Best Picture Hall of Fame

Tools    





You can't make a rainbow without a little rain.
Gbgoodies says she hasn't seen it either, though it was marked off her list when I checked it. I doubt she'll like it since she doesn't seem to be a fan of violent movies but I'm looking forward to seeing what you think of it.

I just checked my list, and you're right. Gladiator is checked off on my list, but I don't remember seeing it.

I think I may have watched it for the 2014 Movie Tournament. I think that was the first movie tournament I participated in when I joined MoFo. I watched a bunch of movies for that tournament so I could vote, but I guess I don't remember all of them. (I probably didn't even realize that it was an Oscar winner back then.)

Now I'm kind of curious to see if any of it comes back to me when I rewatch it.



You can't make a rainbow without a little rain.


Rocky (John J. Alvidsend, 1976)
Imdb

Date Watched: 01/13/18
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: Best Picture Hall of Fame
Rewatch: Yes.



The first time I attempted to watch this movie, I shut if off after about an hour. The second time, I made it through and hated every minute of it but still gave it a 2.5+. There will be none of that generosity today.

I understand wanting to root for an underdog. I get the appeal of watching someone rise up and make a name for his or herself. The problem is, I hate Rocky the character. He's a dim-witted brute who can't ever seem to shut the **** up. Everything about him grates on my nerves and I simply do not want him to succeed. Making things worse is that I don't like anybody else in the movie, either.

I also find myself underwhelmed by the film's technical aspects. The cinematography leaves no impression and the soundtrack leaves me rolling my eyes. Those training montages do the same.

If I'm going to watch a story about a boxer who rises up from nothing and defies the odds, it's going to be Cinderella Man. That's an underdog I can get behind. And if I'm going to watch Sylvester Stallone, it damn well better be Demolition Man in which his dim-witted brutishness is at least amusing.

Screw this movie.


I was afraid that my review of Rocky was going to be as bad as this, but I was pleasantly surprised that I liked the movie. (Just to clarify, "bad" meaning that the movie was bad, not that the review was bad.)

Do you think you would have liked the Rocky character more if he hadn't been played by Sylvester Stallone?





Rocky (John J. Alvidsend, 1976)
Imdb

Date Watched: 01/13/18
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: Best Picture Hall of Fame
Rewatch: Yes.



The first time I attempted to watch this movie, I shut if off after about an hour. The second time, I made it through and hated every minute of it but still gave it a 2.5+. There will be none of that generosity today.

I understand wanting to root for an underdog. I get the appeal of watching someone rise up and make a name for his or herself. The problem is, I hate Rocky the character. He's a dim-witted brute who can't ever seem to shut the **** up. Everything about him grates on my nerves and I simply do not want him to succeed. Making things worse is that I don't like anybody else in the movie, either.

I also find myself underwhelmed by the film's technical aspects. The cinematography leaves no impression and the soundtrack leaves me rolling my eyes. Those training montages do the same.

If I'm going to watch a story about a boxer who rises up from nothing and defies the odds, it's going to be Cinderella Man. That's an underdog I can get behind. And if I'm going to watch Sylvester Stallone, it damn well better be Demolition Man in which his dim-witted brutishness is at least amusing.

Screw this movie.

Have you seen any of the sequels?



Do you think you would have liked the Rocky character more if he hadn't been played by Sylvester Stallone?
I don't know. Played by anybody else he'd still be a brute, but maybe I'd hate him a little less.

I really want to see Miss Vicky do a review for Red Psalm. I couldn't imagine how brutal that review would be at the movie
I think I'll be avoiding that one.

Wait MV prefers a boxing movie with Crowe, I am shocked.
Crowe's James Braddock is far more likable than Rocky Balboa. He's a husband and a father struggling to support his family during The Great Depression. He earns an honest wage as a day laborer but it's not enough and he ends up going hungry so that his kids don't. He gets back into boxing to give them a better life.

Stallone's Rocky Balboa is an obnoxious dip**** who works as a strong arm for a loan shark and tells twelve year old girls they're going to be whores.

Have you seen any of the sequels?
Nope. Not going to either.



James Braddock was a real human being and if you don't think the film views Rocky as flawed you didn't really pay attention.



James Braddock was a real human being and if you don't think the film views Rocky as flawed you didn't really pay attention.
I agree that the film views Rocky as flawed. I'm also aware that Braddock was a real person. But in the end both movies are fiction (as all movies are) and within the context of the films, both men are characters.

