going to rank their own entry highly.
I actually think the only time I ranked my own film first was when my first choice was disqualified haha. I love these HoFs because I almost always find a couple films I enjoy more than what I nominated. I've even had my choice halfway down my ballot a few times. Those are usually my favourite Halls.

That's going to be excruciating for me to watch
It would seem that Siddon accomplished his goal then.

[CosmicRunaway]

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=84413

Cure (1997)
Directed By: Kiyoshi Kurosawa
Starring: Kōji Yakusho, Masato Hagiwara, Tsuyoshi Ujiki

Cure has a very gloomy atmosphere, with a cold, impersonal camera that is detached from the action on screen. The horror elements are almost entirely psychological, save for the occasional jarring quick cuts of gruesome or unsettling imagery. With a long average shot length on top of that, it creates a deeply uncomfortable mood that permeates every aspect of the film.

It's all strangely compelling, even before getting into the underlying themes of suppressed rage, and social expectations interfering with human nature. The performances are all rather engaging as well. Kōji Yakusho is great as the obsessed detective, and Masato Hagiwara's portrayal of Mamiya's devious aloofness is absolutely fantastic.

The film moves slowly, building intrigue at its own pace. But like festering anger, things bubble to the surface more and more, before finally snapping for the film's climax. Viewers who want everything spelled out for them will be disappointed with the conclusion, as everything is drenched in ambiguity. Far more questions are proposed than answered, but luckily that's how I prefer my mysteries.

[Takoma11]

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=84413

Cure (1997)
Directed By: Kiyoshi Kurosawa
Starring: Kōji Yakusho, Masato Hagiwara, Tsuyoshi Ujiki

With a long average shot length on top of that, it creates a deeply uncomfortable mood that permeates every aspect of the film.
.
.
.
It's all strangely compelling, even before getting into the underlying themes of suppressed rage, and social expectations interfering with human nature. The performances are all rather engaging as well. Kōji Yakusho is great as the obsessed detective, and Masato Hagiwara's portrayal of Mamiya's devious aloofness is absolutely fantastic. [/LEFT]




If you liked this one, I would highly recommend Pulse from the same director.

[pahaK]

If you liked this one, I would highly recommend Pulse from the same director.

A controversial opinion: Pulse is better than anything by that other Kurosawa.

[Siddon]

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

My Dog Skip (Jay Russell, 2000)
Imdb (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0156812/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1)

Date Watched: 01/14/21
Rewatch: No.

Although it's barely more than 90 minutes long, My Dog Skip felt more like 5 hours. It was unrelentingly boring and horribly clichéd. It tried so hard to be heartwarming that it viewed more like a satire of Lassie or Leave It to Beaver or some other nauseatingly wholesome tripe than any genuine attempt to tell a believable story. I never once bought any of these characters as real people. I never connected on any level with any of them and the only performances that made any sort of impression on me were those of Enzo and Moose - the dogs that portrayed Skip.

Maybe if I was a young boy or even a dog person I might've been moved by this, but I'm not either of those things and this movie utterly failed to raise the temperature of this cat-loving bitch's bitter little heart.

rating_1_5


https://media1.giphy.com/media/49zC0Bm1kbu36/giphy.gif

The film tells you from the start that the characters are from the perspective of a nine year old. You shouldn't think of Willie as a trust worthy narrator because he's not and he makes it clear at the start of the film.

[cricket]

A controversial opinion: Pulse is better than anything by that other Kurosawa.

https://c.tenor.com/5XslWB2qt_QAAAAC/i-like-you-but-youre-crazy.gif

[Miss Vicky]

The film tells you from the start that the characters are from the perspective of a nine year old. You shouldn't think of Willie as a trust worthy narrator because he's not and he makes it clear at the start of the film.

I'm aware that it's from the perspective of a nine year old. Trust me, the movie makes it excrutiatingly obvious that it's from a kid's perspective. That a film succeeds in doing what it's trying to do does not somehow magically make the experience enjoyable.

[CosmicRunaway]

If you liked this one, I would highly recommend Pulse from the same director.
I've seen Pulse already. Should probably rewatch it though as it's been a really long time. :up:

[Takoma11]

I've seen Pulse already. Should probably rewatch it though as it's been a really long time. :up:

I thought it had a similar atmosphere to Cure, but connected with its themes a bit more strongly. Really love both.

A controversial opinion: Pulse is better than anything by that other Kurosawa.

I wouldn't go that far, as High and Low is one of my all-time favorite films. But Pulse is amazing.

[cricket]

Witness for the Prosecution

https://media1.giphy.com/media/110cATdoZJUkw0/giphy.gif

My 3rd time watching this and it just reinforced my previous thoughts. I'm a sucker for courtroom flicks and I think this is the best.

Normally with a courtroom movie I may feel the urge to pick it apart, but for whatever reason I don't feel a need to do it with this one. One thing I will say, and it's not a criticism at all, is I wonder why the need to have the barrister have a health issue. Just wondering.

This is a very entertaining film from start to finish. I'm not sure how extremely clever it actually is, but clever is at least most definitely a word that comes to mind to describe it. It's also suitably funny without derailing the story. I laughed quite loudly when Laughton scored is 2nd cigar in the beginning the way he did. He's phenomenal in this and easily the headliner. Dietrich and Power come as close as they can to matching him. It may seem at times like they are overacting but it's actually very good acting. It's important to remember that they are playing characters who are putting on an act. I maybe could have done without the very last action of the film but really I don't find a lot of fault here. It's just so damn good.

4.5

[ueno_station54]

Pulse is a movie i get nothing out of each time but i keep having a urge to try it again so there must be something there lol.

[CosmicRunaway]

Has everyone decided which version of Apocalypse Now they're going to watch? I tried Redux a few years back but turned it off, so I'll either stick with watching the theatrical version again, or try the Final Cut.

[ueno_station54]

Has everyone decided which version of Apocalypse Now they're going to watch? I tried Redux a few years back but turned it off, so I'll either stick with watching the theatrical version again, or try the Final Cut.
assuming theatrical is the shortest i'll be watching that

[Takoma11]

assuming theatrical is the shortest i'll be watching that

Same.

I've seen Redux and didn't think it added much. I've seen the theatrical cut twice. It's a film I respect but don't enjoy all that much.

[Miss Vicky]

Has everyone decided which version of Apocalypse Now they're going to watch? I tried Redux a few years back but turned it off, so I'll either stick with watching the theatrical version again, or try the Final Cut.

Theatrical is already two and half hours long. No way am I watching Redux.

[ueno_station54]

Same.

I've seen Redux and didn't think it added much. I've seen the theatrical cut twice. It's a film I respect but don't enjoy all that much.
apparently there's like 4 cuts of this??? i've always heard theatrical was the best cut anyway so that works out.

