The 19th Hall of Fame

2022 Mofo Fantasy Football Champ

06-11-19

Pulp Fiction

The first and only time I had seen this film was about a decade ago. It was known as one of the greatest films ever made and it seems a popular choice to still hold that crown. I don't get it and I don't buy into that being a true statement.

Don't get me wrong, there are some decent scenes. I specifically think the scenes with Travolta and Jackson are pretty darn good, but I have a lot of issues with certain aspects of the film. My first issue is Bruce Willis, who has always come off as a pretty wooden actor for me. Once we get to his main scenes the film seems to go bland and the scenes seem to go on forever. Tarantino's acting scenes are even worse, but luckily we do not get stuck with him for too long.

Uma Thurman is pretty highly regarded in this film too and I think she did pretty well, but I think her angle was really underutilized and she could have been in the film more.

I think a lot of people love the beginning and the ending of the film too, but I disliked both.

Samuel L. Jackson (and Travolta) were my favorite parts of the film and it could pretty much end there. I still think this is a highly overrated film. Of course, I expect it to win this.

Citizen Rules

Trouble with a capitial 'T'

06-11-19

I don't believe it

Raul didn't like Pulp Fiction, I would have pegged you as a fan of it. Can't say I disagree with you though, especially about Tarantino's acting scenes, ugh. I liked Travolta and Jackson and Uma too. The one scene I really did like was with the overdosing Rosanna Arquette stuff. Too funny!

neiba

The thing isolated becomes incomprehensible

06-12-19

The Virgin Spring (Ingmar Bergman, 1960)

Bergman is gradually becoming my favourite european director (excluding UK here), and this film represented one more step on that path.
At first sight this is just a tragic film about revenge and redemption, but as always with Bergman, its power lays on metaphors.

The elements: water, fire and earth are characters themselves here. The water representing cleansing and at the same time death and passage (with the river image), the fire representing punishment and earth probably forgetfulness or sin.

The last 20 minutes are simply some of the best I've seen in a Bergman picture: You have the hateful and revengeful father killing his daughter's murderers including a poor innocent child who doesn't resist his anger (that shot where he sits on the throne and a halo appears behind his head is out of this world), representing the worst side of God.
Then you have the other side, the caring, forgiving God who conforts the pain of a father and forgives him, while also forgiving Ingeri, a pagan girl who wished death on the innocent Karin, and converting her to Christianity in a very moving scene of baptism.

Bergman struggled with his sense of faith and this struggling becomes obvious on The Virgin Spring. Being a convict atheist, I may not relate to this struggle but I can definitely feel touched by it.

Thank you to whoever nominated this. It's always a pleasure to get to know more of the Swedish master and undisputed King of the Arthouse cinema.

Citizen Rules

Trouble with a capitial 'T'

06-12-19

Originally Posted by Siddon

Cinema Paradiso

Like most films from this era it has a very simple and strong message that I'm not sure I agree with...

That's interesting. What message did you think the film gave?

Siddon

Msg

Registered User

06-13-19

Originally Posted by Citizen Rules

That's interesting. What message did you think the film gave?

That Hollywood is the place all your dreams come true.

edarsenal

Women will be your undoing, P�p�

06-13-19

Since I've seen The Godfather countless times, after rewatching it several days back, the review I wrote for the Best Pictures HoF says it all for me so I will be cut and pasting it here.

Originally Posted by edarsenal

The Godfather

"I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse."

I can't count the amount of times I've watched this movie and since it has been a while since seeing it, it was an absolute joy to sit back and enjoy.
I do understand that, like with any genre, if it's not your cup of tea, a nearly 3 hour film can be rather difficult to endure, so I do appreciate anyone who runs that gambit. For myself, having a fascination with the genre, and a love for this movie, the 3 hours slip right on by like visiting a favorite friend - or more appropriately, famiglia.

