30th Hall of Fame

Jiraffejustin just sent in a nom! This HoF is shaping up real nice. His nom is:

Candyman (1992)

I've seen all of them except Ship of Fools and Dead Man's Letters. I'm going to watch those.

Nice! Candyman is fantastic. I have all the Candyman movies on blu ray.

I'll look forward to revisiting Candyman. Huge fan of it.

__________________
IMDb
Letterboxd

Ida(2013)

Ida tells the story of a young nun in training who finds out that she's actually jewish. She then goes on a road trip with her surviving family member while being confronted by the disillusionment of her life. The film is a period piece shot in black and white.

I have to confess I'm torn the film is a visual feast and it's got a very strong basis for it's story. But man did this feel like I was watching a perfume ad...every scene was just drawn out. I understand that the director loved the way he was photographing the film but this is a 20 minute story padded out to an hour and 22 minutes.

I also had an issue with the characters...I never got a feel for Ida and her personality and her voice. She was like this haunted spectre in the film a ghost of sorts. If you are going to do that than you really need to surround her with memorable characters but Ida doesn't really do that. The film just left me feeling like I watched gorgeous but shallow film. In hindsight it's a good road movie I just wished that it more to it than what I saw. It did make my top four on personal recommendation list



B-

An Autumn Afternoon (1962)
Director: Ozu
Nominated by Raul
Raul knows Ozu. And this is one I need to see, so d@mn fine choice, bud!

Dead Man's Letters (1986)
Director: Konstantin Lopushanskiy
Nominated by SpelingError
I have never seen Tarkovsky's work or know anything of him (shut up, don't judge), but I am a little excited/nervous but d@mn curious to experience this lil adventure. Thank you, Spelling!

Dog Day Afternoon (1975)
Director: Sidney Lumet
Nominated by Phoenix74
F@ckin AMAZING flick!! Seen it a number of times throughout my life, the last one in the Seventies HoF, so shit YEAH, very hyped to see this again. Excellent call, Phoenix!

Fat Girl (2001)
Director: Catherine Breillat
Nominated by Allaby
I did a quick read of the story description and something hinted at me to go blind, and I do concur. Thank you, Allaby

Ida (2013)
Director: Pawel Pawlikowski
Nominated by Thief
I know nothing of this, and after reading the short description, I do believe I will venture in, blind as well, and see where Thief takes me. YAY

Lawrence of Arabia (1962)
Director: David Lean
Nominated by Bubbles
Hi, Bubbles!! WELCOME! Quite the powerhouse nomination, Bravo. Been several decades since I've seen this, and rarely did before that in my youth so pretty excited about the revisit that will feel nearly brand new. NOICE.

Ship of Fools (1965)
Director: Stanley Kramer
Nominated by Edarsenal
That's me. Helloooo!

Valley of the Dolls (1967)
Director: Mark Robson
Nominated by Citizen
Ahh, Valley of the Dolls finally got its turn as a CR nomination. Very happy to be a part of it since I never, ever saw this. In fact, I don't think I ever saw anything that Sharon Tate was in. So, discoveries abound.

To Live and Die in L.A. (1985)
Director: William Friedkin
Nominated by Siddon
Completely off my radar. First off, Willem Dafoe in his early days? F@CK YES. Secondly, my dumb@ss had to look Friedkin up, and holy sh#t what this man has done, so this puppy is definitely in the high echelon of Excited To See. Thank you, Siddon!

The Uninvited (1944)
Director: Lewis Allen
Nominated by MovieGal
Note: Optional to watch for now
Hell, I'm d@mn tempted to see this any ole way. Looks pretty d@mn cool, and it's got Milland - sweet. BRAVO darlin!

Candyman (1992)
Director: Bernard Rose
Nominated by Jiraffejustin
Been a decade and a half since I saw this. BIG Clive Barker fan. I loved reading his stuff. It should be a very fun revisit. Noice, JJ, thank you!

