24th Hall of Fame

Tools    





Wait, so do we still have to watch The Deer Hunter, or was it removed from this HoF? I'm holding off on it so far.

Generally speaking my rule of thumb is to wait till someone posts 2-4 reviews before watching their nomination. Some posters will wait till the very end and binge until the deadline.



2022 Mofo Fantasy Football Champ
Wait, so do we still have to watch The Deer Hunter, or was it removed from this HoF? I'm holding off on it so far.
A lot of HOFs made rules where you would have had to start by now. I probably should have. I'd say it's a Longshot this person finishes if they haven't posted in the thread in almost a whole months time.



A lot of HOFs made rules where you would have had to start by now. I probably should have. I'd say it's a Longshot this person finishes if they haven't posted in the thread in almost a whole months time.
I'd be amazed if AgrippinaX finished the HoF at this point, though I would be pleased to have do so. But didn't you say you PMed her and got no reply? If so, that's not very encouraging.



2022 Mofo Fantasy Football Champ
I'd be amazed if AgrippinaX finished the HoF at this point, though I would be pleased to have do so. But didn't you say you PMed her and got no reply? If so, that's not very encouraging.
PM, a mention here, and a profile comment.



I've seen The Deer Hunter, but it's been too long. Still, I will leave it for last in case anything happens.
__________________
Check out my podcast: The Movie Loot!



2022 Mofo Fantasy Football Champ
Does anyone think it's unfair for me to give @AgrippinaX a deadline of February 10th to start participating? It's been almost over a month and some of you are already in the double digits of watched movies.



Does anyone think it's unfair for me to give @AgrippinaX a deadline of February 10th to start participating? It's been almost over a month and some of you are already in the double digits of watched movies.

I would send a PM and links to films if you have them



I don't know. If she says she's still in, she's in. Who's to say she can't watch 15 films in a week? At least that's how I see it.



Does anyone think it's unfair for me to give @AgrippinaX a deadline of February 10th to start participating? It's been almost over a month and some of you are already in the double digits of watched movies.
I don't have a problem with what Thief said but I don't think it's too much ask for a PM to you or a post saying they are still in. Feb 10 seems reasonable.
__________________
Letterboxd



It was just that the luck of a broader understanding of how the news was received made me a little disoriented in having a sense of where their culture/society was at the time. Were such crimes happening a lot? It was just a detail about the feel of the community, for lack of a better word, that I thought was missing a little.
A crime like that I think would be considered an isolated incident, especially one that's committed by a person who knows the victim. If you're asking if those crimes happened a lot in 70's Argentina, it wouldn't occur to me that they happened more frequently then and there than anywhere else. I know the government was corrupt but I wouldn't have any reason to believe that their people were different than others.



Does anyone think it's unfair for me to give @AgrippinaX a deadline of February 10th to start participating? It's been almost over a month and some of you are already in the double digits of watched movies.
That's fair.



La Dolce Vita



My second time seeing this. It's one I wanted to watch again because while I enjoyed it the first time, I thought I could get more out of it. I did get more out of it this time, but I still think there might be more.

I agree with Siddon that this is like a hangout movie. I'd also add it's a good background movie. I could picture an Italian restaurant playing this on repeat in the bar area. Since honeymooning in Rome and other parts of Italy, I have a strong fondness for the place, so I very much enjoy all of the sights in the film. Also echoing Siddon, this is a 3 hour movie and I feel every bit of it.

To me this movie is a bunch of separate scenes that are interconnected and feature the same character, Marcello. He's a cool character except when he's trying to pick up a super hot actress. I look at this movie and think of the question, what do you want in life? I, like others, spent years partying and chasing women. I would often get what I thought I wanted, but I never felt content and never stopped wanting. I thought I was having fun at the time, but when I think back there's no way I could have been happy. Something I really noticed in the movie is the spontaneity of the characters. That can be a great trait but it also points to a lack of structure, or in this case meaning.

I'm not sure how I feel about this movie but I know I enjoy having it on. I don't know if it has deep meaning or if it's actually very simple. It's definitely good, maybe great? I don't know.




A crime like that I think would be considered an isolated incident, especially one that's committed by a person who knows the victim. If you're asking if those crimes happened a lot in 70's Argentina, it wouldn't occur to me that they happened more frequently then and there than anywhere else. I know the government was corrupt but I wouldn't have any reason to believe that their people were different than others.
Probably. But at the time they begin investigating it looks like a home invasion. They take the trouble and effort to grab two innocent random dudes and beat confessions out of them. There was just something about the dynamic between the public and the police and the "judicial branch"/lawyers that wasn't quite defined enough for me.



