Zotis' Film Watching Diary

I forget if it was Mr. Vengeance or Lady Vengeance that I saw, but I watched one and didn't like it, so I didn't watch the other. Oldboy was just 3/5 for me on first viewing so I'd like to see that again first.

but why? They're so good, you have to love them... You just have to! Please Cricket, please!

I can't decide if I like Late Spring or Tokyo Story more. I am so glad I bought this. It was an incredible film. At first the story seemed a little boring, though still pleasant in a way that looks at the beauty of daily life. As the story moved along the plot thickened and it became evident how essential the earlier parts were to the build-up. The climax was magnificent, and the ending perfectly wrapped everything up. I would say it was a textbook example of how a film should be made, but also much more than that. Late Spring was the kind of film that raises the par for excellence. The cinematography was so brilliant that if nothing was going on except for someone entering a doorway I was mesmerised.

I've seen several Van Sant films, but he's not a director I have really been aware of until now. Good Will Hunting is one of those movies everyone talks about. I have an impression of Finding Forrester as a decent movie, but nothing special. It's been 5-10 years since I saw it. I can hardly relate those works to Elephant. Elephant is one of those particularly realistic films with very artistic tendencies, and it's much more comparable to Last Days and Paranoid Park. Well I personally love realistic movies, and I love artistic movies, so Elephant was right up my alley. What captivated me most about the film was the way it was shot. There were many long shots that overlapped the perspectives of two or three characters. Because these long shots were done from different angles it meant that each time the scene would have to be completely reenacted (otherwise you would see the other camera crew). The scenes were shot out of chronological order and pieced together. Anyone who's aware of the film probably already knows it's about a high-school shooting, and that it was based loosely on Columbine. The film doesn't take long to reveal that a shooting is going to take place, but it's very good at building the tension gradually and keeping you wondering what exactly is going to happen. This had been sitting on my to-watch list for a long time now, so I'm glad to finally have gotten to it. I admit that it was kind of hard to separate it mentally from the Columbine shooting, but it really takes very little from the actual events of that tragedy.

Elephant has a great rep but I remember it being almost unbearably slow. Since then, I've grown to love slow movies so maybe I should watch it again.

Nice to see your review and rating for Late Spring, a great movie. I liked it a little more than Tokyo Story.

Elephant was fairly slow. It's a very subtle movie. I think to enjoy it you have to understand and appreciate what's going on. Long shots means the acting has to be strong, and realism compiles that, and shooting the same scene from another perspective reenacting it exactly the same compiles it even more. Also the criticisms of character types was honest and insightful, which demonstrates the intelligence of the directors and writers. I think the lack of a conventional story/plot would make it hard for most people to enjoy.

Elephant is an excellent film - it really grew on me with my second watch. BTW, if you are interested it is actually part of a "death" trilogy with Gerry and Last Days. I enjoyed both of those as well with Last Days being the weakest - without actually saying so it is essentially the last day or so in Kurt Cobain's life. Pretty messy but some great scenes.

Also, nice review of Late Spring - great film

__________________
Top 133 Favourite Films

Asia/Pacific Top 100

Elephant is by far the best of those three Van Sant films - that's why I give it .

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

Yeah my film expert co-worker was also telling me about Gerry. I plan to watch it.

Noah Baumbach, director/writer of The Squid and the Whale, Francis Ha, and Greenberg, all great movies, also wrote the screenplay for Fantastic Mr. Fox. He wrote and directed Mistress America, and like Francis Ha, which also starred Greta Gerwig, she co-wrote the film with him. Greta Gerwig is an actress I have come to admire for her work in Francis Ha, Greenberg, Lola Versus, and Hannah Takes the Stairs. She usually, if not always, plays awkward characters that talk too much and lean towards the nerdy side, but in a very charming and lovable way. Yet she also manages to make each of these characters, sharing this trademark, still remain unique. I would say, by my limited understanding of the term, that she is a character actress. Lola Kirke on the other hand is new to me. She played the central character, while Gerwig played the lead supporting role. Kirke is an interesting actress. She's very beautiful and charming, has a lot of character, and appeals very much to me in a down-to-earth sort of way. I detected a slight lisp, so I don't know if that was just her character or her as a person since I haven't seen her in anything else. I hope she'll have a promising career, and I'll likely keep my eye on her. I think I sense another celebrity crush coming on... Anyway, the movie itself is about Kirke's character, Tracey, who is an 18-year-old freshmen in college and aspiring writer. Gerwig's character, Brooke, is her soon-to-be step-sister, and the two soon become close friends. The tale that unfolds is one of admiration and friendship with a touch of humor and drama blended into a sort of coming-of-age tale (not sure if it really qualifies though, but it has that kind of vibe to it). It's in theaters now, though it's probably a bit hard to find since it's an indie film (I think).

