24th Hall of Fame

I had it 13th out of 15.

I had Rudderless at 8th place.

Does Suspect have a Letterboxd account?

I had it in 11th place out of 13 films (I still liked it though), but I still need to fit The Whisperers in there.

__________________
IMDb
Letterboxd

I agree with this completely.

__________________

I had Rudderless at the bottom, but considering I really haven't disliked anything I've seen here so far, it's really not a bad spot to be at. Most of you read my review so you know how I feel.

Anyway, sorry that you couldn't finish, Suspect. Wish you the best at work.

Which, just to elaborate, is no slam against crowd-pleasing films (even the more "prestige" form of crowd-pleasers).

Like, I thought about both Mother and Dogtooth for days/weeks after watching them. The Secret in Their Eyes was a really solid, well-acted, and at times wonderfully shot film, but I don't find myself turning over scenes from it in my head at night.

Also, I nominated my film specifically because I think it has a lot of crowd-pleasing elements. So, seriously, no shade toward those who really love Secret in Their Eyes or found it a more moving experience than I did.

Well I watched this one, the remake and then for the hall...I turn 65 in 25 years

Dogtooth is one I’ve been meaning to watch for a good while now. That, and really, any film from Lanthimos

I've seen Dogtooth and The Killing of a Sacred Deer and liked both of them.

He's one of those directors who creates his own strange vibe. And fortunately he seems to have a knack for finding actors who can get their performances around the weirdness.

I'd say Dogtooth veers a bit darker and more bleak, while Killing of a Sacred Deer is more obviously (to me) dark comedy.

I forgot he did Sacred Deer. Thanks for the reminder. I also am interested in The Favourite and The Lobster. I’m so behind the past decade it isn’t even funny though.

Those are both on my watchlist as well, so you are not alone!

I've only seen Dogtooth and The Favourite, but I would recommend both. As different as they are, they both have a weird, awkward vibe of dark humor and emotionally disturbing events. Dogtooth leans more to the latter, whereas The Favourite leans more to the former, which makes it a bit more accessible.

3 days!

The bold part I was saying in jest, it's not something I would ever say with a straight face, and I only said it because I take issue when someone brings up a bunch of movies that have nothing to do with this HoF and use words like "embarrassment" and "clearly". How clear is it that it was a mistake that The Secret in Their Eyes won the foreign language Oscar? I'm wondering because to me it is better than those other films. If it's so clear that I'm wrong, do I just have no clue what I'm talking about? It's no big deal but I didn't care for the post.

I have no issue if you feel that way, but I wouldn't say it's cut and dry either way. Let's keep in mind that even though you use the word "easily", you did give The Secret in Their Eyes . For the record I gave Mother + and Dogtooth . From a technical level, I would say each of the 3 movies are excellent. I would also say that the single most impressive technical moment of all 3 is the soccer stadium scene. The styles of the 3 movies are all different, and I happen to like all 3. A viewer could easily have a personal preference for style, I know I do, but I would have a very difficult time trying to decide which one was better.

As far as the daring of the storytelling, I find the content to be a dime a dozen for Mother and Dogtooth. Someone else may not feel that way, but those are the exact types of movies I seek out and generally prefer. I think they could be daring for a viewer who's used to playing it safe, but when I watched Mother it was exactly what I expected, and the same goes for when I watched Dogtooth, except it was less shocking than I expected. I liked it and thought it was made well but there was nothing that made me uncomfortable or say wow. Boundary pushing is commonplace these days. What I would call daring is Hitchcock killing off his leading lady or Lynch making the G rated Straight Story.

I don't see it that way and I think one could argue it's more daring than the other two. While the other two were what I expected, this movie was not at all. The movie is packaged as a thriller, but I think anyone looking at it that way or expecting it will be let down. There is a certain risk involved with that. I read some of the write ups here and said to myself, they didn't even see the movie. Siddon said it was the 3rd time he's seen it and then later said that includes one time watching the remake, but they're nothing alike if you get all there is to get from it. It is a very introspective movie that will make some viewers think deeply about their own lives. It's far different from a crowd pleaser at least as I know them to be. Again, it's up to how much the viewer can take from it, but there's a lot there.

