Movie Tab II

Tools    





Awesome. Don't miss out on several other Loy and Powell combo's as well. Like: Double Wedding, (probably my favorite after The Thin Man movies) Evelyn Prentice, Manhattan Melodrama, The Great Ziegfeld, Love Crazy and a few others that I have yet to see. They all are pretty enjoyable as far as I'm concerned.
__________________
We are both the source of the problem and the solution, yet we do not see ourselves in this light...



Welcome to the human race...
Withnail & I




I can kinda-sorta see why some people love it, but I get the impression you have to appreciate being drunk on a higher level to really adore it, and I'm not a big drinker. That said, there are some genuinely hysterical moments (my favorites: the sitting chicken, and the "burglary" line). Perhaps it'll get a higher rating if I see it again, but at the moment I just found it to be fairly above-average, with sporadic moments of highly amusing greatness.
I'm not exactly a big drinker either and Withnail and I is easily Top 10-20 material for me. Like most cult classics, it's a very love-or-hate affair and I didn't exactly think it was the greatest movie I'd ever seen on first viewing (as a matter of fact, I'd say it took about five viewings to get everything that was going on with the plot - even now, there are still things I pick up on new viewings). I just find it a constantly rewarding viewing experience.

Harold and Maude


No offense meant to anyone who enjoys it.
None taken.
__________________
I really just want you all angry and confused the whole time.
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0



Thursday Next's Avatar
I never could get the hang of Thursdays.
Harold and Maude


but Maude is a bad person masquerading as a free spirit. I didn't find her car-stealing, police-defying antics to be cute or charming, just horrendously inconsiderate,
I'm not sure that she was supposed to be some kind of shining example of how to live your life, though. That would be a bit trite, wouldn't it? A bit Hollywood. I thought all the characters were a bit more three dimensional than that - everybody's messed up in some way or other.

I have to think that it's one of those films some people like just because it's offbeat, and therefore says something about them if they like it.
I think people can like something because it's offbeat. It's a taste some people have. I don't think the second part of that stands up, though. Can't people like something without trying to 'say something about themselves'? I'm not trying to say something about myself every time I say I like a film. Otherwise there's a few films I like I'd probably keep quiet about...



I'm not exactly a big drinker either and Withnail and I is easily Top 10-20 material for me. Like most cult classics, it's a very love-or-hate affair and I didn't exactly think it was the greatest movie I'd ever seen on first viewing (as a matter of fact, I'd say it took about five viewings to get everything that was going on with the plot - even now, there are still things I pick up on new viewings). I just find it a constantly rewarding viewing experience.
I can totally buy that; I think I had a pretty decent handle on the plot, but it was fairly dense and a lot of the slang went over my head, so I think the whole affair would be a bit clearer and therefore possibly more enjoyable. Not that I didn't like it very much.

I'm not sure that she was supposed to be some kind of shining example of how to live your life, though. That would be a bit trite, wouldn't it? A bit Hollywood. I thought all the characters were a bit more three dimensional than that - everybody's messed up in some way or other.
I think it's pretty clear we were supposed to admire her, at least somewhat. She says all these grandiose emotional things about life and how to live it, she gets away with everything, it wins Harold over completely (aren't those little speeches about life one of the reasons he fell for her?), and she's one of the titular characters. It's all painted in a pretty positive light, and I can't think of anything offhand that suggests otherwise. I've only seen it once, though, so let me know if I'm forgetting something.

Anyway, even if we assume she isn't meant to be sympathetic or likable, I'm not sure that leaves the film in a much better place, because it doesn't give Harold much reason to admire her.

I think people can like something because it's offbeat. It's a taste some people have. I don't think the second part of that stands up, though. Can't people like something without trying to 'say something about themselves'? I'm not trying to say something about myself every time I say I like a film. Otherwise there's a few films I like I'd probably keep quiet about...
Oh sure, of course people can like something without trying to say something about themselves, I'm just saying sometimes this isn't the case. I certainly know a few people who seem a bit more concerned with what their taste in films says about them than one would like, and I think it's fair to say we all do this on some unconscious level.

