Originally Posted by rauldc14 (Post 2197049)
Predictions for top 5?
2. Shame 3. La Dolce Vita 4. The Day of the Jackal 5. Vampyr |
I'm happy to see older films in the top five...we haven't had a 70's winner since 2014
|
Originally Posted by Siddon (Post 2197064)
I'm happy to see older films in the top five...we haven't had a 70's winner since 2014
|
No huge surprises she far. I expected Beasts to be a bit higher but thought we would see it by now.
Off to see if I still have my list. |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
5th Place
Vampyr https://nofspodcast.com/wp-content/u...9556204661.jpg 99 Points (1st, 3 3rd, 2 4th, 5th, 2 9th, 3 10th, 12th) |
5th place is still good :up:
Excited to see which film won this. |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
just popped on to see WHEN this was going to happen ---
Looks like I'll be in time for the top run. . . |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
4th Place
The Day of the Jackal https://homemcr.org/app/uploads/2017...-1-940x460.jpg 105 Points (1st, 3 2nd, 2 4th, 2 5th, 6th, 3 7th, 13th) |
Originally Posted by Siddon (Post 2197064)
I'm happy to see older films in the top five...we haven't had a 70's winner since 2014
|
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
Pretty happy to see my nom make it up to #4.
Everything seems to be panning out as I thought it would. Here's mine so far: 1) 2) The Day of the Jackal (#4) 3) Beasts of the Southern Wild (#11) 4) The Whisperers (#9) 5) Vampyr (#5) 6) 7) The Man from Nowhere (#7) 8) Hard Times (#10) 9) The Secret in Their Eyes (#6) 10) Antwone Fisher (#8) 11) 12) In a Glass Cage (#13) 13) Aniara (#12) |
Originally Posted by Citizen Rules (Post 2197096)
Yeah, kind of sad that old films don't get the same love as new stuff in HoFs.
|
I didn't care for Day of the Jackal...mostly because I've seen the same film done better too many times.
|
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
I'd actually have to look and see where the majority of mine were. Not sure if I've ever nominated a film within the past decade.
|
Originally Posted by Siddon (Post 2197101)
I didn't care for Day of the Jackal...mostly because I've seen the same film done better too many times.
|
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
3rd Place
Shame https://www.sensesofcinema.com/wp-co...18-718x400.jpg 113 Points (1st, 2 2nd, 2 3rd, 4th, 2 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 11th, 12th) |
Originally Posted by Siddon (Post 2197101)
I didn't care for Day of the Jackal...mostly because I've seen the same film done better too many times.
|
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
I predict that Barry Lyndon will win.
Loved Shame, btw. |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
I enjoy a nice spread of decades in these HOFs which usually happens.
|
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
Nice to see Bergman score so high.
1) 2) The Day of the Jackal (#4) 3) Beasts of the Southern Wild (#11) 4) The Whisperers (#9) 5) Vampyr (#5) 6) 7) The Man from Nowhere (#7) 8) Hard Times (#10) 9) The Secret in Their Eyes (#6) 10) Antwone Fisher (#8) 11) Shame (#3) 12) In a Glass Cage (#13) 13) Aniara (#12) |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
Just looked at the General HoFs and I surprised myself to see that the majority was after the 80s with a couple in the 2000s and one from the 2010s.
|
Originally Posted by edarsenal (Post 2197104)
Since I do enjoy the genre so much, I'd love to know a few that come to mind. Perhaps there may be one or more I would add to my Watchlist
Three Days of the Condor Alphaville World on a Wire The Finger Man The Red Circle Tokyo Drifter The Man Who Knew Too Much Foreign Correspondent 39 Steps The Killing Odd Man Out Kiss Me Deadly White Material Brick Under the Silver Lake |
OK I'm here let's get started
|
Originally Posted by Siddon (Post 2197114)
I've nominated State of Siege and Le Samurai before
Three Days of the Condor Alphaville World on a Wire The Finger Man The Red Circle Tokyo Drifter The Man Who Knew Too Much Foreign Correspondent 39 Steps Brick Under the Silver Lake THANKS Siddon! |
Originally Posted by Siddon (Post 2197114)
I've nominated State of Siege and Le Samurai before
Three Days of the Condor Alphaville World on a Wire The Finger Man The Red Circle Tokyo Drifter The Man Who Knew Too Much Foreign Correspondent 39 Steps Brick Under the Silver Lake |
Originally Posted by Siddon (Post 2197114)
I've nominated State of Siege and Le Samurai before
Three Days of the Condor Alphaville World on a Wire The Finger Man The Red Circle Tokyo Drifter The Man Who Knew Too Much Foreign Correspondent 39 Steps Brick Under the Silver Lake Of those,I would rate only 39 Steps higher, though Brick and Condor both come close. Also, an aside, Was World on a Wire ever released in theatres? Just curious. |
Originally Posted by edarsenal (Post 2197117)
I have Alphaville on my List; looking forward to that one. BIG fan of Three Days of the Condor and I'll be looking into the others, some sound familar.