[Takoma11]

apparently there's like 4 cuts of this??? i've always heard theatrical was the best cut anyway so that works out.

I definitely prefer it over Redux, though Redux is the only time I got to see it (in any form) on the big screen.

[Allaby]

Has everyone decided which version of Apocalypse Now they're going to watch? I tried Redux a few years back but turned it off, so I'll either stick with watching the theatrical version again, or try the Final Cut.

I think I will go with the theatrical cut. I have the 3 disc blu ray edition, which has both the theatrical and the redux cut on it.

[Citizen Rules]

Has everyone decided which version of Apocalypse Now they're going to watch? I tried Redux a few years back but turned it off, so I'll either stick with watching the theatrical version again, or try the Final Cut.I always prefer the original theatrical cut as I always like it better than extended or final cuts, so that's what I'm going with.

[edarsenal]

I think I'll be going with the theatrical as well. If anyone has a link for it, please let me know. Not having much luck

[CosmicRunaway]

If most everyone is watching the theatrical cut, I'll go with that one too. :up: Final Cut is reportedly not as long as Redux, but I don't know anyone who has seen that version to confirm whether or not it's worth the extra time.

Speaking of rewatches, I just finished Jaws. Might get something written tonight, but I'm pretty tired even though it's not that late yet. It's been a really dark, dreary day which always makes me a little extra sleepy for some reason.

[SpelingError]

I think the theatrical cut is generally considered to be the best, so I recommend going with that one.

[Citizen Rules]

I think I'll be going with the theatrical as well. If anyone has a link for it, please let me know. Not having much luckI had a hard time finding it too. But I did find it eventually and I'll send you a link.

[ueno_station54]

i've had a dvd copy forever but idk what cut. think it might be the redux eww.

[CosmicRunaway]

i've had a dvd copy forever but idk what cut. think it might be the redux eww.
Does it list the runtime on the back of the case? That'll probably tell you which version it is.

[SpelingError]

For some reason, virtually every single version of Apocalypse Now I've come across online is the redux version. Due to that, I bought the theatrical version on Amazon yesterday.

[ueno_station54]

Does it list the runtime on the back of the case? That'll probably tell you which version it is.
i just dug it out and it has both i guess but if i'm reading this right both versions are on both discs, split in two parts. man, dvd producers did not know what they were doing early on.

[ueno_station54]

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/S/pv-target-images/5dccab68b7c663fd7257110edf68df5556fab4360443f6bcc8389a6a03b0a44f._RI_.png
One Cut of the Dead (Shinichiro Ueda, 2017)
This film is the definition of set up and payoff. Personally, I'm not really into that sh*t and this film really, really makes you wait around for the payoff. So it kicks off with 40 minutes of insufferably boring one-take zombie stuff. Its bad on purpose but that can't work for 40 whole minutes. One-take is already the most boring way you could ever possibly shoot something, especially something that's supposed to have action and comedy probably the styles that need cuts the most. The only cool film to do the one-take gimmick was Russian Ark because it wasn't the type of film that needed the momentum and energy that you would typically get with cutting. Anyway this part sucks, like a lot. Then we get like 30 minutes of "movie about making a movie" type stuff with casting and rehearsals and whatnot. Also not really my thing (though Sion Sono got away with it a couple times) and there's nothing really engaging about this section of the film either. Then, after like 70 total minutes, we finally get the payoff. The crew making the film. This is the only part of the film that's even remotely enjoyable. It's got some fun moments, the human pyramid crane shot was v. cute, this part is nice. It was not worth sitting through the other parts of the film, but its nice. Doesn't help that the entire movie just looks awful too, lol. Just boring for the bulk of the runtime and a few smile worthy moments in the last 20.
rating_2

[pahaK]

I've decided to join. There are only a couple of films that feel like a chore, and most of the rewatches are something I've been planning to do anyway.

I picked this because I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking it's been a rough year so far. I figured we could all use something heartwarming.

I had exactly the same... Wait, never mind :rolleyes:

As far as I know at least one of you has seen my nomination (I assume he liked it). It's not mentioned too often here, so hopefully, it's something new for most. I'll let Ed do the proper announcement, though.

[CosmicRunaway]

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=84426

Jaws (1975)
Directed By: Steven Spielberg
Starring: Roy Scheider, Richard Dreyfuss, Robert Shaw

Though I've seen parts of Jaws countless times, I couldn't remember the last time I actually sat down and watched the entire thing from start to finish. It didn't initially feel like a film I needed to revisit, but I'm really glad I did. Despite my familiarity with all the major story beats, I still found the whole thing thoroughly engrossing.

While the animatronic shark has aged much better over the years than CG typically does, it didn't look quite as realistic as I had remembered since my eyes kept getting drawn to edges of its mouth where it buckles unnaturally. It's still rather impressive though, and the film does use it very effectively. After hearing about behind-the-scenes issues with the shark, you also have to commend the amount of effort that went into getting that thing to function at all.

The performances are solid, and I had actually forgotten how compelling Robert Shaw's character becomes. I always considered Jaws to be a horror film without contest, but this time around I did finally see why a lot of people argue against it. I don't necessarily agree, but it's certainly more nuanced than I thought, especially since the tone and score shift significantly once the three men set out to find the shark.

[CosmicRunaway]

Just boring for the bulk of the runtime and a few smile worthy moments in the last 20.
rating_2
I'll count this as a win since you didn't completely despite it. :cool:

Rob Schneider doesn't stand out much too me but I think that's a function of the role because he's good.
I've never heard anyone say they thought Rob Schneider was good. :p

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/92/62/ff/9262ff3253ae9dda8a2596ced12269ce.gif

(I'll see myself out now, lol)

[ueno_station54]

I'll count this as a win since you didn't completely despite it. :cool:
i swear i don't hate everything! according to letterboxd i've given out more 8/10s than anything else. plz believe me!

[cricket]

Yea GBG sent me a message about my blunder but I was half asleep when I saw it and then completely forgot about it. It's something I'll have to live with:p

[cricket]

I've decided to join. There are only a couple of films that feel like a chore, and most of the rewatches are something I've been planning to do anyway.

Personally, I'm hoping for something that's much less tame than In a Glass Cage.

[pahaK]

Personally, I'm hoping for something that's much less tame than In a Glass Cage.

Well, there's no underaged nudity or anything like that to send FBI after Siddon. By the way, it's you who I believe to have seen my nomination.

[ueno_station54]

ok question: my dvd describes the additional footage in Apocalypse Now Redux as "controversial and unusual". is this accurate and if so how unusual are we talking? might be getting sold on this longer cut since i have unlimited free time this week anyway.

[cricket]

ok question: my dvd describes the additional footage in Apocalypse Now Redux as "controversial and unusual". is this accurate and if so how unusual are we talking? might be getting sold on this longer cut since i have unlimited free time this week anyway.

