MoFo Movie Roulette II (a movie watching participation event)

Tools    





Here’s looking at you, kid.

Cat on a Hot Tin Roof (Richard Brooks, 1958)

Liz Taylor, wow! She was stunning in this!...Her acting way dynamically stunning as Maggie 'the cat', a married woman who's husband had no romantic or sexual interest in. She's quite flustered!

Liz Taylor has been referred to as the most beautiful actress of all time...and I believe it! But a whole lot of that beauty is coming from inside. I know that because while I found her captivating, when I looked for a lead image for this write up I couldn't find any screenshot that captured that luminous quality she projected in the film, so I know her beauty isn't just skin deep.

Burl Ives blew me away with his portrayal of Big Daddy a tyrant of a man who possesses so much and has so little. He so deserved a best supporting actor Oscar. Actually the entire cast was well chosen for their parts, I liked them all. Paul Newman really hit the mark as a raging alcoholic with a secret that was tearing him apart. It's too bad that the secret had to be changed for the movie censors of the 1950s.

I loved the sharp flowing dialogue that only Tennessee Williams could have penned. Indeed this was based on the hugely successful stage play.



So glad you liked it, one of my favorite films.

I recd you all films that were either meant for the stage or that were originally on stage and made into a film or looked like it was made in a theater.



[Cat On A Hot Tin Roof]...I recommend you all films that were either meant for the stage or that were originally on stage and made into a film or looked like it was made in a theater.
Cool theme choice, I didn't realize that they were all based originally on plays. A lot of people will complain that a movie felt 'play like' or 'stagey'...Personally I love films that feel play like, as it's a totally different type of acting and story presentation.

@Citizen Rules

You said you might have seen the film before, having watched it, did you see it before?
If I did, my brain was washed at some point I didn't remember anything about the story or any scenes, so I never knew what was going to happen. I didn't even know Burl Ives was in it. I do have a memory of seeing Liz's in her slip caterwauling at Paul Newman in the bedroom. I think I might have seen that scene in trailers as I use to watch every single extra DVD feature.

If I had seen it like 15+ years ago, it then begs the question: can I even consider a film that I've seen only once decades ago as having been watched?





Throne of Blood / 蜘蛛巣城 (1957)
Directed By: Akira Kurosawa
Starring: Toshiro Mifune, Akira Kubo, Isuzu Yamada

Throne of Blood is a hauntingly beautiful adaptation of Macbeth, which takes a number of artistic liberties with the source material in order to transport its themes and characters to feudal Japan. Having no love for Shakespeare's flowery and verbose style of writing, I greatly appreciated that no attempt was made to mimic or translate his dialogue into Japanese.

The sets are absolutely fantastic. Kurosawa was nothing if not dedicated to his craft, and his decision to build the castle exterior on the slope of Mt. Fuji to utilize its thick natural fog made for some impressive, and highly atmospheric shots. The use of Fuji's forests was equally stunning, with that mist once again setting an eerie yet captivating stage for the actors.

The film doesn't just take inspiration from Macbeth, but from traditional Noh theatre as well. The two blend together seamlessly, creating a uniquely Japanese adaptation that still feels true to the spirit of the original work. The performances are fantastic from everyone involved, and it's impossible not to commend Toshiro Mifune for his willingness to have real arrows fired at him during the film's climax.




Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	throne-1.jpg
Views:	184
Size:	177.2 KB
ID:	80381  



My initial reaction was to rate Throne of Blood at
, but while reflecting on it to write that review, I talked myself into another half star.

Wish we could've watched films like that instead of actually reading Shakespeare back in school.



Women will be your undoing, Pépé
So I watched Le crime de Monsieur Lange (1936), as suggested by @edarsenal. Directed by Jean Renoir, the film is a mix of comedy and crime drama showing in flashbacks how and why a murder happened. This didn't really do a lot for me to be honest. I liked the cinematography best of all. The story was alright, but I didn't find it overly interesting. The comedic elements were very funny to me and the crime/thriller elements were that thrilling or exciting. The acting was decent, but I wasn't really impressed with anyone. The film is only an hour and 20 minutes, but it felt longer. I'm not sure why but I can't really connect with Renoir's films. I've seen 3 now and have been underwhelmed by them. Grand Illusion is the best of the 3 I have seen (7/10), but I didn't love it. Rules of the Game was a 6/10 for me. Le crime de Monsieur Lange would be somewhere between the two for me. I still intend to eventually see more of Renoir's films to see if I will come across one I really like. This one is a
.
Sorry, it didn't do a lot for you, it happens. I'll definitely try for better next time around.
__________________
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



Women will be your undoing, Pépé
Cool theme choice, I didn't realize that they were all based originally on plays. A lot of people will complain that a movie felt 'play like' or 'stagey'...Personally I love films that feel play like, as it's a totally different type of acting and story presentation.

If I did, my brain was washed at some point I didn't remember anything about the story or any scenes, so I never knew what was going to happen. I didn't even know Burl Ives was in it. I do have a memory of seeing Liz's in her slip caterwauling at Paul Newman in the bedroom. I think I might have seen that scene in trailers as I use to watch every single extra DVD feature.

If I had seen it like 15+ years ago, it then begs the question: can I even consider a film that I've seen only once decades ago as having been watched?
I know what you mean, I've run across a couple that I've seen only once a very long time ago that almost feel like I should take them off the List to revisit since I truly cannot remember anything from them. Currently, there are two of them in this thread, this and Throne of Blood. Even more so after reading Cosmic's review.