THANKS Siddon! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3nh5zcGUsE I might pick this one for the next hall...it's a very different political thriller but it was very good. |
Originally Posted by seanc (Post 2197120)
Haven’t seen two of these but I would put Day of The Jackal number two behind Red Circle.
|
Originally Posted by Siddon (Post 2197122)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3nh5zcGUsE
I might pick this one for the next hall...it's a very different political thriller but it was very good. Also, just realized that The Finger Man is Le Doulos. Saw that recently and loved it. One of several Melville's that I've become enamored with. Le Deuxième Souffle is another recently seen and loved. And I do believe I'll be adding Foreign Correspondent to my Watchlist. |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
I think Foreign Correspondent is an underappreciated gem. It's on my Hitchcock Top 5.
|
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
|
Raul might be dragging this out just a bit....
|
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
GET ON WITH IT!!!!!
|
Originally Posted by Siddon (Post 2197139)
Raul might be dragging this out just a bit....
|
Originally Posted by cricket (Post 2197141)
Maybe it's a hint and he's doing his best Fellini impersonation.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/f3/34...51f3d2bd8e.jpg Somebody oughta go and demand satisfaction. |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
Here's my ballot with the two mystery movies.
01: In a Glass Cage 02: The Day of the Jackal 03: The Man from Nowhere 04: 05: The Secret in Their Eyes 06: 07: Hard Times 08: The Whisperers 09: Vampyr 10: Aniara 11: Beasts of the Southern Wild 12: Shame 13: Antwone Fisher |
Here's my current ballot. I'm fine with either Barry Lyndon or La Dolce Vita winning.
1. Vampyr 2. ??? 3. ??? 4. Hard Times 5. Shame 6. The Whisperers 7. The Day of the Jackal 8. The Secret in Their Eyes 9. The Man From Nowhere 10. Beasts of the Southern Wild 11. Antwone Fisher 12. Aniara 13. In a Glass Cage |
Well at hour 5....I guess I have to go. I hope I won I was the one who won the last time an Old film won...in 2018
|
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
How many foreign films have won a main HoF in the past?
EDIT: Several of them. I checked the main thread. |
Originally Posted by SpelingError (Post 2197163)
How many foreign films have won a main HoF in the past?
6... 400 Blows Autumn Sonanta Sansho A Separation Contrateimpo The Hunt |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
2nd Place
La Dolce Vita http://prod-upp-image-read.ft.com/03...1-051dbffa088d 118 Points (2 1sts, 3 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 2 6th, 7th, 2 9th, 12th) |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
1st Place
Barry Lyndon https://images2.minutemediacdn.com/i...?itok=p6-Yqs8t 125 Points (3 1sts, 2 2nd, 4th, 3 5th, 3 6th, 13th) |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
Congrats to Siddon. Kubrick breaks into the General Hall for the second.time, tying Tarantino.
|
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
Well my nom almost won!
Congrats to Barry Lyndon, nominated by Siddon. A fine addition to the MoFo Hall of Fame Museum! Thanks to Raul for running this! And thanks everyone who finished! Now onto the 25th, which I hope to start on this Friday evening. |
Barry Lyndon is a worthy winner! It’s nice to have Kubrick represented.