Probably. But at the time they begin investigating it looks like a home invasion. They take the trouble and effort to grab two innocent random dudes and beat confessions out of them. There was just something about the dynamic between the public and the police and the "judicial branch"/lawyers that wasn't quite defined enough for me.
Usually I would say a quick arrest or rush to judgment type of thing is done to appease the public. I'm glad it didn't get sidetracked with that whole aspect because it'd be a different movie, but it's definitely an interesting thing to think about.



Usually I would say a quick arrest or rush to judgment type of thing is done to appease the public. I'm glad it didn't get sidetracked with that whole aspect because it'd be a different movie, but it's definitely an interesting thing to think about.
The reason I think that I wanted that sense (and, again, just like a sentence or two of context) was to help me understand the pressures on the characters, including their jerk of a boss.

For example, I really like that we see how moved Esposito is by the husband's suffering and the way that this motivates him.

When it comes to a film where political power and shady dealings are part of the fabric of the narrative, I just like to be a bit clearer on those dynamics.



Hard Times (1975) -


I'm not the biggest fan of sports films (or, at least, it's not a genre I find myself drawn to). However, I really like/love a handful of sports films out there and am always open to checking out more of them. Even though I didn't know about this film beforehand, I was pretty impressed by it. It would definitely land somewhere in my 10 favorite sports films.

I appreciated the way this film handled street fighting, with how winning appeared to be everything for that sport. For instance, Speed was initially treated as an outcast in the film since the wrestlers he worked with usually lost all their fights. It wasn't until he started working with Chaney when his reputation began to grow.
WARNING: spoilers below
On the other hand, Jim Henry's arc was in direct opposition to Speed's. He initially had a reputation for being undefeatable, having won multiple boxing matches in the past. Once he lost his first match though, his intimidating demeanor was gone, he was treated as an outcast by his boss, and ultimately became a shell of his former self.
Normally, if you were to lose a boxing match, it wouldn't be a big deal. Just learn from your mistakes and practice to get better. With this film though, being undefeatable came with a price as, once you lost your first match, your reputation would be destroyed.

Chaney had a lot in common with Clint Eastwood in the Dollars trilogy for a number of reasons. Both Chaney and Eastwood were mysterious characters who would wander from town to town and only stay if necessary or if there was something significant for them to do (the final scene lingered with me as it helped to enhance the mysterious aura around Chaney). This also extended to the alienation and his difficulties with getting along with the various people he met, like Speed, who he occasionally got into arguments with, or Lucy, who he was emotionally distant with during their affair. Also, like Eastwood's character, both characters excelled at what they did (street fighting v. Western gunfights), carrying out these acts with an immense precision that none of their opponents could match. Chaney's skill in the fighting matches made for a pleasing style, yet didn't rob the film of tension or narrative momentum since the direction and editing of the various boxing matches were top notch (the fight with Jim Henry was my favorite from the film). This film had a unique feel which I don't recall seeing in any other boxing film.

Overall, I enjoyed this film quite a lot. I can understand someone feeling distant from the characters, but I wasn't bothered by that. The film had quite a lot to offer, like the "winning is everything" feel to street fighting or Chaney's characterization. I can see myself watching this film again.

Next Up: In a Glass Cage



Glad you liked it! I didn't even think about the "winning is everything" statement it makes. It makes sense given Jim Henry's treatment after losing, Speed's gambling addiction, etc. That also makes the Depression setting more relevant because you could argue that this mindset is what put America in that mess.

Walter Hill never gets enough credit if you ask me. Sure, he's made some clunkers, but this movie, The Driver, The Warriors and 48 Hrs. are all great.



Glad you liked it! I didn't even think about the "winning is everything" statement it makes. It makes sense given Jim Henry's treatment after losing, Speed's gambling addiction, etc. That also makes the Depression setting more relevant because you could argue that this mindset is what put America in that mess.

Walter Hill never gets enough credit if you ask me. Sure, he's made some clunkers, but this movie, The Driver, The Warriors and 48 Hrs. are all great.
Good observations. I didn't tie that into the Depression setting, but that also makes sense. As for Walter Hill, this is the only one of his films I've seen, but I'll have to keep an eye out for his other films.