You get only ONE chance

I saw some other people make similar observations. I guess there would be no reason to cut at all if it was real? At least, that wouldn't make any sense to me. I can be ok with this stuff if it is fake, but I am 100% with you for anything unsimulated.

That was my first impression. Any thoughts on the use of the cut?

"Umberto D" is one of my favorite movies by my favorite director. The last time my brother and I had a laugh was after he saw this movie, and couldn't stop laughing because of one scene.. Umberto needs change, so he buys a cup/glass, and nonchalantly just throws/breaks in into the street to get it. Like it was customary.



"Wild Strawberries" is a 10/10, and Bergman is one of the best ever.



After watching only American movies, I'd get bored to death. It's like women, food, music, etc... Just one brand? I doubt I'll ever watch a "classic Hollywood" or noir again. It's like eating bread every night. But I don't want something so far out that it's unique, but not enjoyable.

__________________
https://www.youtube.com/c/LoyalOpposition

I feel Takoma I'd probably right..it's been years since I've seen that scene and I remember being caught off guard by it, and so just immediately assumed it was real. Didn't want to Rewind to check.

I went down a YouTube rabbit hole and ended up watching a Polish vlogger interviewing Jim Cummings, and Cummings said he thought that a Polish film (Corpus Christi) was the best movie he saw that year, so I put it on my watchlist.

I found it to be a really powerful meditation on faith and forgiveness, and how those things intersect with the natural tendency to form cliques and alliances in any social situation.

That kind of stuff is a deal-breaker for me, so if I'd thought it was real at the time, I probably wouldn't have finished the film.

I mean, I also think there's just as good a chance that they MEANT to hit the badger in that long take but somehow missed it. Obviously the animal's safety wasn't a priority for anyone who put that sequence together, whether the animal was actually killed or not.

Yeah, I will not watch films with real animal deaths (with some very rare exceptions), and I tend to immediately stop a film if it pops up. I'm very glad that the internet has made it so much easier to screen for it these days.

The Counselor

Yes, that's one huge benefit! It has come in handy for me many a time.

Well, I trust you guys on this one. It will go on my to-watch list on the medium-timescale.

Ha---I'm only concerned about animals here!

Doesthedogdie.com has been an absolute gift to me.

If you want to skip the badger part, it comes right at the beginning and it's super obvious what's coming. After she runs over it, I don't think you see it again.

My watchlist is pretty ridiculous at the moment (I'm having a very watchlist-focused year next year.)

Oh - and American Animals is great.

My movie is A Matter of Dignity (1958)

__________________

I hope it goes without saying that this movie will not be for everyone.

I hope you will take it as a compliment that I know that your recommendations may sometimes feel . . . challenging as a viewer. Forewarned is forearmed!

The secret is to discover the invisible line that exists between challenging and awful.



And then to debate pointlessly at which side of it Reflections of Evil falls on.


For me, you'll find it on the same side as Orson Welles. For others, it will be keeping company with pigeon droppings and body odour and Baby Driver.

Thanks, that website looks very helpful for the future!

I am about 20 minutes in, and this is why I like threads/conversations like this because I would have never watched this on my own. The Tony Curtis overdub intro is amazing, and the lead actor losing his mind next to a bus stop poster of Miss Congeniality was hilarious. The loudly over-dubbed background conversations are incredible. "THAT'S TAFFY! YOU GET BETTER STYLES!"

I'm entirely serious when I say that if an animal appears in a horror or thriller film, I go immediately to that site. I has saved me from at least three films with unsimulated animal cruelty, one of which sounded particularly horrific.

What you say in jest, I think many would say in earnest. We tend to be much more concerned about the stunt animal than the stunt person. Where is the website that shows us if humans were hurt in the making of the film?

While yes, it’s a real concern (or should be at least) stunt men, or stunt women, taking risks of their own volition in accordance with the job requirements is not the same thing as an animal being hurt (without their consent!) for a scene in the movie.