The 19th Hall of Fame

Tools    





I could honestly write reviews for the five films I've seen but I always rewatch everything nominated as to me that's a part of the Hall of Fame process.
I agree. I've never understood the people who skip over watching some of the noms. I always like them to be as fresh in my mind as possible so they all get a fair shot.

That said, I kind of hope The Godfather wins this so I never have to watch it again.



thirteen reviews in two days -- WOW!!
Having already seen half the nominations might make the latter weeks a bit uneventful, so we need a couple more nominations. Though the tough competition might be interesting to debate once everyone's finished.






Open Range 2003
Directed by: Kevin Costner
nominated by: edarsenal

The intro and opening scenes (first 34 minutes) were near perfect for me.
Except for the opening title font choice, thought it was a more fitting font for a Little Women or Driving Miss Daisy type movie.



The cinematography by J. Michael Muro (Dances with Wolves) is amazing, love the natural landscapes and lighting.
The set design of the town, the costume design and the excellent score all really contributed to an authentic looking Western setting.



Fine acting and great interaction between Duvall and Costner's characters. (Big fan of Robert ‘Consigliere Tom Hagen’ Duvall should have gotten a nomination for his role in Widows. Costner has always been one of my ‘mixed-bag’ actors, but I was one of the few that sort of liked Waterworld back when it came out in ‘95.)
For me the films weaker points were the somewhat illogical shoot-outs and action sequences and the slightly too sweet final scenes. (I blame Benning)
Overall still very much enjoyed this re-watch, especially the first half hour.



Women will be your undoing, Pépé
quite agree about the cinematography, John, truly gorgeous!
__________________
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



2022 Mofo Fantasy Football Champ
I agree. I've never understood the people who skip over watching some of the noms. I always like them to be as fresh in my mind as possible so they all get a fair shot.

That said, I kind of hope The Godfather wins this so I never have to watch it again.
It would defeat the purpose of me joining just to talk about the films. Watching them is the real purpose, regardless of seeing them before once or twenty times.



2022 Mofo Fantasy Football Champ
Having already seen half the nominations might make the latter weeks a bit uneventful, so we need a couple more nominations. Though the tough competition might be interesting to debate once everyone's finished.
Just because you've seen them doesn't mean you can't see them again.



Women will be your undoing, Pépé



Open Range


Mack: Shame what this town's come to.

Charley Waite: You could do something about it.

Mack: What? We're freighters. Ralph here's a shopkeeper.

Charley Waite: You're men, ain't you?

Mack: I didn't raise my boys just to see 'em killed.

Charley Waite: Well you may not know this, but there's things that gnaw at a man worse than dying.

My nomination and on my list of Countless Rewatches to the point I will come across it and just watch a good 30-40 minutes of it, just to watch it, at any given point of the movie.

For me, this is the ultimate Tip of the Hat to Old Time Westerns. Which could explain a lot of the familiar plot points; but, then, it's kind of like having a Sword & Sorcery film WITHOUT having the lead character being The Chosen One and a special item or weapon is sought after to prevent an evil presence from destroying the hero's world.
Still, this film draws deeply from the Well of Western codes, ideologies and basic beliefs in what's right and when it comes to take a stand for it without being a mere copycat.
And, like a good ole western, the scenery and town are shown with an almost poetic beauty.
The same can be said about the props, costumes and the list of characters that inhabit and bring such life to this Western.
It's all done with love and respect for the Western genre and in so doing, makes it my #1 favorite of all time, Western. And d@mn pretty high on all time favorites, period.

Duvall and Costner's characters are en route with a large herd of cattle when they bypass a town with a rancher who vehemently hates "free grazers" and things go sideways until things get settled, out in the street with six-shooters and shotguns.

Now, that is the very basic premise of this, but it is the people of the town, the interactions of our two protagonists and the "conversations" that we traverse through as the final showdown eventually comes to play that truly shine in this film.
And it's the reason why I can pop into any spot in this film, sit back, and enjoy it all. Due to the countless "moments" throughout this film. Moments that make me smile, and one in particular that brings a tear to my sentimental eye, every single time. (And once enough folks watch this, and should there be an interest, I'll share that moment.)



It would defeat the purpose of me joining just to talk about the films. Watching them is the real purpose, regardless of seeing them before once or twenty times.
Yeah, but to some extent I think it's fine. I literally watched Pulp Fiction a day or two before this hall of fame was started, it would just be a waste of time to watch it again.



Women will be your undoing, Pépé
Yeah, but to some extent I think it's fine. I literally watched Pulp Fiction a day or two before this hall of fame was started, it would just be a waste of time to watch it again.
Seeing a film a short time before a Hall of Fame is perfectly fine. Lots of folks who had watched something within a month of it popping up on a HoF, state so and write something up. That's cool.

Now, while I don't speak for other people, especially when they are quite able to do so themselves, and forgive me for doing so, raul's statements is more about keeping a film fresh in your mind and not just simply posting a review for something you saw a significant time ago. For example, half a year a go or more. Or for one that any one of us has seen countless times.
He speaks of sharing a movie watching experience with others doing the same within a close time frame. (the given HoF).