I'm certainly not suggesting that anyone who likes this film has some ulterior motive. You'll have to forgive some of my speculation; I've been reading a lot of Chuck Klosterman lately, and he likes to delve into this sort of thing. I'm particularly intrigued by the idea that some people can begin to think of themselves as a "type" of person, and inadvertantly allow that to influence their taste in art.



i couldn't stand maude, in harold and maude. i don't know that i mind her being a "bad" person, so much as an obnoxiously smug person. disclaimer: i've only seen that movie once.

over the weekend-

\\
showgirls

the final destination

ponyo



The People's Republic of Clogher
Withnail & I




I can kinda-sorta see why some people love it, but I get the impression you have to appreciate being drunk on a higher level to really adore it, and I'm not a big drinker. That said, there are some genuinely hysterical moments (my favorites: the sitting chicken, and the "burglary" line). Perhaps it'll get a higher rating if I see it again, but at the moment I just found it to be fairly above-average, with sporadic moments of highly amusing greatness.
I got hooked on Withnail & I when I was a student in the early 90s in the north of England. It just so happened that our landlady had a cottage in the Lake District that we used to rent in the summer. Not far from Penrith, actually.

The little village (more of a hamlet of a few houses actually, it was called Hilton I think) even had its own Withnail-style pub, run by a sozzled old dear and populated by various farmer types.

Once the novelty of walking through fields with the ex-Mrs T shouting "We've gone on holiday by mistake!" and "Are you the farmer?" had worn off we were left with frequently awful weather and one video - Withnail & I. And a sensational cellar.

It just never grows old for me, even though I admit it's a bit dated and certainly not to everyone's taste. It's as warm and snug as your favourite pair of slippers.
__________________
"Critics are like eunuchs in a harem; they know how the Tatty 100 is done, they've seen it done every day, but they're unable to do it themselves." - Brendan Behan



birdygyrl's Avatar
MovieForums Extra
She Done Him Wrong - 1933 - Lowell Sherman - A



Holy smoke!! Mae West was the total package...she was sultry, simmering, and had sex appeal oozing out of every pore!! No wonder people thought this was risque for its time. And Cary Grant....even back then totally suave.


The Navigator - 1924 - Donald Crisp - A



There is just something about Buster Keaton that tickles my funny bone. I always end up laughing out loud at the classic slapstick. I love his leading lady, Kathryn McGuire. She definitely held her own while working with the master.

To Be or Not To Be - 1942 - Ernst Lubitsch - B



I just love Carole Lombard.

My Man Godfrey - 1936 - Gregory LaCava - A



Again, Carole Lombard. And William Powell always lends class to whatever film he stars in.

Its A Gift - 1934 - Norman Z. McLeod - C



I know this is a classic, but I just ending up getting annoyed instead of entertained. I think my funny bone was on hiatus.
__________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons.....for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.



Bright light. Bright light. Uh oh.
This is a friendly response to what's been posted thus far about Harold and Maude.

Harold and Maude
certainly isn't meant to be some political diatribe. It's not about economics or conservatiism vs. liberalism, although it wouldn't be hard to pull that out if you want to discuss where its heart lies. Do I look up to Maude? Of course I do. She's not like anybody else. Is she wacky and a wacko? Of course; that's why I love her. Harold and Maude is just much simpler in its basics than people seem to think it is, although its details can be complex. Harold represents Death and Maude represents Life. That's not anything too tough to grasp. If you find this a simplistic look at life, especially for a draft-age kid who could go to Vietnam at anytime (it was made in 1971) somehow personally insulting, then I think you're taking it much too seriously. Yes, and that includes the fact that Maude is a survivor of a Nazi concentration camp (remember the tattooed number on her arm?)

