Movie Tab II

I do watch Miazaki's films for the beautiful visuals but after seeing Mononoke I realized how much the story is my primary focus. There are too many similarities, the central characters are almost identical, the nature vs industry/humans theme is central in both, the waring clans/tribes, a strong female villain and the 'demons'/enraged bugs share so many things. Mononoke is more or less a reimagining of Nausicaa. I agree that Mononoke is a much better film, I just wish I hadn't seen Nausicaa first.

Watching Darby O'Gill and the Little People right now. Should be a hoot! The Wife loves it. I've never had the pleasure. Sean Connery looks so young.

Anywho some more movies...

The Unborn (David S. Goyer - 2009)

Relatively ho-hum. Your basic dumbed down version of The Exorcist. But man o' sakes alive was the lead girl a little hottie! Sort of a Jessica Alba wannabe and believe me that's a good thing. But yeah, the flick itself is pretty mediocre. I didn't really expect much though so I didn't hate it.

Escape to Witch Mountain (John Hough - 1975)

I've probably seen this flick about 10 times, all of the previous viewings were before the age of 12 during the wonderful world of Disney on Sunday nights when I was growing up. I stayed up past my bedtime several times to watch this and several other Disney movies back then, but this is still one of my favorites. Its such a fun little lighthearted story and of course I just loved 'Winky' the cat.

Return From Witch Mountain (John Hough - 1978)

A better cast but not nearly as fun and charming as the first installment. I'm pretty sure I've never seen this before. I was pretty shocked to see not only Bette Davis but also Christopher Lee in this. What a trip. Bette sure looked old. 70, by my estimation. Pretty good but not as fun as the first. I wonder if the new one will be any good.

__________________
We are both the source of the problem and the solution, yet we do not see ourselves in this light...

Show Me Love (Moodysson, 1998) -

I loved this film when I saw it for the first time around this time last year, but now I'm starting to get tired of it. Between the amateur-ish photography (complete with the most painfully obvious use of zooms this side of Enter the Dragon), mediocre dialogue and a largely cringeworthy soundtrack full of the crap soft-rock I assume that teenagers in the '90s thought was cool (with the sole exception being the use of Foreigner's I Want To Know What Love Is, I've actually begun to realise just how heavily flawed Show Me Love actually is. Granted, there's still a part of me that reckons this film belongs on the right side of but who knows, maybe if I watch it again the same time next year, it may go down even further. Shame, really. Oh, well.



Elmer Gantry (Brooks, 1960) -

Despite being made in the early 1960s and set in the early 1930s, I'm amazed at how Elmer Gantry and its treatment of religion (or rather, the "revivalist" movements that branched off from the core concept of religion) still seem to hold up well in the eyes of somebody who was born in the early 1990s. Such is the strength of the story, especially when brought to life by a handful of great, perfectly believable actors - and of course, Burt Lancaster as the eponymous Gantry. Based on this and Sweet Smell of Success, I've started to realise that he's actually a very good actor with great screen presence, and it makes me want to check out more of his films now.

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

Dragon Wars -

Well, despite reading horrible reviews and hearing dreadful things about Dragon Wars from friends,I just had to see it for myself. And.....*sigh*. The acting was awful, the story was paper-thin, and the action--while really cool in some places--was way overdone. Way too many lengthy action sequences and not enough story or substance.

It was somewhat of a pleasure to watch on Blu-ray (yes, I actually purchased it on Blu-ray...but at least I got it on sale, heh), but I probably won't be watching it again.

Rock My World -

+



As I'm getting closer and closer to completing my Top 100 Favorite Films list (which I've been working on for the better part of two months now), I'm rewatching a bunch of movies that I know I like a lot but don't remember completely. I'm doing this for confirmation that I want to include these films in question on the list, and Rock My World aced that test with flying colors. An awesome dramatic comedy with great performances, plenty of fun humor, and a story that's simply inspiring to watch unfold.

18 Again! -

+



I had seen 18 Again! once before and I felt it was time to revisit it, and I found the film to be a pleasure to watch a second time. 18 Again! is a heartwarming comedy about an eighty-one year-old man who "switches bodies" with his eighteen-year-old grandson and, as a result, temporarily live each others' lives. It's a movie about self-discovery, and I feel it delivered its theme very well. A very good movie, despite a few so-so spots throughout.