Congrats Siddon. This was a really fun HOF with a Diverse representation of genre and decades. Thanks to all who participated. And of course, thanks Raul, for hosting |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
My voting list:
1 The Whisperers 2 Barry Lyndon 3 Antwone Fisher 4 La Dolce Vita 5 Shame 6 The Day of the Jackal 7 Beasts of the Southern Wild 8 Rudderless 9 Hard Times 10 Aniara 11 Vampyr 12 The Man from Nowhere 13 The Secret in Their Eyes 14 In a Glass Cage |
Third win for Kubrick (Paths of Glory, Doctor Strangelove, Barry Lyndon) |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
My list
1. Antwone Fisher 2. La Dolce Vita 3. Vampyr 4. Shame 5. The Man from Nowhere 6. Barry Lyndon 7. Day of the Jackal 8. Aniara 9. Secret in Their Eyes 10. Beasts of the Southern Wild 11. Hard Times 12. The Whisperers 13. In a Glass Cage |
Originally Posted by Citizen Rules (Post 2197218)
Well my nom almost won!
Congrats to Barry Lyndon, nominated by Siddon. A fine addition to the MoFo Hall of Fame Museum! Thanks to Raul for running this! And thanks everyone who finished! Now onto the 25th, which I hope to start on this Friday evening. |
Kubrick wins Mofo
Good job everyone. Probably see you in the 25th |
Congratulations Siddon and also to Citizen to a lesser extent;) Thank you very much Raul for hosting, I didn't know you had in you.
The Secret in Their Eyes The Day of the Jackal Shame Antwone Fisher Barry Lyndon The Sea Inside Hard Times La Dolce Vita The Man from Nowhere Aniara In a Glass Cage The Whisperers Rudderless Vampyr Beasts of the Southern Wild |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
My full ballot (including Rudderless) with the ratings I put to Letterboxd. Ranking and rating La Dolce Vita gave me a lot of problems, and I ended up putting it in the middle of my initial range (2 to 4 stars). It's definitely a film I need to rewatch at some point. Barry Lyndon is my favorite Kubrick, so good winner in my books.
01: In a Glass Cage (1986) 02: The Day of the Jackal (1973) 03: The Man from Nowhere (2010) 04: Barry Lyndon (1975) 05: The Secret in Their Eyes (2009) 06: La Dolce Vita (1960) 07: Hard Times (1975) 08: The Whisperers (1967) 09: Vampyr (1932) 10: Aniara (2018) 11: Beasts of the Southern Wild (2012) 12: Shame (1968) 13: Rudderless (2014) 14: Antwone Fisher (2002) |
The Day of the Jackal
The Man from Nowhere Shame Vampyr Antwone Fisher La Dolce Vita The Sea Inside In a Glass Cage The Secret in Their Eyes Aniara Beasts of the Southern Wild The Whisperers Hard Times Barry Lyndon Rudderless I think that the middle would get shuffled around quite a bit, but the top and bottom would mostly stay the same. |
Here's what my final ballot was:
1. Vampyr 2. Barry Lyndon 3. La Dolce Vita 4. Hard Times 5. Shame 6. The Whisperers 7. The Day of the Jackal 8. The Secret in Their Eyes 9. The Man From Nowhere 10. Beasts of the Southern Wild 11. Antwone Fisher 12. Aniara 13. In a Glass Cage I really enjoyed this Hall of Fame. It was a lot of fun watching and reviewing all the movies which were nominated for it, reading the reviews that other people wrote, and discussing the films with the people here. I'm definitely going to join the 25th HoF and I hope to see Thief, Takoma, Torgo, and some more of the Corrie/RT crowd there as well. Anyways, congratulations to Siddon for winning this and thank you so much Raul for hosting this HoF! |
Originally Posted by Siddon (Post 2197221)
|
It's been fun! Thanks to Raul for hosting.
Despite my new fatherly duties, I finished earlier than I expected, so I should hopefully be able to swing the next one. Here's my list: 1. Barry Lyndon 2. La Dolce Vita 3. Vampyr 4. Day of the Jackal 5. Hard Times 6. Shame 7. The Secret in Their Eyes 8. The Man from Nowhere 9. The Whisperers 10. In a Glass Cage 11. Antwone Fisher 12. The Sea Inside 13. Aniara 14. Rudderless 15. Beasts of the Southern Wild |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
I'm really excited that it seems we have a new eager HOF core. I already know my pick for the next one and am very curious what people will think.
|
Originally Posted by Citizen Rules (Post 2197262)
That's kind of a weird thing to say.
|
Originally Posted by cricket (Post 2197268)
He's right. It's much better when you can hit the town and imitate the lead.
|
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
Here's my full final ballot...