I saw nothing controversial, unusual, or worth watching.

[cricket]

Safety Last

https://cdn.onebauer.media/one/empire-tmdb/films/22596/images/i3RzSYQt5kj2n39Gv16xv9v9wkc.jpg?format=jpg&quality=80&width=850&ratio=16-9&resize=aspectfill

This was my 2nd viewing after watching it for the pre-30's countdown. Not much has changed.

Lloyd is likable but I can't picture him getting up into Keaton and Chaplin territory. Probably unfair to compare yet I think it's natural. The love story part is sweet and it's an easy watch that is mostly amusing. It just never goes beyond that for me. The big finale is the weakest part of the movie in my eyes but again, there's nothing to dislike here. Well, except for the cat scene that Miss Vicky pointed out. It may not look like much but you can severely injure a cat like that. It won't affect my overall view of the film. So yea, I appreciate the historical significance and it's worth watching. That's about all I've got.

3

[edarsenal]

OFFICAL ANNOUNCEMENT ;)

pahaK is IN and here is his nomination:

https://iv1.lisimg.com/image/4170974/308full-demons-poster.jpg
Demons akaShura (1971) (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0165473/)
Director: Toshio Matsumoto 2h 14m
Nominated by: pahaK

WELCOME, pahaK!!!

Have not heard of this but looks like it scored insanely high on IMDb so I'll be curious to see it.

[ueno_station54]

yaaass great pick! <3

[cricket]

Ahhhh yea, I was going to nominate that at some point. Great friggin movie.

[PHOENIX74]

Demons looks great - haven't seen it but it's near the top of the bunch I look forward to seeing now.

[Allaby]

Haven't seen Demons, but it definitely looks interesting.

[Miss Vicky]

Never heard of Demons. No clue what I'll think.

[Citizen Rules]

Demons looks intriguing and welcome to the club PahaK!
A really good quality link with subs would be nice. I did find a HD link but no subs.

[pahaK]

Demons looks intriguing and welcome to the club PahaK!
A really good quality link with subs would be nice. I did find a HD link but no subs.

I sent you a link. It's on youtube at very decent quality with subs. Just search "demons 1971" and it should be among the first hits.

[ueno_station54]

pretty sure i watched it on youtube and had no qualms about the quality.

[jiraffejustin]

Yeah, Demons is great. I watched it last year during the movie roulette we did. cricket recommended it to me, and I loved it.


Shura is amazing. It's one of the best examples of black-and-white enhancing a film and making total sense over color. The way characters would completely disappear by an enveloping darkness while other characters felt super close-up because of the pitch black behind them was amazing. That is just one element of how cool this film is, but it's also super f*cked up, and when the baby got got, I let out an audible gasp. I figured it was going to happen, but there was still a little bit of hope that maybe we could still root for Gengobe. That moment let's you feel like a piece of sh*t for still being on his side after what he did in Fukagawa. I was strongly reminded of Eraserhead during that sequence, because the sound of the baby crying added a lot of tension. Two main reasons why: a) the sound of a baby crying is grating, and b) you also had the fear that Gengobe would do what he did or some other misfortune would befall the child. The effects are all great too. The only thing that really bothered me is why in the world did they keep the sake that Gengobe gave them. I would have instantly poured that out. It did lead to a gruesome scene, so I can't really complain about that. Amazing selection for me, cricket.

[pahaK]

Demons (1971)

84437
"All that's left now is eternal, all-enveloping darkness."

I rarely think composition and visuality, in general, further than noticing that something looks good. Demons is one of the exceptions; its negative space, the blackness surrounding the people, is like a character of its own. There's this almost Lovecraftian feel to it, meaningless humanity surrounded by the vast coldness of the void and the uncaring universe.

I love a good tragedy, and Demons is as bleak and nihilistic as they get. Love, honor, justice; all turn to rot, and the suffering that ensues is ultimately needless, a cosmic joke where people unknowingly work towards a common goal only to drown in a sea of blood. Everything happens for no reason, and that's why the film hits so hard.

I watched this the first time about two years ago. I liked it a lot back then, but this rewatch was even better. I knew what was happening, and I had more time to focus on the details. A great drama with horror elements and amazing black-and-white cinematography.

4.5

[Wyldesyde19]

OFFICAL ANNOUNCEMENT ;)

pahaK is IN and here is his nomination:

https://iv1.lisimg.com/image/4170974/308full-demons-poster.jpg
Demons akaShura (1971) (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0165473/)
Director: Toshio Matsumoto 2h 14m
Nominated by: pahaK

WELCOME, pahaK!!!

Have not heard of this but looks like it scored insanely high on IMDb so I'll be curious to see it.

Oh yeah, this movie. I’ve heard of this. I think. Pretty sure it’s the only film from the 1970’s titled Demons from Japan, right?

[pahaK]

Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/DirectJollyAllosaurus-size_restricted.gif

An old-school adventure that may be formulaic, but at least it does the formula well. I didn't even remember how similar this is to Star Wars movies (both older and newer) and how much Indy resembles Han Solo. It's also more violent than I remembered, with several bloody shootings and melting faces.

There are some pacing issues, especially during the second half. The rivalry with Belloq seems unnecessary bloat, and there are few too many coincidences. With some improvements to the script, the film could have been great instead of good.

I've always liked The Temple of Doom the most, but Raiders isn't that far behind. It's an enjoyable and easy movie to watch. The scoundrelly hero and violent, lethal action make it grittier than modern PG adventures, and that's plus in my books.

3.5

[TheUsualSuspect]

Surprised so many people love Temple of Doom the most. I'm a Crusade fan myself.

[Citizen Rules]

I sent you a link. It's on youtube at very decent quality with subs. Just search "demons 1971" and it should be among the first hits.I just took a look at and video quality looks great and with subs too. Cool. Thanks!

[ueno_station54]

https://s3.amazonaws.com/criterion-production/images/5130-d380740c29e069c1b4f1bfa9384e1cf9/current_28446id_021_medium.jpg
Safety Last! (Fred C. Newmeyer & Sam Taylor, 1923)
I am shocked. Completely stunned. Utterly bamboozled at how little this did for me. Like, I don't think there was a scene or bit that even made me smile. Felt nothing throughout. The big climax got a "wow that looks dangerous" out of me but I didn't really "feel" it, y'know? Despite this, I wouldn't say I was bored either. The movie was on and I was there for it is kind of all I can say. I just have no strong feelings one way or the other. I don't know how to keep writing "I have nothing to say about this". I guess I'll just add that of the Harold Lloyd films I've seen this is safely last.
rating_2_5

[CosmicRunaway]

I've been meaning to watch Demons for awhile, but for some reason keep forgetting about it. At least, I don't think I watched it, but that image pahak used on their review looks incredibly familiar.