__________________
What I actually said to win MovieGal's heart:
- I might not be a real King of Kinkiness, but I make good pancakes

~Mr Minio

Not gonna read it till AFTER I see this.

I'd be curious to see what ya think of SoF

I figured you and Citizen Rules would like this as it's an older film.

I just copied Ed's post because I'm lazy But I'll add my own comments of course as I'm not THAT lazy.

An Autumn Afternoon (1962)
Director: Ozu
Nominated by Raul
I'm a huge fan of Ozu and prefer his films over Kurosawa I've loved everything I've seen from Ozu, so far, haven't seen this.

Dead Man's Letters (1986)
Director: Konstantin Lopushanskiy
Nominated by SpelingError
I've not seen this but have heard good things about it. I looked at a minute of the video to check the quality of the link and wow this really looks like Stalker in it's cinematography. I've been impressed with Russian language films from this era and Stalker is tops with me so high hopes here.

Dog Day Afternoon (1975)
Director: Sidney Lumet
Nominated by Phoenix74
Seen this once in an HoF and was totally impressed, far more than I would've guessed. It's the human element and the relationships that I responded to...that and the acting which is sublime.

Fat Girl (2001)
Director: Catherine Breillat
Nominated by Allaby
I cheated! and watched this last Wednesday so this will be the first nom I review.

Ida (2013)
Director: Pawel Pawlikowski
Nominated by Thief
Seen and really liked this in a past HoF and I'm happy to rewatch it again.

Lawrence of Arabia (1962)
Director: David Lean
Nominated by Bubbles
Very glad to have Bubbles join us and glad to have a long needed rewatch of LOA. I seen this only once when I first got into films some 20 years ago and was blown away by it. Love that direct cut from the match to the sun. I've seen direct cuts since but nobody does it better than David Lean.

Ship of Fools (1965)
Director: Stanley Kramer
Nominated by Edarsenal
Another film I seen only once and 20 years ago. I was so tired that night I really couldn't focus on the film so I can't remember a thing about it. But I do love movies set on ships, that's why I'm currently binge watching the old TV show The Love Boat.

Valley of the Dolls (1967)
Director: Mark Robson
Nominated by Citizen
My nom and I think it's a blast. Hope some of you like it.

To Live and Die in L.A. (1985)
Director: William Friedkin
Nominated by Siddon
Haven't seen this but I sure have heard of it. Sounds good.

The Uninvited (1944)
Director: Lewis Allen
Nominated by MovieGal
Two words: Gail Russell! I've seen her in a number of films and she has this certain quality to her. Sadly she had a tragic life. Good movie and looking forward to it.

Candyman (1992)
Director: Bernard Rose
Nominated by Jiraffejustin
Two more words: Virginia Madsen do I need to say more! Never seen it but have always been curious thanks to the lovely Miss Madsen.

I will echo Citizen and steal Ed's format


An Autumn Afternoon (1962)
Director: Ozu
Nominated by Raul
Saw this very recently. It was actually my third Ozu; the weakest of them, but still very good. Will probably post what I wrote then in a while.

Dead Man's Letters (1986)
Director: Konstantin Lopushanskiy
Nominated by SpelingError
Never heard of this, but hey! I liked the poster.

Dog Day Afternoon (1975)
Director: Sidney Lumet
Nominated by Phoenix74
Haven't seen this in a very long time, so I'm happy to rewatch. Remember liking it a lot, though.

Fat Girl (2001)
Director: Catherine Breillat
Nominated by Allaby
Don't know anything about this.

Ida (2013)
Director: Pawel Pawlikowski
Nominated byThief
My nom. It's great.

Lawrence of Arabia (1962)
Director: David Lean
Nominated by Bubbles
Saw this a couple of years ago, and liked it a lot. Still, I wouldn't mind a rewatch.