Set in post Word War II we get to meet "the family" of the Corleones at an incredibly large wedding. From Brando's Vito, The Godfather, granting "favors" with the adopted son; Tom (Robert Duvall) who is the family consigliere or advisor. We meet the eldest, Sonny, the hot-tempered son played with his usual gusto by James Caan, the second son, Fredo (John Cazale) who seems to be one that resides in the shadow of his brothers. And finally, the youngest, the war hero, Michael, played with such a dangerously calm waters by Al Pacino.

From here we learn a bit about the family business and what becomes of those who don't simply take the offer they really shouldn't have refused in the first place.
We also witness the war that erupts when the Corleones do not wish to join in on the Narcotics Business with the Tattlagias and the Barzinis, two of the five families of New York.
For the majority of us, this is common ground, even for some who haven't watched this movie, there are a number of scenes that are known and stick in our memories. For me, it is far too countless and to put them down would be the lump sum of reading a 3 hour review, since there are so many to easily choose from.

While still a glamorized rendition of Sicilian mafia families, there is still a tangible grit to the story line and what becomes of everyone. Especially in the finale of this movie. But, also, what raises it above a simple gangster film, is that we experience more than the underworld, but of the family themselves. Their interactions and who they are to one another.

__________________
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

rauldc14

2022 Mofo Fantasy Football Champ

06-14-19

Probably Tombstone next for me on Monday.

neiba

The thing isolated becomes incomprehensible

06-15-19

Return to Paradise (Joseph Ruben, 1998)

Very good film!
I loved the moral debate that it put to the characters and ultimately to the viewer.
The acting was quite good from everyone involved especially from Vaugh and Phoenix, who do an amazing job portraying characters going through a great deal of pressure and changes. The scene where Phoenix says he wouldn't go back for Vaughn, after living all that, really impressed me. It showed how far he was from being that kind soul that wanted to help orangutans.
The press thing really angered me too, and knowing he was killed because a journalist couldn't wait 1 day with a man's life on the stake is maddening.

I disliked the romantic thing though, and simply can't understand why was it there. You have a girl looking to save her brother's life, meets a man-child with no compassion that is basically condemning him to death and still bangs him. Call me cold hearted but I can't see it happening, and that probably stops me from considering this a great film.

Apart from that, very good nom!

Last edited by neiba; 06-16-19 at 04:04 PM.

jiraffejustin

Before man was, war waited for him.

06-15-19

Pulp Fiction

An early favorite of mine and important in the trajectory of film watching habits, Pulp Fiction will always hold a special, little place in my chubby, little heart. It's the film that showed me how cool movies could be. From this film, I checked out some of Godard's 60's output, and I enjoyed that. That lead me to check out different film movements, and from there I saw some Italian neo-realism and then some film noir and blahblahblah. I credit Pulp Fiction and a couple other films for being the table setters for me, so whenever those films pop up in Hall of Fames that I am participating in, they have a built-in advantage.

The obvious reason to like Pulp Fiction is that it is really cool. The dialogue doesn't feel like real people speaking, but if we were all as cool as we wanted to be, it would feel like real people talking. I can see how that could possibly be a turn-off for some, but it works wonders for me. Tarantino's presentation is flawless in this film. He plays with the timeline, but he makes sure all of the questions are answered and there aren't any lose ends.

Every now and then I think about Christopher Walken talking about shoving a watch up his ass, and I can't believe that he does that in one of my favorite movies of all-time.

Citizen Rules

Trouble with a capitial 'T'

06-16-19

Return to Paradise (1998)

Loved the premise and the moral exploration of the theme of responsibility...that's my kind of movie.

But I hated how the actors, especially Vince Vaughn and Anne Heche acted so light heartened in so many of the scenes, which then diluted any power the movie's moral dilemma had. A scene would start out strong only to have Vince end it by grinning at Anne Heche...I've never seen more smirks and smiles than in this movie. For the subject matter, the tone of the film was too light, except for Joaquin Phoenix who added needed believably to the otherwise mess of a movie.

