The Resident Bitch's Movie Log

→ in

I was dissed and I wasn't repped.
You weren't "dissed." Your vote for it in the Millennium Countdown did a lot to get it on the list which is how I heard about it. However, I didn't consider watching it until Mark said he thought I would like it.

As to the lack of rep, it was an oversight. Nothing personal.

You'd delete, too.
Unlikely. I almost never delete my posts.

I think all of my posts from now on should just be pictures of people staring or whatever. I'll never say another word again after this. I will only stare at you. I will become a forum mute.

Maybe I'll even just use that particular Hedwig picture most of the time.

If that's the case, I will start writing posts that have the sole purpose of seeing what you come up with, Sexy.

The Adventures Of Prince Achmed (Lotte Reiniger, 1926)

Date Watched: 03/01/16
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: Curiosity
Rewatch: No

As a fan of animation, I really wanted to love this. It is, after all, the medium's first feature length film. On a technical level, it is pretty impressive. It is quite unlike the animated films modern audiences are accustomed to and although it's a bit crude by today's standards, but the animation is done quite well. Its creators succeeded in producing some very beautiful images using only silhouettes and, I imagine, a whole lot of patience.

That said, those pretty pictures can only do so much to hold my attention. I struggled to engage with the story - which is based on The Arabian Nights and is full of magic and fantastical creatures - or feel anything for its very one dimensional characters. I was constantly having to remind myself of the limitations of the medium and the time, since the film is also a silent picture with text translated from German to English.

Ultimately I found myself a little bored. This may be the first animated feature in history, but I think I would've enjoyed it more had it been a short instead. Still there is plenty to be appreciated in this film and I'm glad that I've finally watched it. I will probably revisit it sometime down the road and I truly hope to have greater appreciation for it then.

I was quite surprised you bought it, but I'm not surprised at your thoughts about it.
I couldn't find it through other, trusted avenues so I ended up buying it.

It's certainly not the worst thing I've ever blind bought. It's not like it's 300 or There Will Be Blood or something.

No, I've not seen it. But I know what it is and have seen clips of it. You're right, it's not something I have any interest in seeing at all.

It's certainly not the worst thing I've ever blind bought. It's not like it's 300 or There Will Be Blood or something.
What's the meaning of this? There Will Be Blood is a perfectly respectable movie with an intelligent plot, thought provoking dialogue, excellent acting, and potent meaningful subject matter. How can you call it bad, or compare it with 300's level of awfulness?