The Personal Recommendation Hall of Fame

Tools    





Sorry for not letting all of you know something sooner...
I didn't think I was falling behind yet since there were quite some other people who had seen around the same amount of films as me. I have actually seen two more of my recommendations, but my life has been a bit chaotic lately and because of that I haven't managed to finish my reviews for them. I honestly didn't think it was a problem, but I realize that I should have at least let you know something due to my history.

I will try to finish those reviews as soon as possible, and once I've done that I can get back to watching my nominations (I wanted to finish the reviews before watching more films to prevent having too long of a list of reviews to write)

I hope this clarifies things a bit and once again sorry if I caused any negative feelings for anyone.
Oh no worries at all. I think I came off angrier than I meant, you just hadn’t respond to any of the mentions so I was like

Glad you’re still in though!



gattaca

this was pretty good. interesting and well-thought-out exploration of the dangers of eugenics and genetic determinism. genetic selection creates a two-tiered class system between those who were engineered and those whose genetic makeup was left to chance. the film highlights not only this injustice, but also the faulty assumptions in this society's line of thinking since the genetically-weak ethan hawke is still able to excel. it could be read as valorizing work ethic as the justification for why hawke deserves his place (pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps bullsht) but it doesn't lean into it as much as it could, which is a good thing. niccol is careful to point out that the barriers to success for the genetically "inferior" are primarily systemic, whether it's getting turned away from school for insurance purposes or the psychological effect of knowing your destiny that creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. i would've liked if we were allowed to see the experience of other invalids besides hawke but i get why niccol went with a more self-contained thing.

kinda conflicted about this movie on a narrative level though. every beat works for the most part, but this is the second film i've watched this HoF that seems to frustratingly suffer from a lack of narrative imagination for a sci-fi film. it's a good extrapolation of a future world but it's all framed around this murder investigation of a dude we never met. it did a perfectly fine job keeping the movie afloat and bringing out various tensions, but idk, i don't need my sci-fi to be so conventional. but i did appreciate the way it went out of its way to avoid certain cliches. (SPOILER) like, the reveal of the actual murderer is treated as such an afterthought when any other movie would've had a dramatic confrontation scene where we find out the kind boss was actually a scheming evil dude the whole time. instead we don't find out until he's already been caught, and he doesn't even say much or seem to mind and then that's the last we hear of it. it was also nice that they avoided the obvious direction of having jude law grow resentful of hawke's success, and instead he's quite supportive the whole time. there's also definitely some interesting queer subtext here in how these two pretty boys share one house/identity and are constantly exchanging fluids.

hawke and thurman are both pretty good here but weirdly have very little chemistry for two people who got married irl a year later. loved how many great character actors popped up in this thing. ernest borgnine, alan arkin, tony shalhoub, elias koteas, xander berkeley, dean norris, ken marino, and... gore vidal for some reason.

__________________
Most Biblical movies were long If I Recall.
seen A Clockwork Orange. In all honesty, the movie was weird and silly
letterboxd
criticker



The thing isolated becomes incomprehensible
Fail Safe
Plot:
Due to a technical malfunction, the President of America only has little time and resources to stop the nuclear annihilation of the world.

Wonderful film. Usually with films like this that have a limited location, you feel as though it could've just been a stage play. Lumet is a master of his craft though; He uses all of his amazing talent to tell this story visually in a way that would be impossible with any other medium.
The editing is used very effectively in many scenes to heighten the tension. The black and white cinematography combined with the lighting makes for some striking visuals, many wonderful scenes of actors cast in black. The script is brilliant; Lots of moments for the actors to shine and many little details that add to every character.
The film also presents many interesting philosophical viewpoints on war itself and the conflict between nations. not enough to make this film a proper philosophy textbook, but enough to promote very interesting and possibly worthwhile discussion.
Acting is also great in this film, especially from Henry Fonda as the American President, who has to act professional and smart in an emotional and stressful situation. The absence of music was a great choice too, I do feel that the inclusion of music would have hindered the film.

I've loved nearly every Sidney Lumet film I've seen and this wasn't an exception. Thanks to whoever suggested this.

+
You're welcome



I was listening to Van Halen's Panama and thinking about Gattaca. Every time David Lee Roth yelled Panama, I yelled Gattaca. Otherwise I don't think a whole lot of it but it's a fine movie.