My only point of all this is that I think it's unwise to make such matter of fact statements when comparing movies that are all of high quality. I wouldn't ever say The Secret in Their Eyes is better than Dogtooth because I'm nobody to say that and neither is anybody else here, and vice versa.

I’ll have my review up for Beasts shortly, heading to Frederick to watch The Courier though because I need to get back to going to the movies.

The above line is uttered by an artist, almost inadvertently, during a party showcased during the middle "episode" of Federico Fellini's La Dolce Vita. But the relevance of that line and that philosophy is central to the film, which follows journalist and womanizer Marcello (Marcello Mastroianni), as he navigates through Rome's nightlife and lifestyle of the rich and famous.

The film's story, which is split into seven separate vignettes, is said to represent the Seven Deadly Sins, or the Seven Hills of Rome, or the Seven Sacraments of the Catholic Church. But while I try to make sense of all those symbolisms, on the surface the film features Marcello struggling with his relationship with volatile fiancée Emma (Yvonne Furneaux) as he also goes about his job as a gossip columnist and socialite, while mingling with celebrities and wallowing in the excesses of sex and drinking.

However, deep down Marcello craves a more meaningful life. He confesses as much to his friend and role model Steiner (Alain Cuny), who as opposed to Marcello, enjoys "partying" with intellectuals, poets, and philosophers instead. It is at this party that we hear the above quote, and up to this point, we've already seen Marcello flirt, engage, and possibly more, with sunbathers, a prostitute, a wealthy heiress (Anouk Aimée), and an actress (Anita Ekberg), not to mention Emma.

For the rest of the film, Marcello continues his descent as he visits a nightclub, an aristocrat party, and a decadent party in a beach house. He's restless, burning, as if constantly looking for something, anything to distract him or take him out of a life he doesn't want, while longing for a life that might not be as good as he thinks. Should he "freeze" or "burn" himself?

Marcello is a tough character to analyze. He's not entirely likable; after all, he's a womanizer, he's unfaithful, and has outbursts of violence and excesses. Putting aside whatever symbolisms each may have, to see every single woman he meets fall at his feet also made me roll my eyes often. But anyway, to add to his complicated persona, Marcello also works at a job that's not the most liked. Still, as a middle-aged man myself, I can't help but sympathize with his search for meaning and purpose, even if I disagree with the ways he goes about it.

At the end of the film, Marcello doesn't seem to be any more closer to finding out about his life as he was at the beginning of the film, but he does seem to be more at peace with just not knowing where "the sweet life" will lead him.

Grade:

I will watch something tonight. Was caught up with the podcast the last few days, but I will watch something tonight. It makes more sense to tackle Barry Lyndon tonight, but if not, I'll go with Beasts.

I did really like it. I just thought that it did something really well that I have seen before.

I think that the film is careful to pace out expected beats. The stadium long-take is actually the perfect example of a crowd-pleasing moment done with remarkable technical proficiency.

For example, the opening sequence showing the attack of the woman. Because he was writing in that scene, I thought that the scene was meant to be a parody about how the rape and murder of a pretty young woman is like the easiest thing to write. Then I realized that, no, that is actually the crime they are using to start the film/story.

I appreciate that the film layered the main character's inner life into the story, and let the events drive his emotions/character arc and not the other way around. The movie might have bittersweet elements, but it ultimately offers up something generically satisfying (ie .

Again, the film is really solid on a technical level, but I do not find it particularly daring. Just good.

I mean, I said that I would easily place Mother and Dogtooth over it, not that they are objectively better films.

I do stand by my opinion that the easily-grasped nature of the story and the degree of satisfaction in the resolution makes it an easier "vote getter" than the other movies.

Missing.....

2 reviews from Thief
1 review from Wylde
1 review from Speling
6 reviews from Neiba
1 review from Ed