__________________
"The mind is its own place, and in itself
Can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven."
John Milton, Paradise Lost

My Movie Review Thread | My Top 100

Great review Mark. I just caught up with this film on dvd and agree with your thoughts. I laughed a lot too, but it was the sheer exuberance of Marjane coupled with her resiliance that won me over. If anyone watches this it's well worth seeing the 'making of' to appreciate the amount of work that goes into producing an old fashioned hand drawn animation like this one, as well as seeing Marjane and the mark she makes on everyone around her.

I'm watching Spiderman 2 again, J.K. Simmons steals every scene he's in.

__________________
"Don't be so gloomy. After all it's not that awful. Like the fella says, in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock."

Kill Bill, Vol. 1
Quentin Tarantino, 2003

I haven't watched this in awhile, so I thought that it was time to give it another watch. I loved it just as much as I remember, much like every other one of Tarantino's movies. His films are perfect, IMO, and while he may not be my favorite director, he's sure either my second or third. Right from the very start I knew this was going to be something special. One of the best things about this is it's over-the-top violence, except for the first fight between the Bride and Vernita. Everyother fight was really over-the-top, especially the Crazy 88's battle. People were getting their arms and legs chopped off, and blood was squirting out of them like a giezer. It's definitely over-the-top. This is probably Tarantino's most 'actiony' movie so far, but even this didn't totally focus on action. As I remember though, there really wasn't much action in volume 2 at all.

Uma Thurman was the perfect choice for the role of the Bride. She's probably one of the greatest characters of all-time, to me at least. I do wish Gogo could've had more fighting time though, because I thought she was a really cool fighter. I did really notice a similarty between the opening fight of this, and the opening fight of Watchmen, though. It seems like they were done in the same style. I knew the beginning fight in Watchmen did seem like a fight out of Kill Bill, especially in both when they start using a knife. It's like they were exactly the same.

Even though, I already own both volume 1 and 2, I still may buy The Whole Bloody Affair once it comes out on DVD. It's actually supposed to be released pretty soon, if I remember that article that was released recently correctly. I think it may have just been more rumor's though. I'm really not sure if we'll ever get it, actually. Any fan of Tarantino would definitely love this, but I'm sure most Tarantino fans would've have seen it by now. I sadly didn't get the chance of seeing it until a few months back. I think any movie fan would enjoy this movie, though, even if you aren't a fan of Tarantino. I really can't wait to watch volume 2 again tomorrow night; I would've watched it tonight, but I didn't have enough time.

Trouble Every Day (Denis,2001) -



After hearing much about Trouble Every Day, and considering how much I loved L'Intrus, I thought I would give it a go. Now, a fair warning to all of those who choose to watch this: it is very, very disturbing. Trouble Every Day follows Shane and June Brown on their honeymoon to Paris. Shane has a "mysterious" condition, and he longs to find the cure. Eventually, he meets another individual (the seductress Core) with the same condition.

Denis does a wonderful job at creating tone and atmosphere. Agnes Godard (she does almost all of, if not all of Denis' cinematography) creates some amazingly moody cinematography. Godard created some absolutely blissful cinematography in L'Intrus and it carries over very well. Each scene seems to almost be lit by natural sources, which is something I like very much. She manages to bring a very strong visial color palette with the moody cinematography mixed with the (almost) natural-esque lighting.However, in some cases I found that the musical choices conflicted slightly with the overall film; but not to the point of ruining anything.

Denis' narrative is always very experimental. For example, there is hardly any dialogue in L'Intrus - the same is true for Trouble Every Day. This is something I really admire. Denis clearly refuses to utilize exposition and linear script structures - she asks a lot of us. But the difficulty of her narrative is what makes it much interesting. Often times, in either film, we may not "totally understand" what direction the film is heading - which is perfectly fine. She requires us to think and mull over each action without dialogue, and without the needless exposition. Many might prefer the more linear, structured nature of conventional films, but I encourage even those who do to give it a shot. Denis' experimental narrative is what I've always admired and has kept me interested.