I was listening to Van Halen's Panama and thinking about Gattaca. Every time David Lee Roth yelled Panama, I yelled Gattaca. Otherwise I don't think a whole lot of it but it's a fine movie.
OMG, ya just ruined that song for me




Dear Zachary: A Letter to a Son About His Father
(Kurt Kuenne, 2008)



I find it difficult to rate a documentary like Dear Zachary. The subject matter is compelling, infuriating, extremely depressing. I understand why so many viewers are an emotional wreck after watching it. I think it would be damn near impossible to tell this story without getting a rise out of viewers. Therein lies my issue: the tears and anger that this documentary produces are solely a response to the tragic true-life tale. Dear Zachary was initially meant as a "cinematic scrapbook" only to be shared among friends and family of Andrew Bagby, the slain father of the title, and that lack of professionalism shows in the amateurish editing and clumsy construction of facts and events. Thankfully the story is powerful enough that it leaves a lasting impact despite the lackluster execution from director Kurt Kuenne.

I'm not typically a fan of documentaries that mostly consist of sit-down interviews and archival footage. That's just a personal preference, but Dear Zachary made me feel as if I was watching some homemade episode of Dateline rather than an acclaimed documentary. I also think that documentaries should strive to be impartial. That's impossible with Dear Zachary due to Kurt Kuenne's closeness to the subject matter. Judging by this film, Andrew Bagby was one of the greatest humans to ever walk the earth -- a high-in-demand best man, friend of everyone, funny, sweet, selfless, caring, highly intelligent. I don't necessarily think the interviewees were being disingenuous, but the nonstop barrage of praise ate up too much of the runtime and left me rolling my eyes. Since this film is framed as "a letter to a son about his father," I couldn't help thinking that they were unintentionally f**king this kid up, cobbling a pair of shoes so unreasonably large that nobody can fill them. The one-sided attack against the accused also annoyed me and left me anxious to hear something, anything, from the other side. Of course, once the full story is told, those issues become non-factors. However, had the layout been less clumsy, the biased narration less aggressive, such issues would not have existed in the first place.

Judging by reviews, the intimate connection that the filmmaker shares with the subject matter is a positive attribute for many viewers, so clearly I'm in the minority with my opinion. People seem to like the amateurish, homemade production because it adds to the sincerity, making Dear Zachary feel less like a normal documentary than a highly personal tribute to a fallen friend. This is essentially a private film diary made public. I do think that the film's unbridled anger toward the failed justice system elevates the last portion of the film into an impassioned cry for reform, which I'm happy to read was successful. (I could've done without the animated lip syncing for the lawyers, however, which feels like something from a lame comedy sketch on YouTube, but those are the types of amateurish tactics that Kuenne repeatedly employs, always undercutting the emotion of his own story instead of allowing it to speak for itself.) The backyard movies that Kuenne made with Andrew provide a poignant resource of archival footage, many of which fit eerily into the narrative; although Kuenne has a tendency to reuse some of those scenes to an annoying degree, diluting their impact. The film takes many twists and turns, some of which are hard to fathom, so it's best to watch Dear Zachary with limited knowledge of the real-life events. This is a story that needed to be told. I just think that it could've been told much more effectively.

__________________



I think I've figured out who nominated what for me with the exception of Dear Zachary and Funny Games, and I've narrowed those two down to @HashtagBrownies and @TheUsualSuspect. I looked for reviews of Dear Zachary and went back and read the reactions to it in the Documentary HOF we held a few years ago. Suspect thinks very highly of the film, so I'm making him my official guess. Not sure why he would choose this for me, though, unless he's trying to make me feel remorse for all my past killings and kidnappings. IT DIDN'T WORK, SUSPECT!!!! I HAVE NO CONSCIENCE!!!



28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds
I think I've figured out who nominated what for me with the exception of Dear Zachary and Funny Games, and I've narrowed those two down to @HashtagBrownies and @TheUsualSuspect. I looked for reviews of Dear Zachary and went back and read the reactions to it in the Documentary HOF we held a few years ago. Suspect thinks very highly of the film, so I'm making him my official guess. Not sure why he would choose this for me, though, unless he's trying to make me feel remorse for all my past killings and kidnappings. IT DIDN'T WORK, SUSPECT!!!! I HAVE NO CONSCIENCE!!!
Nope. I do really like the film though. I don't cry during movies but I cried both times I watched this and now that I'm a father, IF I were to ever watch it again, I'm sure I'd cry even harder.

I liked how it was being made during the events basically and took narrative turns as they happened to the filmmakers. What started out as one thing, becomes something else and ends up as another. The one thing I always hated though was the LOUD NOISE, SMASH CUT, RE FILTER jarring images and sounds that blasted at you once a horrific reveal turns up.

I did not recommend this one to you, I'd like to think I know my audience a bit better than to blindly recommend something (I lie, I did that numerous times) but for you I actually thought about it a bit.
__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews



Nope. I do really like the film though. I don't cry during movies but I cried both times I watched this and now that I'm a father, IF I were to ever watch it again, I'm sure I'd cry even harder.