The characters almost never delivered their lines like a person's life actually depended on them. I didn't believe them for one second, as they didn't act like they believed the situation themselves.

What derailed the film was the romance thing between Vince Vaughn and Anne Heche, it added way too much lightness to what needed to be a hard hitting film. I actually laughed a couple time at the daft way the characters handled themselves...At the beginning of the film Anne Heche confronts Vince Vaughn on the street and tells him his friend will be executed in 8 days if he doesn't return to Malaysia to serve jail time (Heche was OK there but then) she goes from serious to happy chirpy when she says 'how about dinner?' 'how about drinks'...The film lost me right there. Then again the script doesn't offer the actors much to work with but ad-hoc gimmicks. But it's the director who I blame most as the entire movie felt too light weight for the seriousness of the subject matter.

Attachments

Click image for larger version

Name: 6bmp4hJKxiZdjlFbypDdHy8LT10.jpg
Views: 760
Size: 21.6 KB
ID: 54958

Last edited by Citizen Rules; 06-16-19 at 10:35 PM.

Siddon

Msg

Registered User

06-16-19

Gaslight well this is my nomination and on rewatch I didn't really notice anything different from what I loved about the first time. This is sort of a horror movie/drama/suspense type film, really it's a play adaptation and you can at times feel it with the limited cast. But the film is still brilliant as it plays with the ideas of relationships and sanity.

Bergman clearly won the Oscar with the brilliant double ending the film has in it's third act. But it shouldn't be glossed over what a wonderful rat basta@#$ Charles Boyer is in this. You can see what he's doing the entire time but you can also see how he's manipulated and subjugated the women around him so well.

The interiors and exteriors of the film are just amazing it feels like a period piece, with the Hitchcockian flare to it.

neiba

The thing isolated becomes incomprehensible

06-16-19

Open Range (Kevin Costner, 2003)

My opinion of Costner as an actor is similar to as a director: not bad at all, but not a genius either.
There are some parts I really liked about this: the opening is very solid, and the build up is slow but well paced. The shoot out is definitely the best of this film, especially that first few shots, really exciting. It drags a bit towards the end of said shoot out but nothing critical.
I also liked the relationship between the leading duo and how the folks from the town seemed friendly and familiar. And the cinematography looks stunning.

What I didn't like, and this is something that usually is a important aspect for me, is the writing. The dialogues, especially between Costner and the woman, seem artificial and forced. The whole romantic thing comes from nowhere. Also, after the shooting is finished, every minute the film took, was a minute too long. This could have been easily 30 minutes less.

A good film, but one I don't plan on revisiting.

neiba

The thing isolated becomes incomprehensible

06-16-19

Only two rewatches left, and two I'm really looking forward to. I'll download Cinema Paradiso to watch it on the airplane in a few days, while flying to Switzerland!

rauldc14

2022 Mofo Fantasy Football Champ

06-17-19

Raging Bull

This has always been a movie that I've usually been underwhelmed with watching, and this time I really didn't feel any differently.

Don't get me wrong. The acting is really good. My favorite performance is Joe Peschi playing Jake Lamottas brother. I also think that Robert DeNiro did a good job of playing Lamottas and I commend him for how much research and physical transformation he did to play the part. Cathy Moriarty was solid as one of Lamotta's many wife's.

Also the cinematography is a beauty and it was a great choice to film this in black and white as it gave the film a real gritty feel to it and made it feel like it really did well going back in time. I don't think it would have felt very on point in color. The camerawork by Scorsese was real good too.

But I be damned if I really thought the story was bland here. With as much of a character Lamotta was I would have liked to have seen some sort of a different angle or take. Maybe it needed more of a strong boxing story. Maybe it needed a little more tension of the rough personal life he had. Whatever the case, it REALLY brings the overall enjoyment, and in conjunction with that, the actual rating and how I feel about the film down for me.