Once again, thanks to everyone, especially Raul for running this, and congrats to Siddon for picking a worthy winner. |
Originally Posted by Citizen Rules (Post 2197262)
That's kind of a weird thing to say.
Well if you are on a diet and someone nominates Willy Wonka that's going to affect your enjoyment of a film. It took me three days to get through it and I normally binge films so that's something that is always a sign to me. It's a good film, I liked scenes in the film but I need multiple sittings. |
Originally Posted by Siddon (Post 2197271)
Well if you are on a diet and someone nominates Willy Wonka that's going to affect your enjoyment of a film. It took me three days to get through it and I normally binge films so that's something that is always a sign to me. It's a good film, I liked scenes in the film but I need multiple sittings.
not really! |
Originally Posted by Takoma11 (Post 2196840)
Considering what happened to many Argentinians who went up against the government, the fact that both Esposito and his love interest survived physically intact and were able to be together in the end is a relatively happy ending. I agree that the film makes it clear that they will carry a lot of baggage (both on their own and as a couple) even if their relationship is mostly positive.
Thank God for small favors.
Have you seen La Historia Oficial? (Another Argentinian Best Foreign Film winner that deals with this era of Argentinia history).
I believe that. But I also really doubt that many Academy members did a lot of research to pick up on any of those deeper layers of meaning.
By "accessible" I mean a film that can be mostly followed (on both a plot and emotional/character arc) level without doing too much heavy lifting.
The "bare bones" of The Secret in Their Eyes are those of a typical murder mystery/political thriller.
The main character is a detective trying to do the right thing.
The villains are very obvious.
The theme of regret is explicitly voiced by the main character several times.
Toward the end (and while I liked the film, I thought this part was SO heavy handed), he takes a index card that reads "Temo" (I fear) and adds an "a" so that it reads "Te Amo" (I love you). Fear becomes love.
He then rushes to her office where, breathing heavily, he declares his love.
To the sound of happy, hopeful music
she smiles broadly in a bright room next to bright flowers and tells him to come in.
The final shot is literally a door closing. You could watch this film and pay almost zero attention to the entire political element and still come away feeling like you "got it".
By contrast, I think that something like Mother is a bit more daring and complicated in its ending. I think that it leaves you not knowing quite how to feel. I think that it is also a relatively accessible film, but I think that the character arc is a bit more complex and the resolution is not as "neat".
My opinion is just "I'm not surprised that more people like The Secret in Their Eyes even though I like other films better."
I was thrilled with Moonlight's win (not the least because I have a friend who frequently collaborates with the writer, who I think is amazing), but Crash over Brokeback Mountain to me displays that often a kind of comfortable competency hits the right notes with a large enough chunk of voters to pull out a win.
I'm not saying people are voting for the film they think will be more popular. I'm saying they genuinely liked it! But I do question just a little (as I do with the other categories), the degree to which genre and surface-level story play a role.
The Headless Woman is excellent and disturbing and darkly funny. It has layered critique of class and race politics in South America and it doesn't spoon-feed you anything. I would highly recommend it.
I like the synopsis and I certainly love disturbing and dark humor
I'll keep an eye out for Castle of Purity, though it doesn't seem to be streaming on any of my services currently.
|
Originally Posted by cricket (Post 2197278)
I think the emotional aspect of the movie is much more complex than either you want to admit or realize. I'm not saying you need to be a genius, but you do need to think and it's easy to miss a lot of things.
That's true; one of the things I've said before this conversation is that the plot is unimportant, a means to an end. You are looking at the movie at the most superficial level possible. You could do that with any movie. A person watching this movie like that doesn't get the movie, and in turn won't have as high of an opinion of it.