Ship of Fools (1965)
Director: Stanley Kramer
Nominated by Edarsenal
Another one I don't know anything about.

Valley of the Dolls (1967)
Director: Mark Robson
Nominated by Citizen
Haven't seen it, but I have seen Beyond the Valley of the Dolls, so that counts for something, amirite

To Live and Die in L.A. (1985)
Director: William Friedkin
Nominated by Siddon
Heard a lot of good things about this, so I'm looking forward to it.

The Uninvited (1944)
Director: Lewis Allen
Nominated by MovieGal
40s Gothic horror? Count me in!

Candyman (1992)
Director: Bernard Rose
Nominated by Jiraffejustin
Another one I saw fairly recently. If I have something written, I might use that, but I might give it a rewatch.

__________________

Set in 1960s Poland, Ida follows Anna (Agata Trzebuchowska), a young, aspiring Catholic nun who is confronted with the reality of her past before taking her vows. Orphaned as an infant during World War II, Anna is sent out to meet her aunt Wanda (Agata Kulesza), her only surviving relative, through which she learns about her Jewish parents. Both women set out on a trip into the Polish countryside to find out what happened to their family.

The thing is that Wanda is, in many ways, the opposite of what Anna (or Ida, which happens to be her real name) represents; she's a sexually promiscuous, chain-smoking, alcoholic that used to be a Communist resistance fighter during the war. The above question is one she poses to Anna/Ida as they are about to embark on their journey. Wanda challenges Anna/Ida's beliefs, but in the same way finds herself challenged by Ida's.

This is the second film I've seen from Pawlikowski, after Cold War, and as much as I liked that one, I loved this one even more. This film is, and I hope I can stress this enough, *gorgeously shot*. The framing and overall shot composition is superb, while the black and white cinematography conveys the lifelessness of the post-war world in which these women live, as well as the contrast within their mindset.

Both lead performances are magnificent, and you can feel the mutual "breaking" in both characters as the film progress. The contrast and similitudes continue, as both of their journeys are connected, but separate as well. Ida is determined to uncover a past she doesn't know anything about, while Wanda is drawn to uncover a past she'd rather keep buried.

In the end, we realize that first, the journey never ends. Life continues, despite whatever pit stops we make along the way. And second, that regardless of where the journey leads you to at any point, it is what you make with what you find what counts; even if it's God or your own demons.

Grade:

An Autumn Afternoon follows Shūhei Hirayama (Chishū Ryū), an aging widower torn between his parental duty of arranging a marriage for her daughter, Michiko (Shima Iwash!ta) and her desire to remain with him and take care of him and her younger brother. If it sounds similar to other film, that's because there are several parallelisms between this film and Ozu's own Late Spring, which I saw in December last year.

On that film, however, the focus is mostly on the character of the daughter, whereas here, Ozu decides to focus on the father. This is my third Ozu film within less than a year, and it's just another evidence of how well he can craft compelling and moving stories from seemingly mundane family occurrences, which he does with great writing and excellent performances.

Just as he has done in the other Ozu films I've seen, Ryū does a great job of transmitting the inner dilemma within Hirayama. His performances are not flashy, but there's such a calming aura in his delivery and presence, and you can see the genuine care for his children in his performance. Iwash!ta's role isn't as meatier as Setsuko Hara's were, but she does a great job with the moments she gets.

I won't deny that there is a certain element of "been there, done that" to the film, since it pretty much follows the same beats as Late Spring, but coming 13 years after that film, it's interesting to see tinges of "evolution" and "growth" in how men and women, fathers and children interact. Just like with Late Spring, I have some very minor issues with the notion of an "arranged marriage", but that's not on Ozu, but the culture itself. Still, I like how Hirayama doesn't force things on his daughter as he's setting things up ("I'm not insisting on this other man. If you don't like him, you can say so") which, again, shows some degree of growth in the country's overall culture and Ozu himself.