Glad it was nominated either way. :up:

[CosmicRunaway]

Surprised so many people love Temple of Doom the most. I'm a Crusade fan myself.
I absolutely love some aspects of Temple of Doom, but there are others that I despise (*cough*Willie*cough*). The whole thing is like a roller coaster. I think the average of those highs and lows might work out to make me enjoy it more than Last Crusade though.

[cricket]

Surprised so many people love Temple of Doom the most. I'm a Crusade fan myself.

Yea I never cared that much for Temple of Doom, easily the weakest of the original 3 imo.

[Miss Vicky]

Temple of Doom is easily the most fun of the three for me. Also Mola Ram is one of the best movie villains and Harrison Ford looked great shirtless. :D

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MoFoPics/molaram.jpg

[CosmicRunaway]

30 minutes into Witness for the Prosecution, and I've definitely seen this before. Not sure if I've seen the whole thing though, as I don't remember what happens.

[SpelingError]

Welcome, pahaK!

I don't believe I've heard of Shura before, but it looks interesting.

[Thief]

I absolutely love some aspects of Temple of Doom, but there are others that I despise (*cough*Willie*cough*). The whole thing is like a roller coaster. I think the average of those highs and lows might work out to make me enjoy it more than Last Crusade though.

I generally agree that there are some setpieces I love, but overall, I borderline dislike it.

[Citizen Rules]

I don't think I've even seen Temple of Doom or any of the others in the franchise. Well I know what movies I'll be needing to watch in the future.

[edarsenal]

Not a fan of Temple of Doom. Raiders and Crusade for ne

[pahaK]

Temple of Doom is easily the most fun of the three for me. Also Mola Ram is one of the best movie villains and Harrison Ford looked great shirtless. :D

In the name of equality, I demand adventure movies with topless female protagonists :D

[CosmicRunaway]

30 minutes into Witness for the Prosecution, and I've definitely seen this before. Not sure if I've seen the whole thing though, as I don't remember what happens.
Update now that I've finished it: There was a scene towards the end (in a train station) that I had definitely seen before as well, but there's a large chunk in the middle and again most of the ending that weren't familiar.

I must have seen parts of it on TCM or something. :shrug:

[Citizen Rules]

Update now that I've finished it: There was a scene towards the end (in a train station) that I had definitely seen before as well, but there's a large chunk in the middle and again most of the ending that weren't familiar.

I must have seen parts of it on TCM or something. :shrug:That sounds like my majority of film rewatches, there's always a few scenes or images I remember but the rest of the movie is a mystery to me. I kinda like it that way too! It's like watching the movie for the first time:cool:

[edarsenal]

PROOF that senility isn't really a bad thing lol

[edarsenal]

You know what? That just shows senility isn't really a bad situation

[edarsenal]

That reminds me. . . um something or other

Let me get back to you on that

[Citizen Rules]

PROOF that senility isn't really a bad thing lolI read that, then I forgot it:p:)

[ueno_station54]

well, i have half an hour left of Raiders and i've stopped just because i found better things to do lmao. if you were wondering how that review was gonna go.

[Wyldesyde19]

well, i have half an hour left of Raiders and i've stopped just because i found better things to do lmao. if you were wondering how that review was gonna go.
Booooo. Thou shalt not give Raiders a bad review!

[ueno_station54]

Booooo. Thou shalt not give Raiders a bad review!
spoilers its on track for only a middling review don't worry.

[Miss Vicky]

Meanwhile, I'm struggling to convince myself to finish watching L'amour braque.

[CosmicRunaway]

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=84451

Witness for the Prosecution (1957)
Directed By: Billy Wilder
Starring: Charles Laughton, Tyrone Power, Marlene Dietrich

Witness for the Prosecution is possibly the most engaging courtroom drama I've ever seen. A lot of that is due to the performances of Charles Laughton and Tyrone Power. I could probably listen to Laughton read a phone book and still be enamoured with every word he said. Likewise, Power was incredibly charming, and great at eliciting sympathy. They both had fantastic screen presence.

The film is also quite comedic at times. The nagging nurse character and Robarts being at odds with each other is obviously part of that, but there's more subtle humour sprinkled throughout as well. Everything combined to make for an incredibly entertaining viewing experience. Even though I had clearly seen parts of the film before, I could barely tear my eyes away from it.

I honestly didn't pay much attention to the technical aspects that I usually latch onto; I was just too engrossed in the story and its characters. I was interrupted 30 minutes in and decided to take a short break, but otherwise the outside world ceased to exist for the duration of the film. That happens so rarely for me, that I certainly consider it a sign of the film's quality.

[ueno_station54]

Meanwhile, I'm struggling to convince myself to finish watching L'amour braque.
lol its so fun <3

[Miss Vicky]

lol its so fun <3

No. No, it is not.

[jiraffejustin]

I just sat through My Dog Skip... y'all can sit through those.

[CosmicRunaway]

On Witness for the Prosecution...
One thing I will say, and it's not a criticism at all, is I wonder why the need to have the barrister have a health issue. Just wondering.
I think it's to show how dedicated he is to his job. He does have a line towards the end of the film where he completely dismisses his own failing health because the only thing that matters is the life of his client.

[Miss Vicky]

I just sat through My Dog Skip... y'all can sit through those.

I already suffered through that crap.

[edarsenal]

https://themovieandthemuse.files.wordpress.com/2020/06/jaws-4th-july-beach-sign-scene.jpg?w=703&h=296&crop=1
https://methodshop.com/wp-content/uploads/jaws-boat-sharkin-620x411.jpg


Jaws (1975)

While it did take until my very late teens for me to eventually see this since in '75, I was in 5th Grade, and the idea of a killer shark scared the bejeezus out of me. It was very much an integral part of the Pop Culture of the Time - just on "Bruce's" theme song alone.
Just like Psycho made us leary of showers, Jaws made us stay on the beach or be far more content to swim in a lake. Well, until Friday the 13th came around, anyway.

Also, not every film can withstand Time, and what was once extraordinary becomes downright silly. But, for me, Jaws does not. Even when it comes to "Bruce" the shark and considering just how much difficulty they had gone through just getting the thing actually to work, it does pay off in the long run when get to see him taking on the three leads of this film in the second half of the film, which is my favorite part.
It still holds my attention, and the tension still works. Part of which is very much due to how all three actors draw us in; they are not mere fish food for our amusement. They matter to us. We cheer them on and fear for them as they collide with one another's personalities while trying to take on a d@mn clever, almost unbeatable foe.

In English class as a kid, they taught us that one particularly worthwhile story premise is Human vs. Nature. While the Horror genre continually feeds on that premise, Director Speilberg gives respect while adhering to his usual penchant for characters we care about, cinematic compositions that capture our attention. And films that do not fade from our memories and stand the Test of Time.