First and foremost, Harry and Maude is a comedy, and one I've been laughing at out loud at for almost 27 years now. It's definitely one of the blackest comedies ever made, but it probably does have the funniest sets of "deaths" of any black comedy I've seen. I do not find anything reasonable about any of the characters that the film seems to make fun of, nor do I find the concept of being drafted to go and fight in a war which seems to have no meaning something to be proud about doing. Harold was probably supposed to be about seven years older than I am, but I was in the last group that actually had their birth dates numbered in the draft, so even if it happened to me after I saw Harold and Maude, I definitely can relate to something about why Harold sees death as the way to live and "fake death" as preferable to real death.

Secondly, Harold and Maude is very romantic. Yes, the Priest's verbalization of what it would be like for Harold and Maude to make love makes him sick, but I find it hilarious. Harold and Maude is one of those films where you can see why opposites attract or maybe even why people who are actually similar at heart seem to be opposites; they were born at different times and went through similar things at different times. You just need to sit down and talk with someone about why they seem different. I mean, even Harold is a bit taken aback at how brazen Maude's antics seem to be, but whatever you say, Maude never really hurts anybody. At least not compared to what she must have lived through in the camps. Besides, Maude knows what we do not know. Maude knows how everything will turn out, and she lets Harold make his own choice on how to live and whether to die. If you ask me, if Maude wasn't good for Harold, then the ending would have been a much bigger downer than it is.

My fave scenes in the flick, besides Harold's suicides, are the ending, the awesome scene where they're having a picnic, pick flowers and then the camera pulls back to show you where they are, and the scene with the motorcycle cop. If you don't know, the cop is played by Tom Skerritt (Alien), and he's hilarious. Now, if I had some reason to be worried about any of the characters running around loose on the street who might actually endanger people, it would be this cop. If his pistol didn't misfire, he probably would have shot a pedestrian stone dead.

I'm glad that Yoda liked the song score. I find Colin Higgins' script almost perfection, and I also would pick Harold and Maude as Hal Ashby's apex of direction, even if it was only his second film. My rating:
, and yes, it should be in mafo's Top 100.
__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page



One friendly response deserves another.

I don't think it's a political diatribe, unless you're using the word "political" in a very broad sense. It's certainly a movie with a philosophy, though, and that philosophy is largely the one Maude espouses. It values a certain kind of living based in impulsiveness and unrestricted by peer pressure or social judgment. On some level this is a lovely thought and the idea that we shouldn't refrain from doing things just because some people find them odd is so widely accepted that it probably qualifies as a truism. But it takes this principle a lot further than even your freest spirits usually care to.

Maude doesn't technically hurt anyone, true, but she certainly puts people in danger, and I hardly find the idea of stealing cars endearing. The fact that she has some pseudo-rationalization for why stealing them is okay (because she's a "reminder" about how transient material things are, more or less) makes it worse, to my mind. I don't know if the film is wholeheartedly embracing her on this point, but it sure isn't passing judgment on her. I guess I don't find the idea that she hasn't physically harmed anyone to be a very compelling point in her favor. To me, she's inconsiderate and selfish. I don't find the movie insulting, I just feel like it's suggesting that I should like a character that I don't.

I thought the numbers on her arm were a fascinating inclusion, even if it wasn't explored much. I'd probably have given it an even lower rating if not for that one moment. I like speculating about how that may have made her into who she is, even though I think the film's seeming endorsement of her behavior undermines all the speculation I find most fascinating about it.

The comedy angle is the one way I can relate to someone enjoying Harold and Maude, I think. I found a few parts amusing, but I don't know if I let out an honest-to-goodness laugh at any point. But I can see the humor in the scenes you describe, Mark, and it's no mystery to me why someone would find this movie pretty funny, even if I didn't.



i found maude to be a grating presence, simple as that.

the movie seemed to give both main characters a sense of entitlement to cause mischief and feel like they were doing good deeds to the world and their various victims.

i wouldn't necessarily mind it if she did hurt people in the film. meanness can be very funny, at least to me. maybe that's part of my problem. that harold and maude are supposed to be nice people, innocent little outsiders and victims. taints all their impish pranks with a little too much smarmy self-righteousness for me to really enjoy their activities or like their characters. i think i would like them better if they were just plain old unpretentious jerks.



