The 29th Hall of Fame

Tools    





I forgot the opening line.
Rachel Ward am I right?
My reply turned into a quiz question.

My crush was born 8 years earlier than Rachel Ward - and my crush is on the 70s and early 80s version, which was when she was the most active career-wise. Although her starring roles have petered out, she had a cameo in a recently-released movie which was a remake of the version she starred in. She's been in a Woody Allen film, and starred opposite actors like Steve Martin, Peter O'Toole, Richard Dreyfuss and Julianne Moore. She's married to a producer big-shot, and although she's too old for me now, that still makes me jealous. Her name is...
__________________
Remember - everything has an ending except hope, and sausages - they have two.
We miss you Takoma

Latest Review : Le Circle Rouge (1970)




Invasion of the Body Snatchers (Don Siegel, 1956)

What's there to say about this really? It's a low budget 50s B-movie with no real interest in being anything other than that. Like, it is what it is well enough and it passes the time but there's not really any artistry on display. I mean, I'm not upset a film that only exists to be background noise while teenagers make out at the drive-in isn't the most ambitious thing in the world but you could watch this with your eyes closed and get more or less the same experience. And its not like that experience is even bad, this is perfectly fine and passably entertaining the whole time but its definitely not going to be sticking around in my brain very long.
It's not a big budget movie, but it's budget was comparable to a lot of movies from it's era. I thought it was very well done and I wouldn't call it a B movie. What about it makes you call it low budget B movie?



So today I rewatched Goldmember, uh, I mean Goldfinger. (I always get those two mixed up!) I had seen it at least a couple times before. I have the Bond blu ray box set and I have seen all of them. Goldfinger is my favourite of the Bond films. Well directed by Guy Hamilton, with style and pizzazz, this film has all the elements you expect in a classic Bond film. There are gadgets, beautiful women, memorable villains, and lots of action. Sean Connery does a great job as Bond, giving a cool, smooth performance. Goldfinger is a fun, fast paced film that satisfies the audience. It's entertaining and enjoyable. A good nomination.



He's married but she's not an actress.

I figured you would be one to know.

Another clue, they starred in a film together that was directed by my favorite Irish director but the film had terrible reviews. The other films by this director are hits, and one of them won a HOF.
Gosh I'm so bad at clues. The thing is I can almost remember who you said it was once, but I just can't recall that name.

My reply turned into a quiz question.

My crush was born 8 years earlier than Rachel Ward - and my crush is on the 70s and early 80s version, which was when she was the most active career-wise. Although her starring roles have petered out, she had a cameo in a recently-released movie which was a remake of the version she starred in. She's been in a Woody Allen film, and starred opposite actors like Steve Martin, Peter O'Toole, Richard Dreyfuss and Julianne Moore. She's married to a producer big-shot, and although she's too old for me now, that still makes me jealous. Her name is...
Oh, more clues! See the above answer to MG




The Promise
(1996)

I went into this blind. I didn't even know the general premise of the film. That was a good way to experience this film as I literately learned what was happening as it happened.

I loved the way this film was made, all the aspects of film making were perfect. First, the casting was genius as the teen boy with his partially broken front teeth and his low key, overweight dad seemed like real people. I would not have guessed they were actors, though they were both naturalistic at acting. I also liked the score as I never heard it. In this kind of film if a score is used I want it to be light and unobtrusive and it was. Same for the cinematography and editing it was natural, effective and never showy or self evident.

The linear story telling also felt real...as the people and the way the movie was made felt like I was there in person watching these events as they happened. I even liked the way the film ended as it was naturalistic and not at all like a typical Hollywood movie.

Oh, one more thing I liked that the film was never preachy about the plight of illegal immigrants, it just showed us these events as they happened. I appreciate the film not beating me in the head with some ethics lessons, I have my own ethics and I don't need films to teach me them...and The Promise never did and I respect that.

Good nom.




Gosh I'm so bad at clues. The thing is I can almost remember who you said it was once, but I just can't recall that name.

Oh, more clues! See the above answer to MG
Well, My Left Foot won a Hall of Fame, it was directed by Jim Sheridan who also directed Dream House which is 2.5 on letterboxd and 6% on RT, who stars Daniel Craig, my James Bond, also Rachel Weisz starred in it with him and they are married, . Rachel stars in The Mummy which is a film I know that will always entertain me and she's in Agora, a Historical film about Hypathia, a female Greek mathematician and philosopher which I watch about every 3 to 4 months.

So it is Rachel Weisz. I think she's an amazing actress but no, I don't have a girl crush on her.



I think the only film I've seen Rachel Weisz in was The Fountain. That was so long ago I can't remember it. I did just look at her filmography and she's been in some critically acclaimed movies.



My reply turned into a quiz question.

My crush was born 8 years earlier than Rachel Ward - and my crush is on the 70s and early 80s version, which was when she was the most active career-wise. Although her starring roles have petered out, she had a cameo in a recently-released movie which was a remake of the version she starred in. She's been in a Woody Allen film, and starred opposite actors like Steve Martin, Peter O'Toole, Richard Dreyfuss and Julianne Moore. She's married to a producer big-shot, and although she's too old for me now, that still makes me jealous. Her name is...
I'm gonna go with Barbara Hershey.