[edarsenal]

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=84451

Witness for the Prosecution (1957)
Directed By: Billy Wilder
Starring: Charles Laughton, Tyrone Power, Marlene Dietrich

Witness for the Prosecution is possibly the most engaging courtroom drama I've ever seen. A lot of that is due to the performances of Charles Laughton and Tyrone Power. I could probably listen to Laughton read a phone book and still be enamoured with every word he said. Likewise, Power was incredibly charming, and great at eliciting sympathy. They both had fantastic screen presence.

The film is also quite comedic at times. The nagging nurse character and Robarts being at odds with each other is obviously part of that, but there's more subtle humour sprinkled throughout as well. Everything combined to make for an incredibly entertaining viewing experience. Even though I had clearly seen parts of the film before, I could barely tear my eyes away from it.

I honestly didn't pay much attention to the technical aspects that I usually latch onto; I was just too engrossed in the story and its characters. I was interrupted 30 minutes in and decided to take a short break, but otherwise the outside world ceased to exist for the duration of the film. That happens so rarely for me, that I certainly consider it a sign of the film's quality.




I am VERY MUCH the same way when it comes to Laughton. He ALWAYS has my full and complete attention in everything I have seen him in.

[ueno_station54]

ok working on a Raiders review but wow that went way over my head.

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fernbyfilms.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F11%2FHLE102602-Safety-Last-1923-appeals-to-sweetheart-web-2000-2000-1125-1125-crop-fill-720x405.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Safety Last, 1923

A young man (Harold Lloyd) leaves his country town to go to the big city to earn a living so that he can finally marry his girlfriend (Mildred Davis). He finds a room in the same building as a man who climbs buildings as a human fly (Bill Strother). Antics ensue as the young man tries to make it big while working in a department store, culminating in a much-publicized stunt of having a man climb the store.

I watched this film a little while ago, and so for this rewatch I decided to view the film along with a commentary from a Harold Lloyd archivist.

While the commentary was interesting, I don't think that it changed my feelings about the film very much.

The strength of the film, as with many silent comedies, is the precision timing and physical talents on display during the many setpieces. I appreciate that there are a variety of gags, ranging from stunts to spoken bits to visual jokes. For me, the little things were more interesting than the infamous climactic building sequence. I really like the part where Harold and Bill hide themselves in their coats to escape their landlady. I like the part where Harold, needing to get a package to a woman who is many rows behind other customers yells out that someone has dropped $50, causing the other customers to look on the floor, leaving just the old woman standing. And I liked the visual storytelling of Harold imagining a meal, only for one dish at a time to fade away as he hands over coins to a pawnbroker.

The downsides, though, were quite a few things. Miss Vicky already covered the pretty unkind stunt that involved rough handling of a cat. I also didn't care for the use of racial caricatures, whether that was the disproportionately spooked Black man or the Jewish caricature as the pawnbroker. (The two men doing the commentary were distinctly silent during the former and made some weak excuses for the latter). I also don't find Lloyd to be an actor I click with strongly. I think that he designed and executed the comedy of the film really brilliantly, but it does feel like watching a character move from one setpiece to the next.

I do understand why this one is considered a classic, but it has yet to really win me over.

3.5

[ueno_station54]

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/MSDRAOF_EC009-SPLASH-2021-1618585417.jpg
Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark (Steven Spielberg, 1981)
Yeah, I just don't get this one. I really don't know what its going for or what it wants me to feel. I thought they were going for the "rough around the edges antihero who lightens up and redeems himself over the course of the film" but Indy is just unlikable throughout. He's a colonist that sleeps with underage women and I think Harrison Ford is intended to be like charming here? He has about as much charisma as a glass of milk so it doesn't really work. Like, that opening scene paints him as a villain and that impression never wore off for me. There's action scenes but they're not exciting in any way. These scenes feel like they're trudging through mud every time. Really could have used some tightening up in editing. I don't really know what else to talk about, it feels like the whole movie is just this character and some action scenes. Maybe if it had more of the magical elements that come in at the end I'd be more in to it??? I just don't understand.
rating_2_5?

[cricket]

Sleeps with underage women? Granted it's been several years but I don't remember anything like that.

[ueno_station54]

Sleeps with underage women? Granted it's been several years but I don't remember anything like that.
sorry, implied to sleep with underage woman.

[cricket]

sorry, implied to sleep with underage woman.

Don't recall that either but I may watch it tonight.

[Wyldesyde19]

Don't recall that either but I may watch it tonight.
Oh, it was definitely implied there was something elicit between them when she was younger. It’s never mentioned in the movie itself, but the script has been on the record as saying she was 15 while he was in his 20’s

[ueno_station54]

Oh, it was definitely implied there was something elicit between them when she was younger. It’s never mentioned in the movie itself, but the script has been on the record as saying she was 15 while he was in his 20’s
yes, i personally wouldn't have actually put the word "child" in that scene lmao and the thing with his student suggests an thing between him and much younger women has been a norm in his life.

[Wyldesyde19]

yes, i personally wouldn't have actually put the word "child" in that scene lmao and the thing with his student suggests an thing between him and much younger women has been a norm in his life.
In the latter case, they’re at 18 years old, seeing as they're college students, so it isn’t nearly as salacious. Also, I don’t take that imply anything “inappropriate” was going on between him and his students, but rather a young girls fixation on him.

[cricket]

In the latter case, they’re at 18 years old, seeing as they're college students, so it isn’t nearly as salacious. Also, I don’t take that imply anything “inappropriate” was going on between him and his students, but rather a young girls fixation on him.

This is the only thing I remembered, which is nothing. I'll have to watch to remember the other stuff.

[ueno_station54]

In the latter case, they’re at 18 years old, seeing as they're college students, so it isn’t nearly as salacious. Also, I don’t take that imply anything “inappropriate” was going on between him and his students, but rather a young girls fixation on him.
its salacious in combination with the previously mentioned scene and to me his reaction is suggesting something.

[Wyldesyde19]

its salacious in combination with the previously mentioned scene and to me his reaction is suggesting something.
It isn’t salacious if there isn’t anything there. I don’t read anything implied between them, other than her fixation. He seems to react in surprise a bit, rather than smug satisfaction.
And who cares if there were? She isn’t underage, and at 18 she is old enough to decide who she wants to sleep with anyways, right?

[pahaK]

Oh no, do we need to fear for the FBI because of Raiders?

[ueno_station54]

It isn’t salacious if there isn’t anything there. I don’t read anything implied between them, other than her fixation. He seems to react in surprise a bit, rather than smug satisfaction.
And who cares if there were? She isn’t underage, and at 18 she is old enough to decide who she wants to sleep with anyways, right?
doesn't have to be illegal to be gross <3 i just think having both of these scenes doesn't paint the hero character in the best light.

[ueno_station54]

Oh no, do we need to fear for the FBI because of Raiders?
someone warn Siddon, quick!