My second Tarkovsky. It was brilliant of course. I'm looking forward to seeing the rest of his films. This one was about a psychologist named Kris, played by Banionis, who travelled to a space station to assess the situation. Apparently there were theories about a mysterious sea that caused hallucinations. Some believed they were more than hallucinations, but others were skeptical. It was a very artistic and thought provokingly deep film. The other Tarkovsky film I've seen is Stalker. With both films I noticed something, but it's hard to really describe. It kind of felt like the sci-fi elements suffered from a lack of special effects, but at the same time they were very creative in what they did without expensive effects. Other things made me feel just a little bit weird, like the plot revolving around a space station without a single shot of "space." How do I know it's in space? How do I know it's an "alien" world? There was a bit of confusion in that lack of visual representation, but despite that it was a great film. Solaris was potent. There was something about it that just exuded greatness, and that greatness really towered above the slight awkwardness that I felt about the lack of special effects. It felt like a low budget movie that was still a hundred times better than 99.9% of all the other movies out there. In terms of quality it was right up there with Godard and Ozu, so it felt really weird that it actually kind of seemed a bit low budget. I feel like I'm imagining it, and I certainly put it out of my mind while watching the film. But in all honesty I have to admit that this strange feeling is there. Anyway, all in all it's a great film, but I feel like Tarkovsky's films could have been even greater if he wasn't stuck in Russia, and if he had more money to work with. Then again I don't know how much money he actually had to work with, so I could be totally wrong.

Am I crazy?

I must be crazy...

Anyway, the story was fantastic. I loved the characters, and the complex plot dealing with insanity, delusion, the nature of reality, love, and everything else...

This film was a documentary about two twin sisters who had supposedly invented their own language. They were a phenomena on the front pages of newspapers and the topic of much study and debate by experts. Unlike any documentary I've seen before, this one had a strikingly artistic nature to it. I can't really know for sure how accurate it was, but it felt very honest. The subject matter began with the backstory of the newspapers and studies on the twins. It moved to Gorin himself visiting the family and filming the twins, taking them to the Zoo and the Library. Then it followed up with them six months later, and finished with recap after a three month gap. Without spoiling it, the mystery was uncovered. I found myself engaged, curious, and interested the entire time. The way the documentary was shot was stimulating. I think Gorin had a knack for capturing subtleties. I borrowed the movie from the library. The DVD is an Eclipse Criterion Collection release, and it includes two more of Gorin's "nontraditional" documentaries. The other two are Routine Pleasures, and My Crasy Life. After Poto and Gabeno, I'm looking forward to them. Oh yeah, and Poto and Gabeno were the names the twins had for each other, but weren't their real names.

This documentary pursued two aspects and sought to link them together. The first was a club of model train hobbyists, and the second was Manny Farber, a painter and film critic. Throughout the film Gorin tells a story of his journey making the film. He captures his subject matter in a way that helped me understand and appreciate those things more myself. I've never had a care in the world for trains before, but suddenly I found myself interested. I even noticed a few days later while I was on the bus that when we drove past some train cars I was analyzing their paint jobs and design features and appreciating them. It was very well shot, and Gorin has a knack for capturing interesting details and presenting them in a way that flows very pleasantly. I feel like Gorin could make a documentary about absolutely anything and it would be captivating and enjoyable. I didn't like it as much as Poto and Gabengo, but the film making aspects and story were very well done and interesting to me.