I wouldn't, there's plenty of crappy movies already out there full of pretentious jerks.

Harold and Maude is most definitely my kind of film and I hope you guys give it another go sometime.

After reading Mark's excellent post it really baffles me how some of the members on this site like to take potshots at the guy for not making coherent posts. That was everything I could ever have wanted to say about it and more.



yoda's response is much more thoughtful than mine. i don't even think i got past my gut-reaction of disgust for the two title characters (which had nothing to do with their supposedly-transgressive sexual relationship). i just wanted to add that i did find the romantic angle more compelling than the comedy angle in the film, but couldn't really like either of them enough to get too worked up emotionally.



I wouldn't, there's plenty of crappy movies already out there full of pretentious jerks.
hey, i think you misread my post. i was calling harold and maude pretentious jerks. you may disagree with that characterization, just wanted to make sure you understood what i actually said.

i don't have any intention of re-watching harold & maude, though i wouldn't avoid it either if a friend brings it to a movie night or something. on the other hand i would like to see another hal ashby film - being there - some time.



I can dig it.

Unrelated, (sort of) I was told that Airplane! is a comedic masterpiece and when I finally saw it I found it drab and actually tiring to watch. I still chuckled a bit at all the lines I'd been hearing for almost 30 years but the movie is crap and mostly unwatchable. To me.



Blasphemy.
__________________
"Film is a disease. When it infects your bloodstream it takes over as the number one hormone. It bosses the enzymes, directs the pineal gland, plays Iago to your psyche. As with heroin, the antidote to Film is more Film." - Frank Capra





Soldier of Orange
(Paul Verhoeven 1977)

Another film I've been meaning to see for years now; this finally fell at my feet a few days back (by way of Help the Aged) and I snapped up the opportunity. Soldier of Orange is the first pre-Hollywood film of Verhoeven and Hauer (both of whom I admire greatly) that I've seen. So quite why I've never got off my behind and watched this before is anybody's business.

Adapted from Erik Hazelhoff Roelfzema's (who lived the story and is played by Hauer) novel Soldaat Van Oranje; it tells the tale of the differing life defining choices and journeys made by a group of Dutch university students under Nazi occupation.

Soldier of Orange is the quickest 149 minutes I've ever sat through. Highly political it sucked me right in with it's candid exploration of the feelings and attitudes held by young (oblivious) Dutch men and women towards the Nazis. Indeed Before the invasion when asked what he thinks of Hitler, Erik merely comments 'he builds good autobahns'. But these idylls are soon shattered when the Jewish tutors are removed from their University, and a close friend executed as a Jewish insurgent.

I found the characterisation and acting here particularly excellent (especially from Hauer and Jeroen Krabbe as his swaggering best friend Guus). What motivated some of the group to join the resistance whilst others collaborated, and the re-percussions this has, is the real meat of Soldier of Orange. Ultimately it works as both a gripping war thriller, and a heart wrenching exploration of freedom, loyalty, and betrayal. Plus the final sequence links so beautifully with the the films opening credits that I understand perfectly why the Dutch feel such patriotic pride for this film. Highly recommended.



Zero Woman: Red Handcuffs (Yukio Noda, 1974)

Back to exploitation again with another classic Pinku film recommended to me by a reliable source. Not to be confused with later (and I'm told rubbish) Zero Woman outings; this is the original film starring Miki Sugimoto of Girl Boss Guerilla (1972), Delinquent Girl Boss (1972), and Girl Boss Revenge (1973) fame.

Sugimoto plays Rei, a hard as nails female cop jailed for killing (with her trusty red handcuffs) an American serial killer and rapist who had political connections. After languishing in prison where most of the inmates are women she put away; Rei's soon being recruited to infiltrate and assassinate a sadistic gang of kidnappers who've raped and taken the daughter of a powerful politician hostage...

