Foreign Language Hall of Fame

Tools    








Age of Shadows is a spy/war period piece from South Korea told during the Japanese occupation. The film is the story of a police captain who upon killing a resistance fighter he once knew turns on the police and joins the resistance against the Japanese leaders. I suppose you could call this a cat and mouse game but every other character in the film other than Lee is sadly underwritten and fairly indistinguishable.



The movie is good though, it looks gorgeous and you can tell actual money was spent on a number of the sets, and the large cast. Though at times the cast was more of a hinderence several scenes you have this massive police/army force tracking down one fighter and it just felt really over the top. One scene in the film a hundred soldiers bear down on this cabin on one angle leaving the good guy an opportunity to escape.



The other issue with the film is that it peaks in the middle, you've got a fantastic train scene that builds on suspense and then subverts your expectations with an action scene right afterwards. Unfortunately that's undercut by an hour of story afterwards that just feels tacked on.


Not to say I dislike the film, I actually enjoyed it in bits and pieces but I felt the runtime and fount the uneven nature of it to be a pretty big knock. It's a pity because with better editing and self control this could have been my top pick from this Hall.



I'm watching The Leopard in Italian, Burt Lancaster sure sounds weird. It's quite the chore and I watched half last night and will watch the rest tonight. My internet connection is totally screwed up and is 10 times slower than normally, so I might not be posting until it gets fixed.



I'm watching The Leopard in Italian, Burt Lancaster sure sounds weird.
I get that producers want some star power to get their films noticed in international markets, but I always think it's a poor choice to hire popular actors for majors roles entirely in a language they don't speak.



I'm watching The Leopard in Italian, Burt Lancaster sure sounds weird. It's quite the chore and I watched half last night and will watch the rest tonight. My internet connection is totally screwed up and is 10 times slower than normally, so I might not be posting until it gets fixed.
Could never finish this movie & will never try again. Torture.
__________________
I’m here only on Mondays, Wednesdays & Fridays. That’s why I’m here now.



Could never finish this movie & will never try again. Torture.
I thought it was torture of the first time I watched it. I've been psyching myself up to see it again this coming weekend.

On a related note, I know there is usually a 220 minute limit for nominations, but I think it should be more like 150 minutes. When I hosted the 12th I set a 180 minute limit but I think that's even too much.



I thought it was torture of the first time I watched it. I've been psyching myself up to see it again this coming weekend.

On a related note, I know there is usually a 220 minute limit for nominations, but I think it should be more like 150 minutes. When I hosted the 12th I set a 180 minute limit but I think that's even too much.



Or a cap on the two and half/three hour films, 1 or 2 is fine but that really should be the limit.



Or a cap on the two and half/three hour films, 1 or 2 is fine but that really should be the limit.
Yes we could draw straws to see who can nominate the long stuff.



On a related note, I know there is usually a 220 minute limit for nominations, but I think it should be more like 150 minutes. When I hosted the 12th I set a 180 minute limit but I think that's even too much.
I actually thought the limit was always 3 hours, but once someone nominated a film a little over that, I realized that 3 hours is 180 minutes, not 220.

150 minutes is around the length when my desire to watch a film purely for one of these HoFs drops considerably. Obviously I don't mind watching longer films if it's a choice I'm making on my own, but if it's something I'm only watching because it was nominated, I'd prefer a film with a slightly shorter runtime.



For me, it's not the length of the film, but the content that makes it hard to stay focused. I've watched 3, and even 4 hour long movies that riveted me...while some 90 minute movies seemed like an eternity until they were over.



Thursday Next's Avatar
I never could get the hang of Thursdays.
I thought it was 3 hours. Must have remembered that from a previous HoF rather than checking this one. I actually rejected a couple of possible noms because I thought they would be too long



Who was it that came up with 220 minutes? The first HoF i hosted i just copy and pasted the rules from the previous one, struck me as odd it was 3 hours 40 minutes and not 3 hours or even 3 and a half hours.



Who was it that came up with 220 minutes? The first HoF i hosted i just copy and pasted the rules from the previous one, struck me as odd it was 3 hours 40 minutes and not 3 hours or even 3 and a half hours.
Godoggo in the 2nd HOF wrote this for the rules:

....Since people are expected to watch all twelve movies, I'm not going to allow any movie over three and a half hours.
After that it just became a standard rule. I think it's OK too as I hate to see longer films be disqualified do to their length.