I liked how it was being made during the events basically and took narrative turns as they happened to the filmmakers. What started out as one thing, becomes something else and ends up as another. The one thing I always hated though was the LOUD NOISE, SMASH CUT, RE FILTER jarring images and sounds that blasted at you once a horrific reveal turns up.

I did not recommend this one to you, I'd like to think I know my audience a bit better than to blindly recommend something (I lie, I did that numerous times) but for you I actually thought about it a bit.
I'm shocked anybody would watch it twice. I started to mention in my review that it's a documentary that seemingly has no replay value.

Disappointed that I guessed incorrectly. I feel like I've interacted with you enough that you'd have a pretty good idea of what to nominate for me, and Dear Zachary seemed like too odd of a choice. But when searching the forum for mentions of the film, I saw several posts where you'd praised it quite a bit. That was enough evidence to make me go against my gut. Figured the thinking was "Spaulding seems to like messed-up stuff, and this is a very messed-up story, so . . ." I've never been that into true-crime stories, though. I prefer my murder with a fictional barrier.



*Once, twice, three times he drove the fictional barrier into her head - blood, hair and bone fragments spraying across the wall. He smiled internally, those bastard cops would never solve this one.



Sorry. As you were.



I'm shocked anybody would watch it twice. I started to mention in my review that it's a documentary that seemingly has no replay value.

Disappointed that I guessed incorrectly. I feel like I've interacted with you enough that you'd have a pretty good idea of what to nominate for me, and Dear Zachary seemed like too odd of a choice. But when searching the forum for mentions of the film, I saw several posts where you'd praised it quite a bit. That was enough evidence to make me go against my gut. Figured the thinking was "Spaulding seems to like messed-up stuff, and this is a very messed-up story, so . . ." I've never been that into true-crime stories, though. I prefer my murder with a fictional barrier.

Well I haven't confirmed any picks only denials but I'll break my policy in this case. I picked the film for you...my decision was predicated on the fact that you don't watch documentaries. I didn't pick films that people would like I picked films that you would have likely never have watched on your own.



28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds
I'm shocked anybody would watch it twice. I started to mention in my review that it's a documentary that seemingly has no replay value.
That would be once on my own and the second time forcing my emotionally unstable wife to watch it.




Before Sunrise (Richard Linklater 1995)

All you do to me is talk, talk
Talk, talk, talk, talk
All you do to me is talk, talk
Talk, talk, talk, talk
All you do to me is talk, talk

Damn, now I got that 1980s pop song stuck in my head...Which is apt because talk, talk, talk, talk is all this insipid couple did during the movie. And there's nothing wrong with a dialogue heavy movie. Before Sunrise looked to be like my type of movie, I should have loved it. But I didn't...I didn't believe these people were real, I didn't believe they were a couple and I sure didn't sense any chemistry between them.

But what I did sense was that the director gave them a few 'deep' topics to talk about, but also allowed them to improvise their discussions. Especially in the first scenes, like on the train when they meet, neither of the actors were in tune with the other. Just one example: Ethan Hawke tells this strange story how as a boy he was spraying the hose nozzel so that the sunlight made a rainbow and then he saw his dead grandmother standing there. As soon as he was done telling his story Julie Delpy launches into her pre planned speech. She had zero reaction to his story. It was like she didn't even listen to him. And that not listening to each other continued throughout the movie. I know both actors can do better work than they did here. I blame the director's format for shooting the scenes, I'm sure most dialogue was improvised and it showed. The only time I felt anything was when they parted ways, that was done decently.

Sorry! to whoever chose this for me. I had thought this might end up being a favorite of mine, but it just didn't pan out.





Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	MV5BNDcyMThmNzItZmIyOC00YzkwLTk2MjItYzM3NWQ4Y2NjZmM2XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNDMwNDYzMDc@._V1_.jpg
Views:	631
Size:	95.7 KB
ID:	63079  



I still think that was a good nomination just for you to try it. I've seen it twice and I don't like it at all, and I don't understand why it's so beloved.



Well I haven't confirmed any picks only denials but I'll break my policy in this case. I picked the film for you...my decision was predicated on the fact that you don't watch documentaries. I didn't pick films that people would like I picked films that you would have likely never have watched on your own.
Interesting. I had you pegged for Deep Red since I recall you nominating it in a Horror Hall of Fame.

Even though I was a little underwhelmed with Dear Zachary, I'm glad you chose it. I keep meaning to watch more documentaries, but when given the choice, I always skip over them for other stuff. I would've gotten around to Dear Zachary eventually due to its reputation, but it likely would've been years down the road.