Zero Woman: Red Handcuffs is nuts...completely and utterly crazy. When Noda isn't tilting the camera at 45 degree angles, he's intercutting haunting freeze frame images of characters' past histories during action sequences, and splashing liberal amounts of bright 70's blood all over the place. The story is a wafer thin excuse for lurid violence badly lacking a sense of humour, but it still works thanks to the film's savvy comic book aesthetic, and some well edited set pieces. Sugimoto looks suitably mean but lacks the silent charisma of a Meiko Kaji, or the raw sex appeal of Reiko Ike, despite being very pretty. She's still highly watchable though, and the support (especially the kidnap gang) is laughably over the top in a good way. They sure don't make them like this any more.



Powder
(Victor Salva, 1995)
-
Another film I've been meaning to see for years, and I'm almost sorry I bothered. After reading countless good write ups that say Powder is an original heart warming movie with strong performances, not to mention seeing Lance Henriksen in the cast; I figured it was essential viewing. In reality it left me cold...well feeling sick to be exact.

Sean Patrick Flannery is Jeremy 'Powder' Reed, a highly intelligent albino teenager found living in his deceased grandfather's basement (where he's been all his life) by sheriff Barnum (Henriksen). Soon he's being buttered up, and whisked off to school by Jessie (Mary Steenburgen); a misguided psychologist friend of Barnum's. Naturally a group of bad kids bully him, a sensitive girl falls for him, and there's a hip friendly teacher (Jeff Goldblum) who wants to understand and befriend him. Oh yeah, and he's got some special powers that revolve around electricity...blah blah blah.

Am I being cold hearted and cynical? You bet I am. Powder is an interesting premise all but ruined by schmaltzy half baked philosophy, and a cloyingly intrusive slushy score. Most of the time Flannery walks around like he just got off the set of Nick Roeg's The Man Who Fell to Earth, and whilst Powder is relatively sympathetic in terms of his predicament; I found his wet, detached non-personality a complete turn off. Now don't get me wrong, I consider myself quite a sensitive person, and like the odd bit of sentimentality in my movies if it's quirky and restrained. But in my opinion Powder is hackneyed and predictable in every way imaginable, with only the solid casting to recommend it.



Flavia the Heretic (Gianfranco Mingozzi, 1974)

Often labelled as the best of the (hardly prolific) 'nunsploitation' subgenre (of which the only other films I've heard of are Juan Lopez Moctezuma's Alucarda, and Giullio Beruti's Killer Nun); Flavia the Heretic came as something of a nasty surprise to me. Nasty in that I found it as disturbing and sadistic as anything I've seen, and a surprise in that the film still managed to bravely explore interesting themes surrounding religion, feminism, masculinity and sexual awakening.

In 1400 era Italy, Flavia (the gorgeous Florinda Bolkan from Lizard in a Woman's Skin) is confined to a nunnery along with her sister by their misogynistic father and king. Everywhere she turns Flavia witnesses the cruelty, and oppression of women by men; be it the brutal torture and mutilation of her sister after cavorting stoned with a tarantula cult; the matter-of-fact castration of a horse; or the casual rape of a farm girl. Never having experienced 'the pleasures of man' as her mentor Sister Agatha (Maria Casares) puts it. Flavia remains a virgin, dismissive of sex as a woman's weapon. That is until an invading Muslim army shows up and she falls for it's leader Ahmed (Anthony Higgins) who reminds her of a dying soldier she fell in love with as a little girl...

Slow and downbeat Flavia the Heretic is definitely exploitation, but it's exploitation wrapped around a decent script, reasonable production values, and luscious photography. Historical accuracies aside the film feels very believable and makes some unflinching statements on human nature; particularly the dark side of man, and how religion was (and is) used as an excuse to control and abuse both sexes (but particularly women). Flavia's spiritual journey throughout the film, although tinged by revenge is nevertheless rewarding if you can stomach it. The gory violence is very shocking (at least I thought so) but it's relevant to the story and never feels like titillation for the sake of cheap thrills. Bolkan is fine as Flavia, but Maria Casares as the influential, bitter and outspoken Sister Agatha steals it. Overall not for regular audience consumption, but if this sounds like your kind of thing...