Vengeance Is Mine (Shohei Imamura, 1979)

I haven't seen a ton of Imamura but he's definitely a guy whose work I respect more than enjoy and this film kind of solidified that for me. His stuff is always extremely well made and great to look at (the colour palette in this film particularly) but for whatever reason I never love anything he does. Vengeance Is Mine is a real good film and there's a lot to like but its also just so heartless and bleak and films like that usually leave me feeling cold and this kind of did as well. Again, love the colour palette as it fits the tone perfectly, just very dark and washed out, and the camerawork is, as expected, excellent but its just not the type of film I go for and had I not taken a nap in the middle I wonder if I would have been feeling the runtime a bit. Add it to the pile of Imamura films that are by all metrics pretty great that just don't 100% hit for me. Last scene was cool though and it was slowly winning me over more and more as it went.



It's not a big budget movie, but it's budget was comparable to a lot of movies from it's era. I thought it was very well done and I wouldn't call it a B movie. What about it makes you call it low budget B movie?
Visually its just not on par with most things I've seen from the decade, its a 70-minute creature-feature and when I look up "B movie" on wikipedia the film is mentioned. None of this is a bad thing though other than the visuals being lackluster, which was my only real complaint about the film.



I think the only film I've seen Rachel Weisz in was The Fountain. That was so long ago I can't remember it. I did just look at her filmography and she's been in some critically acclaimed movies.
Did you enjoy it for the most part? Darren Aronofsky is a hit or miss with most ppl. I enjoy his films.



Did you enjoy it for the most part? Darren Aronofsky is a hit or miss with most ppl. I enjoy his films.
I think I was confused by The Fountain, but that was like 12-15 years ago so hard to remember it.



I think I was confused by The Fountain, but that was like 12-15 years ago so hard to remember it.
His films can be that way.

The thing about The Fountain is its sci fi time travel. Two ppl deeply in love finding each other over and over after reincarnation. I think it's a great film but would never nominate it. Again his movies are hit and miss for some.



The trick is not minding
I saw The Fountain in the theatre with a few friends and general consensus among us was it needed to be rewatches to be fully understood, but was good regardless.

I haven’t rewatched it…..



The trick is not minding
Side note on Invasions….if we’re going to argue about it’s “visuals being lack layer for it’s time”, What are we comparing it to? Other b movies released during that same period? That would be fair, given it’s budget.
But I would hope we aren’t comparing it with the mainstream films of its time, those that were deemed “artistic” and such. That’s an unfair comparison.

So if we stick to the similar films of its genre and budget restraints, what else compares to its visuals? Earth vs the spider? Nope. The Wasp Woman? No again. The countless Godzilla films? Egads, no!

So it’s hold quite well compared to its contemporaries, visually.



Side note on Invasions….if we’re going to argue about it’s “visuals being lack layer for it’s time”, What are we comparing it to? Other b movies released during that same period? That would be fair, given it’s budget.
But I would hope we aren’t comparing it with the mainstream films of its time, those that were deemed “artistic” and such. That’s an unfair comparison.

So if we stick to the similar films of its genre and budget restraints, what else compares to its visuals? Earth vs the spider? Nope. The Wasp Woman? No again. The countless Godzilla films? Egads, no!

So it’s hold quite well compared to its contemporaries, visually.
i only compared it to mainstream films of the time when asked why i thought it was a b movie. my review cuts it slack for that reason.



Visually its just not on par with most things I've seen from the decade, its a 70-minute creature-feature and when I look up "B movie" on wikipedia the film is mentioned. None of this is a bad thing though other than the visuals being lackluster, which was my only real complaint about the film.
80 minutes, and I wouldn't call it a creature feature, although a lot of this is just a matter of opinion. The budget was 417K, as opposed to Stanley Kubrick's The Killing which cost 320K. Hitchcock's The Man Who Knew Too Much cost 3 times as much at 1.2 mil, but even if you look at movies today, most horror movies cost tens of millions less than what is considered big budget. That doesn't mean the horror movie is low budget. It's just that when I watch the movie, I never get the thought that it's cheap or cheesy, and one of the things that stood out to me the most was that the cinematography looked just like many other black and white movies of it's time and the performances were just as good.



80 minutes, and I wouldn't call it a creature feature, although a lot of this is just a matter of opinion. The budget was 417K, as opposed to Stanley Kubrick's The Killing which cost 320K. Hitchcock's The Man Who Knew Too Much cost 3 times as much at 1.2 mil, but even if you look at movies today, most horror movies cost tens of millions less than what is considered big budget. That doesn't mean the horror movie is low budget. It's just that when I watch the movie, I never get the thought that it's cheap or cheesy, and one of the things that stood out to me the most was that the cinematography looked just like many other black and white movies of it's time and the performances were just as good.
disagree, no fun shots in that movie. not even a money thing really.