Rate The Last Movie You Saw

I remember watching Fear and Loathing for the first time years ago. I had NO idea what the hell the movie was about the first time I watched it. I was unfamiliar with the source material, had no clue who Thompson was or how he operated. But the performances of Depp and Del Toro were so good I did something I had never done in my adult life. After the movie was over, I immediately watched it again. Over the years, I slowly got more of a feel of what the movie was about. Part of it was after I got used to the visual overload and the surreal nature of the film, I was able to concentrate more on the story.

This is my first viewing after I finished reading the book. And I think the production team did a fantastic job in the adaptation. The voice over narration and the majority of the dialogue are pulled straight from the book. And while certain events are shifted around or changed slightly, it really captures the narrative and surreal feel of the book perfectly. Although certain themes are are covered better in the book, as well as certain events are left out of the movie, I don't think there was any better way to adapt the novel then this way.

The performances by Johnny Depp and Benicio Del Toro as Raoul Duke and Dr Gonzo respectively are fantastic. Particularly Depp. In addition to the acting, the direction and look of the film is perfect. Only a man like Terry Gilliam could bring to life the surreal nature of this movie with the help of the effects department. A combo of CGI and practical effects created an acid trip look to the film. How close it is to an actual acid trip, I will never know. But the imagery is uncomfortable and terrifying. As it is meant to be. This images were not meant to be warm, fuzzy or fun. Darkly humorous yes, but they are meant to reflect the state of mind of the author. Unbalanced, paranoid, and with a head full of acid. And that is done brilliantly.

Not only has Fear and Loathing become one of my favorite books, it propels a movie that is already one of my favorite movies even higher on my list.

__________________
Fear and Loathing in MoFo... The Gunslinger 45's Top 50 Favorite Films

In the 10 Ring: Gunslinger45's reviews

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas is one of my favorites. Knowing the bizarre and very interesting story of Hunter S. Thompson helps to appreciate the film.

Quote: "Per his wishes, his ashes were fired out of a cannon in a ceremony funded by his friend, Johnny Depp, and attended by a host of friends including then Senator John Kerry and Jack Nicholson."

Gonzo Reporter who lived what he reported...

Oh Thompson. God rest his soul.

Analyze This was basically what I expected it to be, and that's a good thing. I wasn't expecting a hilariously side splitting movie or something that would be amazing, and that's ok. Analyze This is a funny movie, especially for fans of DeNiro or just fans of mafia movies in general. It's really funny to see Billy Crystal and Robert DeNiro argue back and forth, and they have good chemistry. The movie has it's typical cliches and whatnot, but I was sort of expecting that. This movie is probably funnier to film fans, because there are many references to The Godfather, and all the phrases normally used in mafia movies (what's amatta whichu, how ya doin', why you breakin' my balls, etc.) are used in the movie and it's fun to hear them from multiple character actors who are in a lot of mafia movies. Not ALL of the acting is great in this movie, and not ALL of the jokes quite land, but I still had a good time and laughed often enough to enjoy it.

If you're going to watch Analyze This, don't expect anything great or amazing, just expect to have a good time and have a good laugh. As a DeNiro fan AND a mafia movie fan, I really enjoyed this movie, and if you are a fan of these same things, you will likely enjoy it too.

__________________
Through the darkness of future past
The magician longs to see
One chants out between two worlds:
Fire walk with me.

Do I question myself when I find a great film boring? Ummm.... Hi, my name's honeykid.

__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.

Honeykid doesn't question himself, he questions everyone else.

Hitchcock strikes again!

Ebert has done an Ozu commentary on Floating Weeds, but I remember finding him to be a bit too out of his element for the commentary to work, I didn't watch the whole thing. I haven't done too much formal studying of Ozu (like book length material). Most of what I know about his subtly personal and unusual use of space comes from David Bordwell's site, as well as his book on Ozu, and my own viewing of many of his films. Most of what I have to offer on Ozu is personal knowledge and experience though. If you have any specific questions about why I love Ozu and think he's one of he best filmmakers there was, I'd be happy to answer.

__________________
Mubi

Harold and Maude

I'm not going to talk about any use of personal space in Ozu's films. It's there, but it's more interesting as a sign of auteurship than greatness. The thing to remember is that most people see his later films where his style is pretty consistent and ingrained, but he made films over a 35-year period, so you can witness [on Hulu Plus for example] an evolution of his style. The thing about Ozu is that he treats his characters with great respect and dignity. He also uses the same actors quite often during the many phases of his career, so watching an Ozu film can feel like the witnessing of a family reunion with each passing one. So basically there is a sense of comfort, respect and familiarity. Within that context, it's quite easy to get involved with Ozu's visual motifs (the wash hanging on the line, the constant appearance of aerials) and character details because they seem so lived-in. This means that it may take a few movies to feel this accumulation of details, but they reveal more of themselves on repeat viewings of both different and the same films.