Why? Sure, it's his job, but he's also traumatized by it-very different from other "thrillers". Furthermore, he becomes fueled by the husband's deep and unending love for the deceased, something he's never had but yearns for, yet lacks the courage to pursue.
I don't specifically remember this, but just because the viewer knows it's there, that doesn't mean the viewer understands or feels it.
-Benjamin, that part when...the guy goes to Jujuy the guy's crying is despair and she's running along the platform as if she's losing the love of her life touching their hands through the glass as if they were a single person she's crying, as if she knew she would be fated to suffer a fake love almost falling on the track, because she never dared to show her love -Yes..it was like that, no? I'm not saying that this theme isn't developed in more subtle ways in the rest of the film. All of what I was listing was an example of how the film could still provide a satisfying and complete narrative for someone who was only paying superficial attention.
He adds an A, not an a, an important distinction. Yes, fear becomes love, and he's motivated by what Morales did, even though it horrified him. Part of the reason it horrified him is what Morales had done to himself and he doesn't want to end up like that. He finds the courage he didn't have before, the courage to do anything in the name of true love, like Morales had done. The A that was missing from his typewriter while writing his novel represented what was missing in his life. He adds the A to the paper just like he had been adding it to his book.
Well, I hope that's not how he voices regret because he doesn't mention love. He says he needs to talk to her just like he's done in the past. This time she senses it's different.
Red to be exact, not the first time in the movie red was intentionally used. And he was already in, she just told him to close the door.
I'd have to watch it again, but my guess is that it could also be stripped down to its bare bones.
I could say that about any movie besides my favorite. I often recommend movies to people that I don't even like myself.
Yes of course they liked it. A big point to my argument is that I don't think they'd like it enough to vote for it had they only seen it at surface level.
I like the synopsis and I certainly love disturbing and dark humor
I can send you a link if you watch movies that way.
|
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
How do we decide who hosts each HoF?
|
Originally Posted by SpelingError (Post 2197282)
How do we decide who hosts each HoF?
|
Originally Posted by Citizen Rules (Post 2197283)
Someone just says they want to do it.
|
Originally Posted by SpelingError (Post 2197284)
I know I'm new, but could I do it, perhaps?
I would do a specialty one first to see if you like it. If their is a specific type of film or style you want to dive into that might get you more engaged than immediately trying to do the 25th. |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
CONGRATS @Siddon!!! Seeing Lyndon was a great surprise
THANKS EVERYONE for a great list of movies and reviews! and, of course, THANK YOU @rauldc14 for Hosting!! 1) La Dolce Vita (#2) 2) The Day of the Jackal (#4) 3) Beasts of the Southern Wild (#11) 4) The Whisperers (#9) 5) Vampyr (#5) 6) Barry Lyndon (#1) 7) The Man from Nowhere (#7) 8) Hard Times (#10) 9) The Secret in Their Eyes (#6) 10) Antwone Fisher (#8) 11) Shame (#3) 12) In a Glass Cage (#13) 13) Aniara (#12) |
Originally Posted by Siddon (Post 2197285)
I would do a specialty one first to see if you like it. If their is a specific type of film or style you want to dive into that might get you more engaged than immediately trying to do the 25th.
|
Originally Posted by SpelingError (Post 2197284)
I know I'm new, but could I do it, perhaps?
|
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
I think I'll start with a specialty HoF first.
|
Originally Posted by SpelingError (Post 2197287)
Okay, that's fair. Do I bring up my idea in Movie HALL OF FAME Archives & info?
If you want to do a specialty HoF, just mention it here and mention it on the Archives thread and see if people are interested. I bet you'd be a good host! Depending on what the genre/topic is I might join. |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
A HoF I've been thinking of doing for a while is a Russian film HoF since Russia is my favorite country for watching foreign films. Would anyone be interested in that? I'll post this in the Archives thread as well.
|
Originally Posted by Takoma11 (Post 2197280)
I mean, I did think while I was watching it? I actually paid very close attention to all of the films. And this is a historical context I find interesting and am familiar with. Nothing you've said about the emotions are things I missed, I just find them less impactful than you (and others) do.
But plot is not unimportant, especially if the events in that plot are meant to take us on the allegorical journey.