I'm still wondering why Ozu invested so much time into the whole "golf clubs" issue. Maybe I missed something, but I feel like he could've nipped most of that and it would've felt tighter. I also feel that this film didn't pack as much of an emotional punch as the other films of his I've seen. Maybe it's because of its similarities to Late Spring, or maybe it's because I feel it kinda lacked a more defining and climatic moment towards its last act, but I still found myself moved by it.

I just realized after watching this that Ozu never married, and that he lived all of his life with his mother, dying from cancer two years after her. This adds a bit more weight to the film, as far as being his final film but also in how it approaches the subject of loneliness, particularly as you get older. Some of the characters reiterate the point that I quoted above, but also warning not to end up "lonely and sad". Regardless of what we do, we spend our lives alone. The other part's on us.

Grade:

I probably won't rewatch my nomination for this thread (I watched it earlier this year), but I'll post my review here once I have a chance to read it over and make any necessary edits to it (likely by tomorrow).

What a great set of nominations! I'm really happy about this Hall of Fame, which is shaping up to be a really good one. Going to enjoy delving deep into a few of these fantastic films. I've already seen 5 out of the 11.

An Autumn Afternoon - I've loved the Ozu films I've seen so far, and An Autumn Afternoon is a bonus because it's one I haven't seen yet. Look forward to adding it to the "seen" list.

Dead Man's Letters - This film is on my watchlist, and is one I've been looking forward to getting on top of - it's always great to see nominations of films I've been dying to see for a while.

Dog Day Afternoon - The bonus here is that I haven't watched my nom for a few years and I'm in the mood to reexperience it.

Fat Girl - I saw this for the first time recently, and bought the Criterion edition of it - I think very highly of this, but it is a challenging watch at times. The Criterion extras should help me look into it a bit more. Great to see this here - I think highly of it!

Ida - This is a film I love, and might have been an eventual nomination from me if Thief hadn't of done that here. Gonna have to be something good, really good, to beat Dog Day Afternoon and Ida on my ballot.

Lawrence of Arabia - I fell in love with as a younger guy. I haven't revisited this in ages, so I'll sit back and enjoy those desert vistas and sweeping orchestral music.

Ship of Fools - This is a film I'm not overly familiar with. The film in this HoF which I'm least aware of and as such a real wild card (or is that wildcard?) - a potential cat amongst the pigeons, for knowing Edarsenal it will be really good.

Valley of the Dolls - You know what, scratch that - even though I'm very aware of the existence of this film I don't have a really clear idea of what it will be like. A mystery!

To Live and Die in L.A. - I have a friend who would definitely have nominated this film if he posted here and participated in Hall of Fames - I've always wanted to give it the serious look I probably owe it considering his love for it.

The Uninvited - I hear about this film a lot - it'll be great to be able to know what everyone is talking about once I've seen it. I'll be looking for it on Criterion before long I reckon.

Candyman - I wasn't impressed by the recent Candyman movie, but seeing that made me feel like I ought to have started here - at the very beginning. Candyman here I come.

__________________

Definitely

Figured I'd get my nomination out of the way since I already had my review for it written up.

Dead Man's Letters (1986) -

My interest for this film was piqued once I learned that some elements of it were reminiscent of Tarkovsky's Stalker, my #1 film of all time. When I first watched it, I felt it was a lesser Stalker (though still very good), but after I revisited it a couple years later, I ended up giving it a 10/10 and it landed in my all-time top 20. The more I think about it, the more I wish that other people would know about it.