[Wyldesyde19]

doesn't have to be illegal to be gross <3 i just think having both of these scenes doesn't paint the hero character in the best light.
And what makes it gross exactly? The age factor? In the students case, again, she is old enough by legal standards, which is 16 in many states, to decide to enter these types of relationships if she wants to or not. So what makes it gross, exactly? Why is it ok for her to be with someone at age 18, but the age of 27 (Indy’s stated age in the script) so terrible?

I’ve legitimately never understood why age, with the caveat of 18 being the mark of course, should be an issue if the girls in question are the ones seeking it out?

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thatfilmguy.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F06%2FRaiders-of-the-Lost-Ark-1981-.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Raiders of the Lost Ark, 1981

Part-time professor and part-time adventure-archaeologist Indiana Jones (Harrison Ford) is called in to find an important relic before a Nazi-sponsored team can find it. His pursuit of the ark finds him reuniting with an old friend, Sallad (John Rhys-Davies), a former acquaintance, Marion (Karen Allen), and an old enemy, Belloq (Paul Freeman).

Like probably most people in this thread, I've seen the Indiana Jones movies a few times. I have always enjoyed them well enough, but never loved them. Then a few years back someone linked a transcript of a conversation that took place in 1978 between several filmmakers involved in the film and, um . . .


George Lucas: I was thinking that this old guy [Marion's dad] could have been his mentor. He could have known this little girl [Marion] when she was just a kid. Had an affair with her when she was eleven.

Lawrence Kasdan: And he was forty-two.

George Lucas: He hasn’t seen her in twelve years. Now she’s twenty-two. It’s a real strange relationship.

Steven Spielberg: She had better be older than twenty-two.

George Lucas: He’s thirty-five, and he knew her ten years ago when he was twenty-five and she was only twelve.

George Lucas: It would be amusing to make her slightly young at the time.

Steven Spielberg: And promiscuous. She came onto him.

George Lucas: Fifteen is right on the edge. I know it’s an outrageous idea, but it is interesting. Once she’s sixteen or seventeen it’s not interesting anymore.

So with that in your mind, watching a scene that goes:

Marion: I've learned to hate you in the last ten years!

Indiana: I never meant to hurt you.

Marion: I was a child. I was in love. It was wrong and you knew it!

Indiana: You knew what you were doing.

"You knew what you were doing." Yikes. I mean, this is now the main association I have with his character: this is a dude who would sleep with someone who is still young enough to be losing baby teeth. (Later in the conversation they admit that they can't actually say on screen how old she was, they'll just have to imply it by casting someone about ten years younger than him).

Some people might say that it's not fair to judge a film by what's not actually on screen, but I would argue that it is actually on screen. It was something I questioned the first time I saw it, but assumed it was a classic case of casting a women much younger than her male counterpart but we're supposed to believe they are about the same age.

ANYWAY.

This is the kind of movie that is your classic 80s adventure. There are memorable setpieces (like the infamous rolling ball) and memorable lines ("Why did it have to be snakes?"). There are memorable moments of comedy (like shooting the guy in the market).

I think my 12 year old self would have given this a big thumbs up. But I'm not my 12 year old self, and so by the time Indiana Jones was burning animals to death, a lot of the magic had worn off for me. I definitely get why this film is so beloved and would be considered a crowd pleaser. I am just really no longer the audience for it.

I do like Harrison Ford, and props to Karen Allen for her physical comedy chops. The film does have that big-scale adventure momentum to it that I bet would make it a lot of fun to see on the big screen.

3.5

[Takoma11]

LOL, I was writing my review while you were all litigating this very topic!

[ueno_station54]

And what makes it gross exactly? The age factor? In the students case, again, she is old enough by legal standards, which is 16 in many states, to decide to enter these types of relationships if she wants to or not. So what makes it gross, exactly? Why is it ok for her to be with someone at age 18, but the age of 27 (Indy’s stated age in the script) so terrible?

I’ve legitimately never understood why age, with the caveat of 18 being the lark of course, should be an issue if the girls in question are the ones seeking it out?
i'm not approaching this from a realism standpoint. i think having both these scenes in a script is the screenwriter saying something about the character and wanting barely legal women (or explicitly underage women) isn't the most endearing quality. also man looks mid 40's here lmao.

[Takoma11]

also man looks mid 40's here lmao.

Look, it's been a rough 27 years.

[Wyldesyde19]

i'm not approaching this from a realism standpoint. i think having both these scenes in a script is the screenwriter saying something about the character and wanting barely legal women (or explicitly underage women) isn't the most endearing quality. also man looks mid 40's here lmao.

Fair enough.

[Wyldesyde19]

Look, it's been a rough 27 years.


Raiding takes a toll on one’s life.

[cricket]

Really curious what I'm going to think of Raiders now. I almost wonder if I'm best left with a fond memory.

[Wyldesyde19]

Really curious what I'm going to think of Raiders now. I almost wonder if I'm best left with a fond memory.

For me, the whole underage thing does t detract from the film at all. It’s still an enjoyable romp

[cricket]

Magical Girl

https://variety.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/magical-girl.jpg

Not going to say anything about the narrative, which doesn't really make an appearance until about 40-45 minutes in. It's definitely not the type of film I could recommend to the average film watcher, only at a place like this. It's not raw and brutal like many of my past nominations, more weird without being unrealistic, and dark without being disgusting. A bit of dark humor and ambiguity. Very well made and excellent performances. I enjoyed it the same as I did the first time and I hope you guys get something out of it.

4.5-

[Citizen Rules]

edarsenal

I just realized that Witness for the Prosecution is ineligible as a nomination per the rules, as it won the 1950s HoF

50's Hall Of Fame (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=43881)
Host: Friendly Mushroom

Winner: Witness For The Prosecution (1958 Billy Wilder)

[Takoma11]

edarsenal

I just realized that Witness for the Prosecution is ineligible as a nomination per the rules, as it won the 1950s HoF

50's Hall Of Fame (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=43881)
Host: Friendly Mushroom

Winner: Witness For The Prosecution (1958 Billy Wilder)


GASP!!! Oh my gosh! You guys I am so sorry! I must have missed it when I skimmed the lists!

Oof, and several people already watched it.

Do you guys want to:

1) Just drop it/me from the HoF "official list" (people can watch it for fun and just nobody puts it in their final rankings). I will still watch and rank everything.

2) I pick a (VERY SHORT RUN TIME) replacement

I will happily do either!

[Citizen Rules]

GASP!!! Oh my gosh! You guys I am so sorry! I must have missed it when I skimmed the lists!

Oof, and several people already watched it.

Do you guys want to:

1) Just drop it/me from the HoF "official list" (people can watch it for fun and just nobody puts it in their final rankings). I will still watch and rank everything.

2) I pick a (VERY SHORT RUN TIME) replacement

I will happily do either!I don't think you should have to drop out, just pick another nom. But up to the host of course.