Now, the acting left a little to be desired. I am not a huge fan of Gallo in acting form, but he isn't terrible here. Sometimes he doesn't seem to be paying much attention as to what's going on - but somehow, he does manage to "fit" the film. Beatrice Dalle, however, was great - per usual. She did wonderfully with what little she had in L'Intrus, and having more to work with this time really paid off well for her.

Overall, a fine film; however, I will say that I still love L'Intrus much more. I do think that this film has a bad reputation and can be misleading given the content of the work, as it involves cannibalism, but on a much deeper level it's about society's moral decay, sexual urges, and love.

Recommended (assuming you can handle the content of the film).

Very interesting, Justin. You also mentioned that you prefer Paranoid Park to Milk. I found that Milk allowed Van Sant to get his avant garde filmmaking techniques into mainstream films, especially his editing and photographic flourishes near the beginning. I found Paranoid Park a minor step up from Elephant and Gerry, but I still don't find it storytelling at all. It's cinematic, but it doesn't tell a story, at least to me.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

I guess I am one of the few who liked Elephant.

Maybe or maybe you're just "young at heart".

Milk did allow Van Sant to showcase his avant-garde techniques, absolutely. There are avant-garde aspects, but the film itself is very ordinary. I hope this isn't as confusing as I think it will be to read, but my opinion is Milk is very mixed.

While watching the film, I kept getting the feeling that his experimental techniques were trying to break out, but the nature of the screenplay and the overall film was far too restrictive; basically, his talent felt very "caged". Technically, it's well done. But as a story, it's far too conventional and ordinary - almost to the point of boredom. Paranoid Park, by contrast, would not have worked if Van Sant had used a more conventional screenplay and done away with the very "uncinematic" feel of the overall film. That's why I think Milk is a little weak and why I have a problem with it; it's conventional narrative is in conflict with it's experimental aesthetic. Van Sant didn't seem to know which way to take the film; he needed (in my opinion) to pick.

A nos amours (Pialat,1983) -



A nos amours tells the story of a 15 year old promiscuous girl. However, the problem is, that she doesn't necessarily have any feelings for any of these boys. She does it for fun. At home, her dysfunctional family doesn't understand her behavior and constantly give her beatings; both physically and vocally.

Now, I have very mixed feelings about the cinematography. There were some very authentically beautiful moments and visuals, but several scenes are almost ruined by some - in my opinion, anyway - poor directorial choices and bad technical work. Most of the cinematography consists of medium-wide shots (wide shots from the waist up, usually). I found this to be an awesome directorial decision. We can clearly tell by these choices what the Pialat is saying - very rarely do we see any extreme close-ups. A majority of the frames do not move, and are stationary and very meticulously placed. That much was very, very well-done. Now, what bothered me considerably was the use of the dolly and dolly-zoom. This was extremely bothersome and ultimately very distracting. It was almost infuriating to see such great cinematography marred by irritating, quick dolly movements that didn't necessarily need to be there in the first place. I'm not fond of dolly-zooms or dollyshots to begin with, but they can be used properly. What seems to cause these shot choices not to work would be the lack of movement in the characters - it's much more noticeable in this case.

Either the acting is stellar, or leaves a lot to be desired with A nos amours. Sandrine Bonnaire was fantastic, as usual. Her role required tremendous subtly, and she lived up to it and surpassed it. Sandrine managed to convey everything she needed to with her eyes and features. Another remarkable performance was Cyr Boitard, as Luc. Despite the fact we only see him a few times, he does a wonderful job. Both Sandrine and Cyr are capable of expressing themselves without the theatrics and melodrama. Now, two performances that were completely unbelievable were both the brother and the mother. They both seemed to be far to theatrical, and less natural. For that reason, I didn't buy their relationship at all. It seemed completely unreal. However, some of the most intense moments were still felt because of Sandrine's wonderful performance. Sandrine's father in A nos amours was also quite good - their more "quiet" moments were extremely well done. So, for the most part the acting is good. But several moments were almost ruined due to several poor performances.