The main thing which keeps me coming back to this film is how well it maintains such a bleak and depressing atmosphere throughout its entirety. Most people in this film had a nihilistic view on life and doubted that there was any hope for humanity. This seemed to be the prevailing attitude amongst most of the survivors we saw in the film except for the main character, Larsen, who believed that other surviving humans existed outside the central bunker and the town he lived in and that their species wasn't doomed. While much of his arc consisted of him trying to convince the people he encountered of his theories to no avail (which made for a number of compelling exchanges, like when a man referenced how Jesus called humanity doomed when he saved them), another handful of scenes featured several intimate moments which detailed his mental state, delivered by the way of the letters he wrote to his son. While the biting knowledge that his son might never read them lingered over these scenes, I found them to be pretty compelling in and of themselves. The monologue of how an operator was unable to make it to a computer in time to prevent the first missile strike since he was slowed down by a cup of coffee in his hands stuck out as a brilliant slice of dark humor. It was easily the standout in that regard. I do think a couple bits can come off as fluffy, like Larson reciting a story of how seeing a cow run over by a locomotive when he was little gave him recurring nightmares of a black locomotive just to describe the distance and the insecurities he felt for his son, but for the most part, I think that aspect worked really well, so in the grand scheme of things, I didn't mind it much.



Lopushansky is often thought of as a protégé of Tarkovsky. I see these influences in the style of this film, like some of the long takes, or the ethereal beauty to be found in certain devastated landscapes. The most significant influence is with the sepia filter which permeates throughout most of the film. This was reminiscent of the first act and the ending of Stalker (which, curiously enough, had undertones of a nuclear disaster looming over it). Overall, I found this choice of filter to be a great touch. I was initially bothered by the occasional usages of a blue/purple filter for some scenes, but though this choice is indeed noticeable every time it comes up in the film, I warmed up to it when I rewatched the film. It probably wasn't necessary, but it didn't distract me either. It's just more of the film's atmospheric design. Beyond the sepia filter though, beauty could be found in several other shots in the film, like an early tracking shot which followed Larsen out of the museum and eventually revealed the full extent to the destruction and immensity of it, a hypnotic shot of an emotionally defeated Larsen as a trickle of water ran down his head and body, and the climactic shots in the library where the camera pulled back and revealed the massive scope of the room. The film's style was packed with several types of greatness and it stuck out as one of the film's main strengths.

Overall, I feel no shame in being an ardent supporter of this film. The more I think about it, the more sad I feel that it isn't regularly considered to be a classic of Soviet cinema since I think it holds up with the best of the country's output. Here's hoping it eventually grows in popularity though.

Next Up: An Autumn Afternoon

I liked the film when it reflected on the sisters love hate relationship. In those moments the film had something profound to say about sibling bonding & rivalry...The girls complex relationship was manifested in the way they treated each other, bittersweet to be sure. The abusive aspect between the girls was never taken over the top but was handled in a grounded reality. That rendered their relationship as believable. My hat's off to the director for that achievement.

The portrayal of an all too eager 15 year old girl to experience love through sex, with a young man...was also quite believable. The immaturity of the 15 year old girl who's on the cusp of becoming an adult and the way she perceived love & relationships seemed all true to me. So my hat's off to the director for that portion of the film.

I was really impressed with the staging and camera work of the drive home on that crowded and foggy highway. The film sets it up that the mom doesn't like to drive and is nervous about the long drive home. I don't know if they found a stretch of highway and just filmed on it with traffic, or if they hired all those semi trucks and cars...but wow! The drive was tension filled and that tension is solely created by the fog and the crowded vehicles changing lanes. I was impressed by how much emotion 'traffic' could add to the film's story arc.

But what I disdained is what I perceive as the director's decision to take a rock solid story with great casting and add in some 'used car salesman' type scenes to maximize publicity. Image if the end scene was removed and the sex scenes all took place off camera, leaving the same story but with a PG13 rating, I don't the film would be well known, controversy sells.

The silly slasher ending had me flipping off the TV screen, then I laughed as it struck me as comic satire. To me the director seems like someone with not enough confidence in their core story that they needed to tack on some very controversial stuff to get publicity.

I'll try to get to one on Monday or Tuesday

I'm still watching Christmas movies but after the 25th I'll probably not be in the mood for them