My initial reaction was to rate Throne of Blood at
, but while reflecting on it to write that review, I talked myself into another half star...
I did the same thing with Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. I was thinking rating it a 4 but I talked it up so well that I convinced myself to throw in another .5

I know what you mean, I've run across a couple that I've seen only once a very long time ago that almost feel like I should take them off the List to revisit since I truly cannot remember anything from them. Currently, there are two of them in this thread, this and Throne of Blood. Even more so after reading Cosmic's review.
Just the other day I watched an old John Wayne film that I'd seen a number of times, so I though, Cahill U.S. Marshal. As the wife and I were watching it we realized that we'd never had seen it before. I guess I had just seen the trailer on other John Wayne DVDs.



Here’s looking at you, kid.
I had heard of Seijun Suzuki before I was rec’d the film but had never seen any of his movies.

There were a number of sequences I enjoyed in this movie, the butterfly sequence being my favorite, which later got the ball rolling for the rest of the plot.

I know that this was a B-Movie and it was basically created in a month on a very low budget. Having said that, Kudos to Seijun for creating such a revolutionary movie for its time, taking chances and stepping outside the box with this.

I loved the cinematography and camera work, the dialogue was very cheesy but it made for a fun film. The only thing that I didn’t like, was the editing and the flow of the cut scenes at the beginning of the film. Sometimes the transitions didn’t make sense to me but I was later able to connect the pieces together. I also think the rice fetish was a little overused.

I’m looking forward to rewatching this film again, hopefully I will connect with it more on a second watch.




I had heard of Seijun Suzuki before I was rec’d the film but had never seen any of his movies.

I know that this was a B-Movie and it was basically created in a month on a very low budget. Having said that, Kudos to Seijun for creating such a revolutionary movie for its time, taking chances and stepping outside the box with this.

B movies are always hard for me to rate, in fact I got one to watch tonight. But I'm glad you appreciated Branded to Kill...I thought it would be a 'fun watch' for you.



Here’s looking at you, kid.
B movies are always hard for me to rate, in fact I got one to watch tonight. But I'm glad you appreciated Branded to Kill...I thought it would be a 'fun watch' for you.
Sadly I don’t have much experience with “B” movies or French New Wave/Noir, definitely a film that took me out of my usual bubble of what I watch



Sadly I don’t have much experience with “B” movies or French New Wave/Noir, definitely a film that took me out of my usual bubble of what I watch
I kinda like the quirkiness of B films, at least some of them. I love classic Noir 1941-1959 but I haven't seen much French New Wave and I really should see more.



Here’s looking at you, kid.
I kinda like the quirkiness of B films, at least some of them. I love classic Noir 1941-1959 but I haven't seen much French New Wave and I really should see more.

Out of curiosity, what did you rate the film?



Out of curiosity, what did you rate the film?
Oh, ha...I've never seen it. I only heard about it on The Rate The Last Movie You Saw thread the other day, Paranoid Android rated it a 4 here

So I thought it sounded cool and I wanted to give you something different than the other two choices. I did see and really like both
Philomena (2013)
Elvis and Anabelle (2007)

I might have to try those again for someone else.



Here’s looking at you, kid.
Oh, ha...I've never seen it. I only heard about it on The Rate The Last Movie You Saw thread the other day, Paranoid Android rated it a 4 here

So I thought it sounded cool and I wanted to give you something different than the other two choices. I did see and really like both
Philomena (2013)
Elvis and Anabelle (2007)

I might have to try those again for someone else.
We can Rec films we haven’t seen? Noted

I’ll have to check out those other two films at some point



Here’s looking at you, kid.
I'll be checking out Memories of Murder this weekend
Great film! I just need “Barking Dogs Never Bite” to finish’s Bong’s full feature films. Hasn’t been a disappointing film in the bunch yet. Okja was a little strange though, but it was a fun film. Hope you enjoy Memoirs!!!



Women will be your undoing, Pépé
Great film! I just need “Barking Dogs Never Bite” to finish’s Bong’s full feature films. Hasn’t been a disappointing film in the bunch yet. Okja was a little strange though, but it was a fun film. Hope you enjoy Memoirs!!!
Thanks, It's pretty much guaranteed that I'll enjoy it. I have loved every one of his films I've seen so far.



Let the night air cool you off
I watched Waltz with Bashir last night.

I wasn't sure what score to go with. I probably wouldn't have scored it if it wasn't the main part of the game. On one hand, I thought it was a little slow going in the beginning. On the other, by the end, I was fully invested. The slow beginning makes sense to me, as we are watching a man try to unlock his memories, so we don't know anything either. I also lack context. These events are not something I am too familiar with, if I knew more about it, I think it would probably help on future viewings. In fact, I just think in general I could see this film being more enjoyable the more I view it. The animation style is cool, but not blowaway amazing or anything. I think it helps to create a certain overall package that I can't recall getting in anything else I've ever seen. So kudos for being original. I think a device that worked tremendously was the switch from animation to archival footage, which was a great symbol of all the memories being fully back and being totally real. This film is only 90 minutes, but I am curious if I would have liked it a little more if it was a little shorter. I'll have to report back on that if I ever go back to it.