Sword of Doom 1966

A classic Samurai picture that is as confusing as it is violent. Over time, he becomes more and more consumed with both bloodlust and madness. Tsukue is really just a cold-blooded killer... Is he a demon on earth?
The plot of the film is fragmentary, the end abrupt, but Okamoto's perfectly balanced compositions, in which even the most brutal carnage radiates nothing but concentrated elegance, make the viewing of "Sword of Doom" a true pleasure.
The story is amazing, the acting by everybody is excellent and the direction by Kihachi Okamoto and cinematography by Hiroshi Murai is some of the best I've ever seen.
__________________
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...



For me, it's not the length of the film, but the content that makes it hard to stay focused. I've watched 3, and even 4 hour long movies that riveted me...while some 90 minute movies seemed like an eternity until they were over.
I’m the same way. A bad movie is always too long & a good movie is always too short.



The Leopard



I first watched this back for the 60's countdown because it was on Ebert's great movies list. I generally struggle with historical pictures as it is, and while I appreciated aspects of this movie, it was a very difficult watch. That was for a countdown while this watch was for a Hall of Fame, and because of that I put a great deal more focus into it this time. I had been psyching myself up for it, and I watched it when I was wide awake with an iced coffee in hand. I got much more out of it this go around.

I decided to virtually ignore the historical aspect of the movie and focus on the man. I had to give up something to get something, but it just made it much easier for me. It's still long and slow, but this time I was never bored. I was up close to my biggest TV, and the visuals I merely appreciated before, usually blew me away this time. Part of that was the sets, costumes, and attention to detail, and part of it was the feeling of being there. I felt as though I could smell the Sicilian air.

At first, I had a huge problem with the dubbing that threatened to take me out of the movie. I'm a fan of Burt Lancaster and I know his voice well. To hear another voice when he spoke was bothersome. I understand why it had to be done, but it was still an issue. Thankfully it bothered me less as the movie went on. Besides that, I thought Lancaster was phenomenal. He looks the part and embodies the character well. I also loved Claudia Cardinale and Alain Delon. The movie suffers when none of the three are on screen, but fortunately that isn't often. This is a tough movie for me to rate. While it's not for my normal taste and I do have issues, I saw it as incredible filmmaking. As it stands now, I do not have a counterargument for someone who calls it a masterpiece.




It's great that you were able to appreciate it more this time around. Do you think it was because you had a different mindset for this viewing, or has your taste changed slightly since the 60s Countdown?



It's great that you were able to appreciate it more this time around. Do you think it was because you had a different mindset for this viewing, or has your taste changed slightly since the 60s Countdown?
I think it was mostly having a different mindset but a little bit of it is taste as well. By that time I was already loving Foreign movies including some arthouse, but I'd say I'm now more appreciative of some of the more finer things like technique and composition.




The Leopard (1963)

3.5 years ago when I first joined MoFo, I wrote about my attempt to watch The Leopard:

I can only comment on the first 45 minutes of The Leopard [as that's all I watched]...and my opinion is, it's a picture all dressed up with no where to go...a grand epic without life. Sure it's filmed prettily but without an engaging story line. It was like somebody filmed a book page by page, without including the spirit of the book. The scenes drag on forever, many of them could have been cut for better clarity. The film did not engage me, it did not evoke any emotions, [in me]...
3.5 years later and I just finished watching the whole 3 hours, and....I still feel the same way...The film's main draw is the time we spend in the stunning palace & the sweeping Sicilian countryside and of course the beautiful costumes. But take away the grand theme of Italy's unification, take away the grand sets and costumes and you get a film that's emotionally distant, with long stilted monologues where nothing much really ever happens. It's a soap opera, but not nearly soapy enough to add any zest.

I might have liked this better had Burt Lancaster (a favorite of mine) not been dubbed in Italian. The dubbing erased part of his performance, and so the main character never seemed quite real. I should have watched this in English instead, as Lancaster did his own voice in English and he is the focal point of the movie. But with him being dubbed, it made it hard to feel much from his performance. Add to that the fact that most of the acting is in monologue form and done rather mater of factually, and there's a number of characters it was a hard film to stay focused on. It's beautiful to look at but I didn't get much out of it.
Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	a.jpg
Views:	391
Size:	138.7 KB
ID:	44762