I respect it, but I also think Scorsese has done far better work. I actually feel his heart wasn't solely into this, so it surprises me that this is always so welll liked in cinematic history.

rauldc14

2022 Mofo Fantasy Football Champ

06-17-19

Angel Face

I really liked this film, the fifties seems to be a great decade for film and this can add another solid one to the decade. The best thing about the film is the acting. There's great chemistry between Robert Mitchum and Jean Simmons here. I loved seeing Simmons in particular in a rather villanous role.

The direction of Otto Preminger was great, I'd say he's pretty underrated as a director and I need to see more of his work. He always seems to keep my attention from beginning to end. He knows how to not have lulls in his movie. That ending was definitely interesting enough for me, and seems a pretty fitting one in regards to wrapping the whole story up.

Siddon

Msg

Registered User

06-21-19

I likely should have done a comparative review of this and Raging Bull. Both films are stories of criminals, degenerates and the world the encapsulate. Both films revolve around a thrown boxing match and both films have a period piece element to them. But while Raging Bull attempted to address the realism of the world of a single character Pulp Fiction attempts to tell a ensemble story in a dreamlike world. Though both choose to page homage to other earlier works of pop culture and film.

The film has a number of qualities to admire. It's easy to love the dialogue but you've got a series of more subtle aspects to the film. Tarantino loves using different color pallets for each scene. You could also love the use of mirroring For example Vincent and Mia coming in dancing with a trophy to the home the first time with the camera in the home. Well Mia gets snorts her heroin and then when she recovers and Vincent drives her home the scene is almost shown in reverse as it's more somber. The party is over for both characters. The film is littered with parallels like that, that allowed me to enjoy the re-watch. I also enjoyed how unlike most of Tarantino' ripoff films you have a cast that spreads out throughout the entire age spectrum, this isn't a collective of 20 year old acting students you have characters from 20's to 50's and it feels more authentic.

The only knock I have with the film is because I've seen so many pop culture referenced films since than the dialogue can become a bit tiresome and the philosophy doesn't really hold up 25 years later.

edarsenal

Women will be your undoing, P�p�

06-21-19

Angel Face

Diane Tremayne: ...How can you say that to me?
Frank Jessup: Oh, you mean after all we've been to each other?... Diane, look. I don't pretend to know what goes on behind that pretty little face of yours - I don't want to. But I learned one thing very early. Never be the innocent bystander - that's the guy that always gets hurt.

I remember the first time I saw this a few years ago and was kind of so-so with it.
This time around, I truly enjoyed it and all it had to offer.

Director Otto Preminger, in my limited experience of his films, has a great knack of delving into the "grays" of the characters. You rarely see someone who is completely one thing or another. You see a more rounded out version and thereby, a little more depth and/or hidden layers of any given character. Sometimes with such subtlety that you may miss out at first glance.

We get this with both Jean Simmons (playing the predator pretending to be a house kitten) to Robert Mitchum's every day guy, who should know better, does know better, but takes a little too long to follow through to get the f@ck outta Dodge.
Along with them, there is the alleged evil stepmother, Barbara O'Neil, who, has we become aware of, isn't at all and is the one and only responsible individual taking care of everything while her slouch husband, played with his usual charm, Herbert Marshall, is easily lovable even after we discover his flaws.

While there is a bit of formula following in the story, placing it in the noir genre, there are a few surprises

View Spoilers

WARNING: "such as" spoilers below

the actual deaths of the parents, and the clever repeat of it at the finality. Which I can easily imagine as an utter WTF moment when it first played out at movie theaters and drive-ins throughout America.
Especially the graphic detail of the bodies (dolls) being bounced out of the car and dragged down with it in the second one.
For it's time, it is pretty intense. Especially that look Simmons' character gives Mitchum before slamming the car into Reverse and that's why I chose it for the image to this review.

ahwell