In any case, my point was that my preference for Cinderella Man isn't just because it stars Russell Crowe, it's because the film's protagonist is a good guy.



I agree that the film views Rocky as flawed. I'm also aware that Braddock was a real person. But in the end both movies are fiction (as all movies are) and within the context of the films, both men are characters.

In any case, my point was that my preference for Cinderella Man isn't just because it stars Russell Crowe, it's because the film's protagonist is a good guy.
Fair enough. Already knew you hated Rocky. Just had to take the opportunity to give you a hard time about your crushes.




Silence of the Lambs (Demme, 1991)


I nominated this film for the HoF partially to motivate myself to watch it again, I consider horrors one of the least rewatchable genres. When I first saw this film I found it one of the most disturbing films ever, I've probably watched a fair 50-70 films since then that make this look soft, however there are still scenes here that are hard to shake. Whether it's the visually foul autopsy or the disturbing quotes from Dr. Lecter in his visits with Foster- the film plays on many types of scares. The classic scene I find one of the greatest in horror history has to be "Puts the lotion on its skin" scene. Plays not only on the creepiness and perversion of Buffalo Bill but the fear of being trapped in a well looking up at this twisted man.

Foster is spectacular in her role, subtle in her acting but always clear in how we should interpret her inner feelings. Never noticed how much this film played on the unwanted male advances in the work place, but this sub-issue was glaringly obvious. Another point of discomfort Demme throws in this film. Hopkins is of course masterful in playing the condescending psychopath Hannibal Lecter. Also relies more on calm oddities than over acting. I will say the first half hour felt rather hokey this time around, very 90s Hollywood, in a way that has a charm in itself. Once the original meeting with Lecter is over the film is anything but hokey however- playing on the deepest fears of man utilizing the sickest minds that exist in humanity.


(-.5)

__________________
Yeah, there's no body mutilation in it



I'm just curious as to what you mean by the -.5? did you mean that it's a
? or something else?
[/center]
should of clarified, signifies that it went down .5 a star from the last time I saw it when I rated it





The Silence of the Lambs (Jonathon Demme, 1991)
Imdb

Date Watched: 01/14/18
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: Best Picture Hall of Fame
Rewatch: Yes.


I watched this movie one time many years ago, before I joined this forum I think. I don't recall actively disliking it, but I wasn't particularly impressed at the time, either. So I wasn't exactly excited when it was announced as a nomination for this Hall of Fame.

Thankfully, my experience with it this time was far more positive than the previous time. The performances of both Anthony Hopkins and Jodie Foster are excellent and the film creates atmosphere and tension that is almost palpable. The score enhances that sense of dread as does the cinematography. The story itself is engaging and I liked that the serial killer being hunted actually seems less threatening than the one assisting with the hunt. That said, it certainly wasn't my favorite crime thriller and I don't know that it's something I'll really want to revisit but it is very good and I'm glad this HOF forced me to give it another chance.

As to whether its win was deserved. I liked it a hell of a lot more than Beauty and the Beast but of the other nominations I've seen only JFK and I remember almost nothing about it so it's not a question I can honestly answer.

-




Argo (2012)

What I liked about Argo is: what it's not...it's not an action packed, thriller suspense movie. And I like that it was based on a true story and a story that I've never heard of before...It proves truth is stranger than fiction. And that truth is: a introspective look inside the CIA's plan to extract six Americans who find themselves trapped in Tehran...during the Iranian hostage crisis of 1980 and yeah I remember those days well.

Ben Affleck does a pretty decent job here of making this feel like an authentic CIA operation. He avoids all the pitfalls that would have made this just another action-suspense-thriller, and I easily see that happening with another director.

Everything was top notch in the movie...except how the ending was done. I think the film tried to hard to amp up the exit from the Iranian airport, so to make the movie feel more suspenseful. And the ending felt more like a Hollywood blockbuster style and a bit overdone.

But overall a damn good movie and a find job from Ben Affleck as director.






Forrest Gump isn't a bad movie, in a lot of ways it's a well made film. The score is great, the cinematography is fantastic, the performances are all solid to excellent. Zemeckis is a great storyteller who inspite of telling a long epic story always switches it up to keep you from being bored.

It's just the subject matter is so groanworthy and dated. Fortunately the "special" person that teaches all the normals a lesson in love/life died out over the next decade it still feels horribly manipulative.

Did it deserve to win.....

NO, Zemeckis is a fun filmmaker, Cast Away, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Back to the Future are all BP worthy...this was not.