Bright light. Bright light. Uh oh.
Greyfriars Bobby (Don Chaffey, 1961)




Another Disney flick whose cast is crammed with British veterans and shot in Britain. It's the story of a Skye terrier who loves his owner so much that he follows him into Edinburgh where the man dies and then the dog proceeds to sleep every night on top of his former owner's grave. The dog is mostly everyone's favorite, but he violates just enough laws that he comes up before the local magistrates who have to send him away unless somebody will truthfully declare him as their own dog. This film qualifies as one of those films that make people cry. It's based on a true story, and it's really a joyous flick, especially if you're an animal lover. In fact, if you love dogs or other pets, watch this and tell me what you think of it.

Lone Wolf and Cub: Baby Cart in Peril (Buichi Saito, 1972)




Number four in the series begins with a naked woman covered with tattoos killing guys left and right, so it gets your attention right up front. The middle of the film isn't as interesting as it brings back one of the earlier characters, but then the ending has one of the most humongous action scenes in the entire series. In fact, if I didn't know any better, I'd say the Lone Wolf was dead, but somehow he walks away at the end with his cub and baby cart. Maybe I should post this series over at the thread about Immortality in Films.

Sin Nombre (Cary Fukanaga, 2009)




This is an intense saga about how gangs (and a specific gang at that) rules the Mexican border from Central America to the United States. It tells the story of how "gangsters" are recruited, how they must follow a code unless they decide they have the guts to try to leave, which usually results in a death sentence. This film tells the story of a Honduran girl and a Mexican boy who hook up on a northbound train although he's wanted for a murder of a gangster jefe. The film is low-budget but alive, although it doesn't really reveal anything new about the gang problem even if it does paint a bit more specific picture of the chief gang in Mexico at our present time. I recommend that you give it a watch but don't expect anything too terrific, although director Fukanaga shows signs of real talent, especially composition of his cinematography and suspense.

Nightmare Alley (Edmund Goulding, 1947)




Very good Jules Furthman-scripted flick which transitions from cheap carnivals to nightclubs to female psychologist's offices to rich men's cemeteries, has one of Tyrone Power's greatest performances and some superb B&W photography which out-noirs almost every other film noir in its "black" qualities. Besides a terrific performance from Power, little-known Ian Keith gives a solid performance as the husband and partner of Joan Blondell. This film is incredibly complex and touches on elements of God and faith which most films just don't have the guts to delve into. Although the flick could have been better, it's still powerful and any film which discusses what a real geek is deserves some respect.

Andrei Rublev (Andrei Tarkovsky, 1966)




To me, this is Tarkovsky's masterpiece, but I realize that some members believe that the man can do no wrong. To me, that seems really weird. Tarkovsky went out of his way to make films which people could not understand on any basic level. If I could somehow magically understand everything which an artist goes out of his way to make sure that I cannot understand on first appearance, then I would have to think that I was some sort of Idiot Savant. Tarkovsky wants people to understand but I'd say it's impossible to understand most of his flicks without repetitive viewings and discussions with similar viewers. This film is about an artist who makes no art whatsoever during the film. It's also about a monk/iconographer who believes in beauty but is completely surrounded by ugliness, pain and death. Obviously, the film is full of contradictions and bizarre, unique visuals and characters. I watched the restored version. The claim was that the Criterion version added 20 minutes to make it go from 165 minutes to 185 minutes. I'll admit that the first time I watched this, long ago, it was 165 minutes, and this version included much more spiritual material, but it was NOT 185 minutes. It was actually about 198 minutes, and of course, the highlight of the film was the conclusion where the B&W film turned to color, and while some intense 2001-type soundtrack was playing, we can see the actual icons which Rublev painted. I easily found this the most moving Tarkovsky I've seen, but it's also incredibly repulsive in the way it shows how far Man truly is from God.