If a movie is one that you know by heart, it's easy to write something up or consider a previous write up for it. I did that recently with two Cary Grant films in the Comedy HoF. My thoughts and feelings were the same, so I did a repeat post of both. I may even do this with a write up I did for The Godfather in the Best Picture HoF.
But I also made sure to rewatch both of the comedies and will be doing the same for The Godfather even though I've seen it a ton of times. To familiarize myself when reading other's thoughts/reviews and sharing mine.
Another rather important note is, after watching all of them, we all do vote on a favorite to least favorite. And having a recent view as opposed to a memory of having seen it is a more fair way of making a voting list.



Seems like it’s the time for watching Open Range. Just finished my own rewatch of it. Gotta gather my thoughts and then I’ll post my write up.



Having already seen half the nominations might make the latter weeks a bit uneventful, so we need a couple more nominations. Though the tough competition might be interesting to debate once everyone's finished.
Just because you've seen them doesn't mean you can't see them again.
But they were so recently seen that I'd rather spend my time with other movies. I'll watch Cinema Paradiso again, but that's all I need. I watched The Godfather four or five times last year since it was on Netflix Instant Watch.





Open Range (Kevin Costner, 2003)
Imdb

Date Watched: 5/27/19
Cinema or Home: Home
Reason For Watching: The 19th MoFo Hall of Fame, nominated by edarsenal
Rewatch: Yes


One of the things that I've always disliked about Westerns is that all too often they focus too much on machismo and swagger, without letting us in on the inner depth and humanity of the characters. Open Range doesn't do that. Don't get me wrong, Charley and Boss are hardened, manly men with plenty of grit, but when Charley says the two of them are "like an old married couple," he's not kidding. They're not just riding partners, they're family - and so are the two younger men and the dog they travel with. The love and respect the men have for each other is palpable in every scene. And, of course, the strength of that partnership comes from the fine performances of both Kevin Costner and Robert Duvall - though I might be a bit biased when it comes to the former, since I've been a fan of Kevin Costner for about as long as I've been a fan of movies. But to Costner's credit as a director, I also love that these men are presented with subtlety. There are no overly heroic scenes. No badass one-liners. And the slow motion is kept to a minimum - though I'd have preferred if it was absent entirely.

On the other side of my relationship with the Western genre, some of the things I've always loved about it are the cinematography, the gorgeous landscapes, and the shoot-outs - and here the film is not lacking. Now it's nowhere near as breathtaking as Costner's masterpiece Dances With Wolves (a previous general Hall of Fame winner) but it still holds its own as a solid piece of cinema in that regard.

I think this is only the second time I've seen this film, and for the moment I'll give it a conservative but still very positive rating, but I suspect that this one might make a future top 100 favorites list, should I ever choose to redo it.

+



I may try to get another one or two watched today. The library's closed today and I work the rest of the week so I'm not sure how soon I'll be able to get over there to get the movies I need, but in the meantime I own Return to Paradise and Pulp Fiction, and Raging Bull is available to stream for free on Amazon Prime, so it'll be one of those next.



Important @ all participants, when you're going to watch my nom Cinema Paradiso please make sure it's the 123 min. (2 hour 3 min) theatrical (international) version.
^ Reminder, please don't waste your time on the directors cut.



^ Reminder, please don't waste your time on the directors cut.
My library appeared to have both in their catalog. I made sure to request the longer one, but I'll double check it when I pick it up.



My library appeared to have both in their catalog. I made sure to request the longer one, but I'll double check it when I pick it up.
Wait, doesn't @John-Connor want us to watch the shorter one?



The thing isolated becomes incomprehensible
I could honestly write reviews for the five films I've seen but I always rewatch everything nominated as to me that's a part of the Hall of Fame process.
I agree. I've never understood the people who skip over watching some of the noms. I always like them to be as fresh in my mind as possible so they all get a fair shot.

That said, I kind of hope The Godfather wins this so I never have to watch it again.
It's about being honest with oneself, I believe. I don't watch a movie if I know it very well, either for having it watched many times or for having it watched recently. Regardless of how much I like it.

On this HoF there are 4 huge favourites of mine, I will rewatch 2 of them because I feel I wouldn't be 100% true on my write ups if I didn't. About the other 2, I hv no reason to believe that anything will change with another rewatch.



Wait, doesn't @John-Connor want us to watch the shorter one?
^ Yes!
My nom is the shorter version that won;

Cannes Film Festival
Grand Prix du Jury
Golden Globe Awards
Best Foreign Language Film
Academy Awards
Best Foreign Language Film
César Awards
César Award for Best Poster: Jouineau Bourduge
BAFTA Awards
Best Film (Not in the English Language)
Best Actor: Philippe Noiret
Best Actor in a Supporting Role: Salvatore Cascio

Not the directors cut!



Wait, doesn't @John-Connor want us to watch the shorter one?
There was one listed as 121 minutes on the library website. I guess that was the right one? But that didn't match what he said so I chose the other one.

I'll cancel the hold and request the other one.

I'm not familiar with either cut of the film so I can't say either way, but when I nominated Dances With Wolves some people watched the 4 hour version instead of the 3 hour theatrical, award winning version and it still came in first.



There was one listed as 121 minutes on the library website. I guess that was the right one? But that didn't match what he said so I chose the other one.

I'll cancel the hold and request the other one.
The 121 is the one, my media player said 123 min. sorry bout that, the DC is 30 min. longer..