If you're thinking my opinion of the film is lower because I only watched it on a literal level, you are mistaken. I feel that I had a good grasp on the film's themes and broadly how it was connected to the real history of Argentinian politics.
I just don't find his character as original as you do, I guess. I feel like detectives who are haunted by "that one case" are actually dime a dozen in the mystery films/TV/books I consume.
I'm not saying that this theme isn't developed in more subtle ways in the rest of the film. All of what I was listing was an example of how the film could still provide a satisfying and complete narrative for someone who was only paying superficial attention.
And that's fine. But it's not, in my opinion, subtle.
He rushes in all bright eyed saying he needs to talk to her. Yes, she senses what he's saying, because she answers "It will be complicated" and he replied "I don't care."
I might not have had the wording correct (or the color of the flowers), but it doesn't change my basic assertion about the kind of emotional momentum that the ending has.
They are taking a positive step towards finding the happiness that has eluded them for 25 years. Sandoval is still dead. Meanwhile the victim of the film is stuck in a life of misery and loneliness. I'm fascinated that some people look at this as a storybook ending. Then again, I should know that emotions can be complex.
Any movie can. I'm saying that by contrast I found the ending of Mother more emotionally complex as a viewer.
Then I'm not sure why me not liking it more than other films is taken as a sign that I didn't pay enough attention or think hard enough or appreciate it for all of its layers.
This is where we'll just have to agree to disagree. Because part of what I'm arguing is that the film is satisfying even if regarded superficially (and more satisfying than many other films would be if similarly regarded).
I was really pleasantly surprised by it. And unfortunately, the thing that I think is most brilliant about it is something that develops through the course of the film and would be too spoiler-ish to discuss with someone who hasn't seen it. If you ever do get around to it, I'd love to discuss!
|
Originally Posted by SpelingError (Post 2197291)
A HoF I've been thinking of doing for a while is a Russian film HoF since Russia is my favorite country for watching foreign films. Would anyone be interested in that? I'll post this in the Archives thread as well.
|
Originally Posted by cricket (Post 2197298)
I usually don't participate in specialty HoFs, but I thought I'd mention a movie you might enjoy if you like crime movies-Brother (1997). I thought it was pretty good. Also The Green Elephant if you like something horribly depraved.
|
Originally Posted by cricket (Post 2197294)
Again, I'm not saying you watched it that way, but you are criticizing it in that way. I'm talking about if someone else watched it at the level you are criticizing it. You've talked about how accessible it is at it's bare bones level, and I'm saying if someone watches it at it's bare bones level, they probably won't get everything out of it, and therefore probably won't think it's a great movie.
I can't prove or disprove that someone who is mostly watching the film for the mystery plot and the broader emotional themes would think it was great. I could see someone watching the film and being tuned into the mystery and tuned into the unrequited love story and still really liking it.
I think his emotions as a detective in a thriller are not the norm.
I don't believe that someone only paying superficial attention can get all that it has to offer.
So you think a quick moment in the film is not subtle. I'd assume that's a criticism or else you probably wouldn't have mentioned it. Do you prefer thrillers that are subtle the whole way through?
Right. Is this another criticism?
They are taking a positive step towards finding the happiness that has eluded them for 25 years. Sandoval is still dead. Meanwhile the victim of the film is stuck in a life of misery and loneliness. I'm fascinated that some people look at this as a storybook ending. Then again, I should know that emotions can be complex.
I wish I could remember better.
Not saying that at all. You could understand everything about it, hate it, and I wouldn't take issue. I'm saying in order to think it's a great movie, a person needs to get it all, or at least a lot of it. If a person doesn't get everything it has to offer, they most likely won't love it.
Same as above. Satisfying sure, but I wouldn't love the movie if I saw it that way. I find this funny in a way. You're telling me you like it but like other movies better. I'm telling you I need to get everything out of it in order to love it. I don't even understand what this part of the debate is over. I feel like you're telling me it's better than I think it is if only looked at on it's most basic level.