I will also say I’m open to other suggestions for comparisons. I only got into South Korean Cinema last year and I’ve liked what I’ve seen so far.
Toss me some examples that you think may be better.
My favorite South Korean flick is I Saw the Devil, but it's pretty brutal and unflinchingly grim, so it's not for everyone. I also highly recommend Bong Joon-ho's Mother. For all the praise that Parasite has received (and deservedly so), I still think Mother is his strongest film. Some others I've enjoyed off the top of my head: The Wailing (which has been nominated in this HOF); Oasis; The Yellow Sea; The Good, The Bad, The Weird; The Chaser; The Man From Nowhere, and plenty of others I'm blanking on at the moment.

Mulholland Drive (2001)

It was all the 'nonsensical' scenes (that's what I call them anyway) that got in the way of an otherwise really well told story. Did we really need the boogie man behind Dennys restaurant (or whatever it was called) scaring the guy to death? Did we need that scene in the Spanish theater? Same with the cowboy and the old man behind the glass wall, I'd like to cut all that right out of the picture. But I guess Lynch fans eat that stuff for breakfast...then they create their own theories as to what it was all about. But I don't view stories like this as 'real' I think of it from a production standpoint, so to me it was like Lynch included some non story related scenes to make us think things are really deep.
I was extremely curious to read your reaction to Mulholland Drive. I don't love it to the degree that some do (if we're talking Lynch, give me Blue Velvet, Elephant Man or my favorite watch-while-stoned movie, Eraserhead). I do think Mulholland Drive is pretty great, and those weird, "nonsensical" scenes are a big part of the appeal. It's the type of film that invites and encourages multiple viewings.

First, can we talk about the "Red Shoes" ballet sequence?? WOW. Just from a technical perspective, Powell and Pressburger utilized every camera method in the book. The costuming, lighting, sets and designs were jaw dropping, and the surrealistic/Dunuel-esque portions were also amazing; practically a silent short film in of itself. I watched the sequence again after finishing and still loved it.
One of the best sequences ever put to film.

Also happy to see such positive reactions to Rififi and Fail-Safe. My write-ups for each film, with my Fail-Safe write-up coming from the 60's Countdown:


Rififi
(Jules Dassin, 1955)

A lot has been made about the heist sequence, and deservedly so. That dialogue-free thirty-minute stretch is as riveting as any scene you'll find. The painstaking level of detail, the sound-editing, the visual storytelling, the body language and facial expressions of the perspiring performers -- everything about that sequence is the epitome of cinematic excellence. I didn't think it was possible to top the heist sequence in Le Cercle Rouge, but Rififi has it beat. However, this film is so much more than one famed sequence. All three acts -- the preparation, the heist, the ensuing fallout -- are incredible, and the stakes and the level of danger steadily increase throughout the running time. Rififi feels darker and more cynical than most noir I've seen. The film has plenty of style, but it feels more grounded in realism than other entries in the genre. This is noir that's grizzled and stoic. Noir that's been through hard times. Noir with dirt under its fingernails and deep crevices beneath its fedora. Jean Servais perfectly embodies both the gravitas of his character and the no-nonsense attitude of the film. Allusions to the director's blacklisting add extra subtext to the film for viewers looking to read into such things, and the film's overall influence can be felt in crime films all these decades later. Easily one of the best noir films I've seen and a definite contender for my 50's list.


Fail-Safe was my #12. I expected it to place at least thirty spots higher, but I guess the low placement is fitting for a film that has always been unjustly overshadowed by its satirical brother. The two films -- Fail-Safe and Dr. Strangelove -- make a great double-feature: same premise, vastly different tones. I guess there's something to be said for taking the piss out of nuclear warfare, as Kubrick did with Strangelove, by illustrating the absurdity of war and reducing us to cartoonish buffoons hellbent on destroying ourselves, but grinning sardonically at mutually assured destruction also runs the risk of trivializing the matter. Fail-Safe, on the other hand, brings to life the horrors and the paranoia of the Cold War better than any film I've seen. Despite the global repercussions of the plot, the film maintains a restricted, constrained, claustrophobic atmosphere, instilling viewers with the same helpless feeling of impending, inescapable doom as the characters on screen. The stark black-and-white cinematography perfectly mirrors the bleak tone. I'm amazed by how much tension Sidney Lumet was able to squeeze out of something as deceptively simple as Henry Fonda sitting in a room with a phone. The ending, with the words, "The matador . . . the matador," echoing like a prelude to Colonel Kurtz's, "The horror . . . the horror," is bold and haunting and devastating. Fail-Safe is as pessimistic as any film you'll find, and that's partly why I love it.
.