[Miss Vicky]

Do you guys want to:

1) Just drop it/me from the HoF "official list" (people can watch it for fun and just nobody puts it in their final rankings). I will still watch and rank everything.

2) I pick a (VERY SHORT RUN TIME) replacement


I see no reason why you shouldn't still be allowed to have a horse in the race. Just pick a replacement and don't worry too much about runtime.

[pahaK]

Just pick a new nomination. And don't fuss about the runtime either, we're still in the open door policy time. Oh, and you can always blame the host for not checking the eligibility :D

[rauldc14]

I'm not in this but personally I think winners in the specialty HOFs should be eligible in the general HOFs now.

[Allaby]

I'm not in this but personally I think winners in the specialty HOFs should be eligible in the general HOFs now.

Personally, I agree with this, but I support whatever decision the host makes.

[ueno_station54]

oh whoops i always thought specialty hall winners could enter the general ones lol.

[Miss Vicky]

I'm not in this but personally I think winners in the specialty HOFs should be eligible in the general HOFs now.

I disagree unless we make the reverse of that also true.

[rauldc14]

I disagree unless we make the reverse of that also true.

I'm on board with that too.

[Takoma11]

Well, you are all being very gracious.

Hopefully anyone who watched Witness for the Prosecution already isn't feeling too annoyed about it.

I will look for another nomination if that's what Ed agrees to.

[Thief]

also man looks mid 40's here lmao.

It's not the years, honey, it's the mileage.

[Thief]

Takoma11, I don't see any issue on you picking another one, and maybe an additional week can be added to "compensate" for the slip-up?

[cricket]

Well, you are all being very gracious.

Hopefully anyone who watched Witness for the Prosecution already isn't feeling too annoyed about it.

I will look for another nomination if that's what Ed agrees to.

Zero annoyance here

[rauldc14]

Witness deserves a general HOF nom

[Takoma11]

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fbloody-disgusting.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F06%2Fone-cut-of-the-dead-2.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

One Cut of the Dead, 2017

Director Higurashi (Takayuki Hamatsu) is filming a low-budget zombie flick in an abandoned WW2 site when things go very, very wrong. As the actors and crew struggle to get through the filming unscathed, we get the chance to see just how things ended up the way they did.

If that plot summary sounds pretty vague, it's because what everyone says about this movie is true: you really don't want to know all that much going into it. As such, I'll try to keep my remarks about it vague. I'll be writing less than I typically do because of this, but it's not because I enjoyed it less!

To begin with, what I most enjoyed about this film was its sense of humor. I laughed a lot. There was good physical humor, clever editing moments, and just some really fun performances from the actors ("POM!!!").

I also appreciated some narrative suspense that was generated once you get the whole "film within a film" concept. There's a great running double-bluff where you have to wonder if there is another twist coming in the third act. Will it be that there really are zombies? Will it turn out that there's even another meta layer to what is happening?

I don't have too many negatives for this one. I did think that an early plot point was pretty obvious, but the film was also very short, so even if things were a bit telegraphed, it didn't wear out its welcome.

I've been hearing buzz about this one for a while, and I'm glad I finally checked it out. It was a fun film to watch on a snowy Sunday evening.

4

[ueno_station54]

It's not the years, honey, it's the mileage.
lmao what's that from it made my skin crawl.

[Citizen Rules]

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=84456
Jaws (1975)

I wrote a review of Jaws a few years back. I've not read it in a long time so I don't remember exactly what I said. I thought I'd write up my thoughts fresh and then post my old review to see how my opinions changed.


I hadn't seen Jaws in awhile and viewing it now I had a slightly different reaction to it. This time around I really appreciated the on-location setting and the use of real town folks for extras. The setting and extras made the film look authentic. I was equally impressed by the actual filming at sea. There's nothing like the ocean and no studio water tank can make a movie look real like the open sea does. All that adds up to high production values...The shark still look terrifying all these years later, especially in it's first swim by when we see it just under the surface.

My favorite shot was the one I chose to lead off this review. My favorite scene was the bonding scene in the ship's cabin, that's where they swap stories and show their scars as they get drunk. In film making that's the calm before the storm.

In Hawaii I was going to do a shark dive in a shark cage just like Richard Dreyfus does. The wife and I paid in advance, got up at 5 am (never fun on a vacation) and drove across the island to where the boat was to take us to the sharks. Only no one was there as the seas were really rough, not even the captain of the boat. So I almost got to see a shark!

Thanks Phoenix, I enjoyed revisiting this classic.

[Citizen Rules]

Just in case anyone is interested this is what I wrote almost 5 years ago.

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=31859&stc=1&d=1498354440
Jaws (Spielberg, 1975)


A hungry shark feeds on human tidbits as New Englanders on Amity Island get ready for their big summer tourist season.

In 1975 Spielberg became a household name with his exciting thriller featuring a huge shark that scared the bejesus out of movie goers. And it gave us some of the most memorable scenes from a movie, and memorable dialogue too. Anybody remember, "you're gonna need a bigger boat!"

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=31860&stc=1&d=1498354448

I watched this for the first time in 30 years and was impressed with the care that went into the staging of the scenes and the cinematography.

A good example of that is this famous scene from the beginning of the movie. Not only is the whole shark attack done frighteningly real with the girl being pulled under water only to pop up again screaming. But look at that buoy in the background. She's so close and that buoy gives us hope that she can reach it and climb to safety. It also gives scale and makes the scene look all the more real. The twilight setting with it's dark shadows makes the attack all the more potent.

The entire movie is constructed for maximum effect, that's why the three shark hunters go out on a small rickety old boat. Spielberg is a genius.

And the score? I don't even have to mention how amazing it is and how much the music adds to the tension.

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=31861&stc=1&d=1498354456
From left to right: Roy Scheider, Robert Shaw, Richard Dreyfuss


I liked all three of the main cast and they're an odd mix, which also creates tension on the cramped quarters of the boat.

Roy Scheider is out of his element as he hates the water and is an outsider to the small island where he's come to be their local sheriff. Robert Shaw as the hard drinking, half crazed sea captain puts the meaning into colorful! But it's Richard Dreyfuss who's always been my favorite. Even when I saw this first run at the theater as a kid, it was the marine biologist played by Richard Dreyfuss who I could relate to. He's for many people a proxy on the shark hunt.

Oh and almost forgot to say after over 40 years the mechanical shark still looks real!

rating_5

[Takoma11]

lmao what's that from it made my skin crawl.

It's a quote from Raiders of the Lost Ark.

[ueno_station54]

It's a quote from Raiders of the Lost Ark.
lmaaaoooooo

[edarsenal]

edarsenal

I just realized that Witness for the Prosecution is ineligible as a nomination per the rules, as it won the 1950s HoF

50's Hall Of Fame (https://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=43881)
Host: Friendly Mushroom

Winner: Witness For The Prosecution (1958 Billy Wilder)

GASP!!! Oh my gosh! You guys I am so sorry! I must have missed it when I skimmed the lists!