I put it on my watchlist. Maybe you'll nominate it for a HoF?
|
Originally Posted by SpelingError (Post 2197291)
A HoF I've been thinking of doing for a while is a Russian film HoF since Russia is my favorite country for watching foreign films. Would anyone be interested in that? I'll post this in the Archives thread as well.
|
Originally Posted by Takoma11 (Post 2197302)
But what else is there to "get"? Or maybe when you say "get" you mean like being on the same frequency with the film? I honestly don't think that I missed anything in the movie, just that what there was didn't have the same impact. Saying I didn't "get it" makes it sound like an issue of understanding or interpretation. I think it's more just a case of incompatibility.
The entire point of our debate is over your belief that the Academy voters gave it the Oscar because it's more accessible and easy to like. You believe the plot and emotions are easily accessible. I agree with you about the plot, but feel the plot it unimportant because in order to love the movie, it has to hit you on that emotional level. The plot is nothing I haven't seen before, the ending is nothing I haven't seen before, and nothing surprised me. It doesn't matter. I've read many reviews of the movie, and for those who love it, it's the emotion that they cite as the main reason why. I disagree with the idea that it's accessible on an emotional level because emotions are complex by their very nature, and everybody processes emotion differently. Emotion is related to perception, and it's that perception that is very important here. I'll skip right to the ending which you have described as relatively and generally happy, easy to take, people pleasing, and lacking nuance. There's one thing you've said that really stands out to me, and that's that you thought the music at the end was happy and hopeful. This speaks volumes to me because it's the exact same music that's played at the beginning of the film during the sad train scene. This has everything to do with your perception. That doesn't make you wrong. It's how you feel and you can't be wrong about how you feel. I will carefully describe how I felt about the ending and I want you to focus on one sentence-you can't suffer real loss without having something that's real. The conclusion of the film includes the main character who needs justice, Morales, holding his head in his hands as he suffers through a living hell. Esposito is traumatized by this. Not a happy ending for who you could call the character who is the main victim of the film, as far as it's presented. On to the other main characters, Ben and Irene. After 25 years, they reconnect showing that their love is real. It is because of this that I feel the pain of those 25 lost years. That pain doesn't come if they do not take that positive step for love. For me, this was emotionally devastating. It's fine that you feel the way you do, but you can't say how I feel doesn't make sense and you should understand my view as well. What this means is that you didn't get the film the way I did. There is a certain amount of available potential with each film we watch. With this particular film, that potential was much more highly realized for me than it was for you, and that's obviously why I feel more strongly about it. It has nothing to do with your ability to follow it or understand it. It has everything to do with our sensibilities as a viewer. This is why I don't agree with accessibility on an emotional level. Yes we all know what love, loss, regret, trauma, etc., are, but we all understand them and process them on different levels, and even that varies with different circumstances. How can it be accessible on an emotional level if viewers feel differently? I agree with your idea that it can be an easier movie to like than some others, but it gets more complicated when it comes to loving the movie. We were specifically talking about the people who voted to give it an award. If they saw it at the superficial level that you have described, then I believe they would have felt more like you did. Since they voted for it, they probably were affected by it more like I was. Just as an aside, this was a very unknown movie when it won and it was considered a big surprise, so popularity played no part in it winning, just the opposite in fact. |
Originally Posted by SpelingError (Post 2197291)
A HoF I've been thinking of doing for a while is a Russian film HoF since Russia is my favorite country for watching foreign films. Would anyone be interested in that? I'll post this in the Archives thread as well.
I won't join though, because I need some time off, but if you need any help, just DM me. |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
1. Barry Lyndon
2. Shame 3. Beasts of the Southern Wild 4. El Secreto de sus ojos 5. The Day of the Jackal 6. Antwone Fisher 7. The Whisperers 8. Hard Times 9. Aniara 10. Vampyr 11. The Man from Nowhere 12. La Dolce Vita 13. In a Glass Cage |
Originally Posted by neiba (Post 2197385)
Last Russian HoF was fun, and it will probably be a small one so that could be a good place to start.
I won't join though, because I need some time off, but if you need any help, just DM me. |
Re: 24th Hall of Fame
The Movie Hall of Fame Archives has been updated and Barry Lyndon has been added to the honored halls!
|
Originally Posted by cricket (Post 2197377)
I'm skipping a lot because we're going in circles and I've felt that you haven't been understanding me, which could very well be the way I'm explaining it. I'll stick to the above as that shows you're on the right track to getting what I mean. I've never thought that there was something in the movie that you didn't understand.