You can go into his camera placement and seeming lack of movement, but once again it's all done to enhance the characters and their plights, and then when there is a cut or change, it usually has more meaning. Other filmmakers have used a similar approach to filmmaking (Renoir, Kiarostami, Truffaut), but none appears more self-effacing on the surface. This doesn't really explain any specific film, so I'm really just babbling, but to make it personal for me, watching Ozu reminds of when I was younger and watching some of my fave TV shows. I was so into them because it was very comfortable to watch my fave characters and the familiar, simple camera set-ups. That's what basically made me fall in love with "The Andy Griffith Show" and "All in the Family". Ozu uses his own culture and history, but now having seen two dozen of his films, I have a sense of familiarity and comfort watching his films, whether it's a new one or a revisit. Does this make sense to anybody, or are you all ready to burst a blood vessel?

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

Yes it makes sense and helps me understand Ozu a bit better. Thank you sir.

Mark hit on a couple strong points about Ozu. The silent Ozu film's I've seen are both distinctively Ozu and very different from his later work. By the time he made color films he (to my knowledge) abandoned camera movements altogether, making him a highly singular filmmaker, which I'm very fond of. At the same time though, I can think of several instances in which a camera movement in an earlier Ozu, most powerfully in Woman of Tokyo, registered with me like an emotional cannon.

As mark indicated, watching Ozu once you've seen many of his films can feel like visiting old friends, even when its a film you haven't seen before. A reason for that which mark didn't indicate, however, was that Ozu's films tend to follow similar narrative arcs. Similarly to the stripping down of his style, Ozu abandoned many common narrative elements in Japan, most notably suicide, and focused more and more intently on similar themes and narratives as he got older. This contributes greatly to the camaraderie I feel with Ozu's actors. Not only do I repeatedly see them, but they often feel like the same people as in the other movies.

Like a number of my favorite directors, Ozu is also a master of storytelling ellipsis. While in the films of someone like Kiarostami, the ellipsis feels like a formal mechanic (albeit an effective one) to engage the viewer's imagination and latent thoughts, it registers as more nuanced with Ozu. While there's formal narrative experimentation at play with his ellipsis, it comes more genuinely from an appreciation of quotidian life. This is also where I think Ozu's composition and spatial tactics are crucial in that they along with the narrative structure reveal the art of the everyday. Ozu enhances everyday life while making it remain resolutely everyday, which allows for some of the most profound insights about my own life, as well as the characters'.

The Royal Tenenbaums (2001)

I just couldn't get into this. I didn't like any of the characters apart from Gene Hackman and overall I just found it dragged a bit. Described as a dark comedy, it just didn't work for me.

+


Wolf Creek (2005) *rewatch

Just as good after all these years.

+

__________________
Too weird to live, and too rare to die.

August Underground (2001)

It's tough to rate something like this because most normal people would dismiss this as trash, and they're probably right. However, it would appear that the filmmakers completely succeeded in what they were trying to accomplish. Shot documentary style, it just shows what a couple of complete psychos do. I'm not sure if I consider it more disturbing then say, A Serbian Film, because it doesn't have the sudden shocks. Rather, it's constantly vile, easily the most depraved film I've seen, although I haven't seen the sequels yet. The good thing about this movie, or bad thing depending how you look at it, is it's very believable. It doesn't look like a movie; the acting is very good and it looks real. I know MovieGal has seen this, and likes these kind of movies, but I wouldn't recommend this to anyone.

The Spirit of the Beehive (1973)

__________________
A normal man? For me, a normal man is one who turns his head to see a beautiful woman's bottom. The point is not just to turn your head. There are five or six reasons. And he is glad to find people who are like him, his equals. That's why he likes crowded beaches, football, the bar downtown...

Escape From New York 4/5 - Somehow I am just now getting around to watching John Carpenter's Escape From New York. The film is campy at times, but never to the point that it taps the eye rolling vein; instead, the campy elements almost seem right and at home in Carpenter's vision of a dystopian 1997 New York. As most of you know, the premise is rather simple: the president of the United States is kidnapped and is being held in Manhattan, which has become the home of a maximum security prison. Kurt Russell's character, Snake Plissken, once a member of the U.S. special forces, now a convicted criminal, is tasked with saving the president in exchange for full pardon from his crimes. Snake's gruff demeanor felt like a perfect fit for Kurt Russell, and I really enjoyed his performance, even its campy elements. The film is nowhere near a masterpiece, but it's intense action and its social and political commentaries make it a film worth watching.

Love that little Ozu discussion!


I can't see how PMMM is similar to Ozu films visually. It's Guap who said this, though.

__________________
Look, I'm not judging you - after all, I'm posting here myself, but maybe, just maybe, if you spent less time here and more time watching films, maybe, and I stress, maybe your taste would be of some value. Just a thought, ya know.

Pretty Good.

Guap is the only one who sees this