Oof, and several people already watched it.

Do you guys want to:

1) Just drop it/me from the HoF "official list" (people can watch it for fun and just nobody puts it in their final rankings). I will still watch and rank everything.

2) I pick a (VERY SHORT RUN TIME) replacement

I will happily do either!

I don't think you should have to drop out, just pick another nom. But up to the host of course.

I see no reason why you shouldn't still be allowed to have a horse in the race. Just pick a replacement and don't worry too much about runtime.
Yes. Yes. And YES.

I'm not in this but personally, I think winners in the specialty HOFs should be eligible in the general HOFs now.

Personally, I agree with this, but I support whatever decision the host makes.

Just pick a new nomination. And don't fuss about the runtime either, we're still in the open door policy time. Oh, and you can always blame the host for not checking the eligibility :D
https://i.makeagif.com/media/6-23-2016/wchljd.gif

That is my snafu for missing it and since I do have it stated in the opening thread: both General and Specialty Winners are excluded, CR's excellent eye is very much correct. Crappers, since I was pretty hyped to see it.
So, if you would please Takoma11,

A) Send me a new nomination
B) Simply post it here and I'll switch it on the front page.

Sorry about that, everyone.

[SpelingError]

I propose that Takoma should be forever banned from all future Halls on this forum!

jk

[SpelingError]

Also, I should have my first review out by tomorrow.

[edarsenal]

On a secondary note, I've got today's run of reviews and one of Allaby I missed to do but not the time tonight, so I'll get 'em tomorrow.
My GOD what a deluge of movie watching this weekend has been with you people - F@ckin AWESOME

[ueno_station54]

ouu we get another reveal <3

[edarsenal]

I propose that Takoma should be forever banned from all future Halls on this forum!

jk

https://i.makeagif.com/media/3-18-2017/s89le2.gif

[Takoma11]

I propose that Takoma should be forever banned from all future Halls on this forum!

jk

Seconded! Motion passes!
.
.
.
Wait . . . :(

[Citizen Rules]

[Witness for the Prosecution] Crappers, since I was pretty hyped to see it... We should do a Best of the Winners HoF. An HoF where all the noms are previous HoF winners. What do you think? It could be even become a thing.

[Allaby]

We should do a Best of the Winners HoF. An HoF where all the noms are previous HoF winners. What do you think? It could be even become a thing.

That sounds really cool. Good idea!

[SpelingError]

We should do a Best of the Winners HoF. An HoF where all the noms are previous HoF winners. What do you think? It could be even become a thing.

That's a good idea.

[Takoma11]

Okay, my first pick was a film I love and I thought most people would love, and we all see where that got us!!

So my fancy new pick is a film that I love and that, well, I think some people will love. Some people will definitely not love it. Or maybe you will? I don't know.

Let's get uncomfortable, ya'll!

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fis5-ssl.mzstatic.com%2Fimage%2Fthumb%2FVideo118%2Fv4%2F7a%2F76%2Fe7%2F7a76e7d0-54fd-d52c-d255-81b09f19cbfe%2Fsource%2F900x900bb.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

[edarsenal]

We should do a Best of the Winners HoF. An HoF where all the noms are previous HoF winners. What do you think? It could be even become a thing.
Definitely. Like the Second Chance Halls it'll be a Battle of the Titans sorta thing.
I like it.

[SpelingError]

I was thinking of a Worst Films Hall of Fame where everyone nominates the worst movie they can think of, but I'm not sure that anyone would be interested in that.

[Takoma11]

We should do a Best of the Winners HoF. An HoF where all the noms are previous HoF winners. What do you think? It could be even become a thing.

So basically HoF Tournament of Champions?

[edarsenal]

Okay, my first pick was a film I love and I thought most people would love, and we all see where that got us!!

So my fancy new pick is a film that I love and that, well, I think some people will love. Some people will definitely not love it. Or maybe you will? I don't know.

Let's get uncomfortable, ya'll!

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fis5-ssl.mzstatic.com%2Fimage%2Fthumb%2FVideo118%2Fv4%2F7a%2F76%2Fe7%2F7a76e7d0-54fd-d52c-d255-81b09f19cbfe%2Fsource%2F900x900bb.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

nah, don't like that one. Try again.


:D
Up on the Front Page, it goes. Thanks!

[SpelingError]

Okay, my first pick was a film I love and I thought most people would love, and we all see where that got us!!

So my fancy new pick is a film that I love and that, well, I think some people will love. Some people will definitely not love it. Or maybe you will? I don't know.

Let's get uncomfortable, ya'll!

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fis5-ssl.mzstatic.com%2Fimage%2Fthumb%2FVideo118%2Fv4%2F7a%2F76%2Fe7%2F7a76e7d0-54fd-d52c-d255-81b09f19cbfe%2Fsource%2F900x900bb.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Haven't heard of that one. Looks interesting though.

[Allaby]

I was thinking of a Worst Films Hall of Fame where everyone nominates the worst movie they can think of, but I'm not sure that anyone would be interested in that.

I would definitely be interested in that.

[ueno_station54]

ouu i saw this on a plane once. dug it <3

[SpelingError]

I would definitely be interested in that.

That might just be the one Hall that ueno wins.

[Allaby]

Okay, my first pick was a film I love and I thought most people would love, and we all see where that got us!!

So my fancy new pick is a film that I love and that, well, I think some people will love. Some people will definitely not love it. Or maybe you will? I don't know.

Let's get uncomfortable, ya'll!

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fis5-ssl.mzstatic.com%2Fimage%2Fthumb%2FVideo118%2Fv4%2F7a%2F76%2Fe7%2F7a76e7d0-54fd-d52c-d255-81b09f19cbfe%2Fsource%2F900x900bb.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Great pick! Excellent film. I love Jim Cummings.

[Citizen Rules]

So basically HoF Tournament of Champions?Yup, good way to put it too. I really like that title can we use it? I just seen Raul talking about including past winners and a HoF Tournament of Champions is the perfect way to do just that. It sounds like a lot of people want to do it, so I'll do the first ToC HoF after the 27th gets rolling a bit.

I was thinking of a Worst Films Hall of Fame where everyone nominates the worst movie they can think of, but I'm not sure that anyone would be interested in that.I like that idea, I'd probably join.

[pahaK]

I was thinking of a Worst Films Hall of Fame where everyone nominates the worst movie they can think of, but I'm not sure that anyone would be interested in that.

Or a Hall of Fame where all the films that have placed last in previous HoFs compete. I'd have a bunch noms in that :D

[Takoma11]

Yup, good way to put it too. I really like that title can we use it?

For a modest fee, of course!