Overall, a nice film. Try and not let my rating fool you. I did like the film a lot; it was very well-done, but ultimately very uneven. Some serious issues are brought up in the film and handled wonderfully. It deals with how a dysfunctional, abusive family can have huge repercussions on a person's life and their ability to love another and to feel loved in return.

Recommended.

Kill Bill, Vol. 2
Quentin Tarantino, 2004

You know, even though I've seen volume 1 numerous times now, I think this was only my second viewing of volume 2. I honestly have no idea why though, because I think I may even prefer this one to volume 1. They were always about equal for me, but with this viewing, it just seemed better to me. Not like a lot better, but still better nonetheless. I did notice some similarities between the score for this and the score for The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly, but that's Quentin Tarantino for you. He loves to pay homage to many of other movies in his movies, but he's still one of my all-time favorite directors. Another thing I noticed, even though it has really nothing to do with the movie, is that Michael Madson really looks pretty old in this. I mean in Reservior Dogs, which he did 12 years before this, he looked in his 20's maybe early 30's, and in this, he looked to be in his 50's. I'm sure he looks even older by now. He was still one of my favorite characters of the series, though, right behind Beatrix and Bill.

This one really focused a lot more on story than the first one did, even though the first one did focus a lot on story. There was much more action in the first, while there was barely in this, aside from a couple of scenes. Tarantino is really a genius at filmmaking, and he shouldn't stop until he really has to. This is really making me want to go re-watch the rest of his movies now, and I still have Jackie Brown to see for the first time. It's also seeming to up my hype for Ingourious Basterds. Anyone who hasn't seen the series yet should get to it sometime soon, though. I really thought it was weird how they split up the two movies, I mean, even though timing would've been off, they shoud've taken the first hour from this and added it to volume 1. Because I feel the first half of this had the mood from volume 1, but the second half just completely changes the tone. It really wouldn't have worked though, because it would have made volume 1: 3 hours long, and volume 2: barely an hour long.

I watched all three of these films for the same reason - I picked up the soundtrack albums for every one of them the other day.



Beavis and Butt-Head Do America (Judge, 1996) -

I doubt my rating for this will ever change. It's amusing all right, but it never feels truly great (unlike the South Park movie, for example) and it's really just a mindless way to pass an hour or so.



Trainspotting (Boyle, 1996) -

Still pretty good, a fast-paced and visually striking piece of cinema.



Lost Highway (Lynch, 1997) -

Yeah, I'm in the minority that doesn't reckon this film was crap. Nothing I can say to change anyone's mind about it - I'll just say that I actually enjoy watching it, purely and honestly.

Woah, I'm forever staying away from that last movie. That picture creeps me out man.

__________________
I used to be addicted to crystal meth, now I'm just addicted to Breaking Bad.

Wuss. Get some Lynch into you.

Movieman you should check out Takeshi's Zatoichi film if you really enjoyed Kill Bill. The sword fights are much more realistic in Takeshi's , but they both have the same exaggerated blood.



The story telling is done in a much different style though , the american trailer is hilariously misleading.

__________________

Thanks for the suggestion. I may check it out sometime.

Cool Hand Luke
Stuart Rosenberg, 1967

I don't know, before I watched this, I was just expecting something different than what it actually was. It was way more simpler than I thought it was going to be, but that isn't a bad thing. I did feel that it seemed to get sort of slow during the second half, which is why this isn't a full perfect score from me. I really, really loved the first half, and if the whole movie was like the first half, my score would've been a perfect score. It might've gotten a bit tedious if the whole movie was like that. The best thing about the second half was that it really helped Newman's acting really shine. Like his acting in the second half was incredible, but still not as incredible as in Butch Cassidy And The Sundance Kid. No movie of his that I see will ever top his performance in that. I really liked Newman's best friend, Dragline, in this though. I think he was my favorite character in the whole movie, even more than Luke. George Kennedy did a great job with that role.

This movie is really a true classic, and I don't see how you couldn't call it a true classic. I really can't wait to continue seeing more of Newman's movies though, because he's truely an amazing actor. If you haven't had a chance to check this one out yet, I'd highly recommend it, especially if you like Newman. I would probably call this my second favorite prison movie, right after The Shawshank Redemption, and maybe The Green Mile.