On paper it would seem boring but I had so much fun watching it way back when.

you got a rep for Elephant since I like this movie very much and because it's an actual very realistic and shocking flick

This time Gorin made a documentary about a gang in California. They called themselves the S.O.S. gang and referred to their criminal activity as "gang-banging." Gorin didn't tell a story with voice-over or appear in the film himself like he usually does. The film follows a cop in the area, a couple of former gang members who moved away, and one member who visits his family in Hawaii. However most of the film focuses on the gang in Long Beach. They party, they hang out, they talk about their lives, and they answer some serious life questions in interviews. It's a pretty interesting look into their crazy world. It didn't have as much of a "story" as the other two Gorin documentaries, and it didn't have as artistic a feel to the way it was filmed. I wonder if that's because it was harder to film them doing their thing naturally with the nature of their lifestyles, but I'm not sure. I didn't like it as much as the other two Gorin films, but it was still pretty good. The thing I enjoyed about it most was the insight.


Perhaps the thing that stands out about this movie the most to me is the character development. It's not so much about the characters going through personal growth, although Gene Bervoets' character, Rex Hofman, goes through quite the growing process from a person considering doing something incredibly evil to a person doing something incredibly evil. The real character development is in the amount of depth each personality has. They felt so real that it could have been a documentary. I think how real the movie felt is also a testament to the quality of the acting and directing. I really enjoyed the movie, but what held me back from loving it was pretty much just content. Some elements are a little boring, but overall it's a great film.

So many movies on this thread that I've never heard of, let alone seen.

A Canadian film set in Palestine about a young female doctor who lives in Israel and works in the Palestinian territories. Chloe is the doctor, played by Evelyne Brochu, and she is the focal point of the film. Surrounding her are her friends and their hardships on both sides of the wall that separates Israel and Palestine. One of her friends is Ava (Levy), a female Israeli soldier who lives in the same building, rides the bus with Chloe, and hangs out after work. On the other side of the wall Chloe is very close to a Muslim family, especially Rand (Ouazani) and her brother Faysal (Sweid). There is a lot of potent imagery in this film, but once it gets going the image is replaced by the actuality of everything going on; the war, the martyrs, the stress... It's really a film about life.

This film really touched me. In terms of film technique it was a masterpiece, and that enabled everything the film was touching on in it's subject matter to be delivered so powerfully. What I connected most with were two aspects. The first was the way Chloe tended to harden her heart to emotional pain in order to get through it, and I do that a lot too. The second was the way that all of the characters felt and dealt with their emotional pain. I really felt like I could feel what they were feeling. I could almost hear their thoughts. I think in terms of that level of internalisation of emotional stress there might not be another film I've seen that captures it as well as Inch'Allah.

This film is about a group home for youths, or something like that. Brie Larson plays Grace, the supervisor who runs the place. Kaitlyn Dever plays Jayden, the new resident who arrives on the scene. It's very much a story about broken people. I wasn't familiar with any of the cast or the director going into this movie. I especially noticed the exceptional acting from Larson and Dever which put both of those young ladies in my spotlight. I've since seen several Brie Larson films, and at least one more of Kaitlyn Dever's, and they both performed consistently well. Larson is an actress who for most of her career thus far has played minor roles, but is now really blossoming into a strong leading star. I think she will have a bright future. In theaters now is the movie The Room which sees Larson in a leading role and has received acclaim already winning awards at the Toronto International Film Festival (which sadly I never go to even though I live in Toronto $$).


This film has a lot of stars. The only downside to that is that the story is very divided and some people may feel like they didn't get to see enough of their favorite characters. I think that it can be appreciated the way that it is though, and this shouldn't really be seen as a downside. Jason Reitman also directed Juno, and I think he's done another bang-up job! Men, Women, and Children is a powerful film about relationships between family and lovers, young and old. It's a reflection on the mistakes that parents make in dealing with their children, and people's problems, quirks, and mistakes, but it's also about hope, finding happiness, and embracing life. I think a lot of people can relate to a lot of things that these characters go through because we've gone through many similar things in our lives.

as always, a distinct pleasure reading your reviews. I always find myself wonderfully contemplative afterwards. Thank you for that.