The entire point of our debate is over your belief that the Academy voters gave it the Oscar because it's more accessible and easy to like.
To put it mathematically: suppose 100 Academy members watch the nominated films. 90 of them watch attentively and think deeply about what they are seeing. The other 10 watch more superficially, are distracted, whatever. I'm saying that I'm totally fine conceding that many of the attentive viewers thought the film was the best. But I'm also saying that because of the film's structure and other elements, those 10 inattentive viewers would probably have a more positive response to this film than to something like Dogtooth. I'm saying it's a film which can be appreciated in depth or superficially. And to my mind, this is not a criticism. It's just something that would give it a slight edge when it comes to something like a vote.
I disagree with the idea that it's accessible on an emotional level because emotions are complex by their very nature, and everybody processes emotion differently. Emotion is related to perception, and it's that perception that is very important here.
I'll skip right to the ending which you have described as relatively and generally happy, easy to take, people pleasing, and lacking nuance.
For me, this was emotionally devastating. It's fine that you feel the way you do, but you can't say how I feel doesn't make sense and you should understand my view as well.
If they saw it at the superficial level that you have described, then I believe they would have felt more like you did. Since they voted for it, they probably were affected by it more like I was. Just as an aside, this was a very unknown movie when it won and it was considered a big surprise, so popularity played no part in it winning, just the opposite in fact.
|
1 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by Takoma11 (Post 2197511)
Got it. Because in my experience when someone says that I didn't "get" a film, they meant that I was lacking in understanding of what happened in the film or what it was trying to accomplish or missed important symbolism or whatever.
I do want to clarify this point, because it's not what I'm saying. To put it mathematically: suppose 100 Academy members watch the nominated films. 90 of them watch attentively and think deeply about what they are seeing. The other 10 watch more superficially, are distracted, whatever. I'm saying that I'm totally fine conceding that many of the attentive viewers thought the film was the best. But I'm also saying that because of the film's structure and other elements, those 10 inattentive viewers would probably have a more positive response to this film than to something like Dogtooth. I'm saying it's a film which can be appreciated in depth or superficially. And to my mind, this is not a criticism. It's just something that would give it a slight edge when it comes to something like a vote. But emotions also have layers. Much like what I wrote above, I think that the film has emotional impact whether you regard it deeply (as you clearly do), or whether you regard it superficially. I agree that a casual viewer would not get the full impact of the emotions, but I think that a superficial viewer would still feel the impact of the "broad strokes" of the emotion. I think that you could watch that final scene without subtitles and still get the emotional vibe. I think that there are elements of the end which are generally happy and easy to take and lacking nuance. Because you have to remember that I'm talking about what someone would be able to glean if they weren't watching the film deeply and how the film might still be able to make them feel. I don't doubt that you felt this way about the film. And while I wouldn't describe my reaction as being emotionally devastated--in part because so many people lost their loved ones permanently--it certainly evoked a range of emotions in me. I think that how you've explained your reaction and how you read the ending as being more tragic than me makes sense. I think that if someone was only watching a film with partial attention (something I do, um, often SORRY SORRY EVERYONE!!), this is the one that would still leave a strong impression, based on my own experiences. It just has the right mix of plot elements, visual storytelling, engaging set-pieces, and emotional music. I had to tell you this because it freaked me out today. I was working and texted my wife that I was stopping at Subway and had a 2 for 1 sub coupon. She wanted chips to go with it and I was rushing her to make up her mind on what kind because people were behind me. Then this happened- It was so weird for me because she knows nothing of the movie. |
Originally Posted by cricket (Post 2197516)
I had to tell you this because it freaked me out today. I was working and texted my wife that I was stopping at Subway and had a 2 for 1 sub coupon. She wanted chips to go with it and I was rushing her to make up her mind on what kind because people were behind me. Then this happened-
. . . It was so weird for me because she knows nothing of the movie. You know what they say: "And if you gaze long enough into The Secret in Their Eyes, The Secret in Their Eyes will gaze back into you." |
All times are GMT -3. The time now is 04:06 PM. |
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright, ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Movie Forums