33rd Hall of Fame

Out of the nominations, I've only seen Shoplifters and Treasure of the Sierra Madre, and they're both great films I'd gladly watch again. Even though Aftersun made it into a few categories of the Film Awards last year, I didn't ever get around to watching it.

There Will Be Blood is one of those films that I keep saying I'll check out, but never do. No Country for Old Men was much the same, though I finally watched that one in preparation for the neo-noir Countdown, so it's too bad I can't participate and have a reason to sit down with There Will Be Blood as well.

It's kind of funny, because a few days before I got that PM about this HoF, I had been thinking I should join one again. But I've only been watching noirs and 2023 films for the last few months, and haven't really had time to think of a more general nomination. I'd rather not have to rush to find something, so maybe I'll see you guys in the next one instead?

__________________

Just what I was hoping for - a film from the 1970s to complete the set to a certain degree...



Added to the nominations on page 1.

__________________

Still got a week (or who knows, maybe more) in case something pops up and you feel the urge.

Looks like a cool hall.

Also, how insane that there is one nom from every decade 1940 and up!

Another new nomination has come in :

Have fun, everybody. After doing the Neo-Noir HoF and my own Albert Pyun project, I feel like going back to regular rotation if you know what I mean. Looks like a good one, though, especially with Aftersun, Beau Travail, Mona Lisa and Sierra Madre.

Quite a wonderful spread of films traversing the decades. VERY cool.

Aftersun (2022) Unknown to me, and a gut feeling said to run blind with just a short summary on IMDB, so I'm intrigued.

Beau Travail (1999) I remember being curious about this when it came out but never following through, so this'll be a pleasant opportunity.

God's Little Acre (1958) This MUST be CR, and no, I have not had the pleasure of seeing another dramatic turn by Tina Louise, so YAY

L'humanité (1999) This will be a rough one to weather, I think.

Macbeth (1971) Truly cannot remember if I've ever seen Polanski's rendition, but I do enjoy me some Shakespeare.

A Man For All Seasons (1966) Saw this a couple years ago and pretty happy to revisit.

Mona Lisa (1986) I'm pretty sold on checking this one out with Hoskins, Caine, and Coltrane. It looks pretty solid.

Shoplifters (2018) I ADORED this film and have been dying to see it again. How frickin awesome!

There Will Be Blood (2007) It's been some time since I last saw this, so I'm looking forward to revisiting it.

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948) This one is mine, and I haven't seen it since I was but a pup, so pretty excited.

__________________
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

Good guess, but nope, but yeah for a hot babe! This time I went with a totally different nom that isn't what I normally pick.

Thought that might be yours, one of my favorites.

I am VERY surprised that God's Little Acre isn't yours. Now I'm curious to find out which is.

Another nomination comes rolling in :

A Man For All Seasons (1966)

The 1960's tend to get a bit of a bad rap when it comes to prestige pictures. The decade started off with Lawrence of Arabia and then a series of clones came out that were dry and unremarkable. A Man for All Seasons seemed to try and buck the trend telling a more intimate story in a film that should be a cinescope style epic but plays more like a procedural.

Paul Scofield was a working actor of little reknown whent he film came out...and he became a bit player in the decades post, however he was given this one magnificent role and he knocks it out of the park as Thomas More. The film is the story of the mad King Henry VIII and his desire to divorce his current barren wife and replace her with his new younger version. Robert Shaw plays the king and he's great in this. One of the things you really notice in the film is the excellent work from all the small parts. Orson Welles shows up in the begining, John Hurt is hanging around in the background, Vanessa Redgrave has a silent small cameo. The casting in this film is pitch perfect.

Paul's performance is fantastic, I think a normal take would be a man conflicted with his desire to stay alive. Or on the flip side you would think Moore would be a rebel...but rather what we see is a man steadfast and resolute in his choices, pushing up against a bureaucracy that wants this whole thing over and done with but it struggling with Moores' silent obstinate.

I wouldn't call the film a slough more a long march to the inevitable conclusion. Sometimes you can appreciate a film that doesn't try and do too much, rather focuses on execution. I think I have enough puns in there.

B+

Macbeth (1971)

Roman Polanski has made a number of films over the years often times playing with genre but sticking to mostly horror. His 1971 version of Macbeth is a film both of it's time and vastly ahead of it. The film has three major prongs going for it, the first of which is this is the play. This isn't some sort of butchered updating of Shakespeare this is the real dialogue and while it might seem like a choire for the viewer Polanski does two very clever things in this film. The first of which is he strips the film of all the glamour, this is a dark horific version of the story...as it should be. The central themes of coruption, madness, and evil are fully shown. Jon Finch gives a two pronged performance speaking boldly as a mad men to the rest of the cast but his inner monologue is filled with fear and doubt. And third aspect is it's strongest point and that's the cinematography.

Only the National Board of Review honored this film, this mostly had to do I believe because it was finaced by Hugh Hefner and rated X on it's release. Now the rating has been adjusted and it's no longer an X rater film because well it's clearly a hard R of a film. But all of that is beside the point...this film has so many things going for it. You are completely absorbed into this world as really you have no stars in the film. You only have the characters, ugly flawed and cynical. And yet it also has a dream-like quality to it thanks to an incredible and restrained score.

And finally the last act is filled with sadness, humor and reality giving us a final duel that is right up there with They Live. One of the things I do with my nominations is try and find and watch the best version of a story and present that to you guys. This is the best version of Macbeth and perhaps the best Shakespeare adaption ever made. I hope you guys enjoy it on a cold wet evening with a fire burning by your side.

A

I guess I can get started on these. I'll try to have a few reviews up today.

great write-ups @Siddon. FULL agreement with Scolfield knocking it out of the park. Felt exactly the same way the first time I saw this a couple of years back and I'm growing more and more curious to see Polanski's rendition of Macbeth after reading your review.

I remember seeing this when it came out; it should be fun to revisit.

Seen and think highly of There Will Be Blood, Mona Lisa, Shoplifters, and Sierra Madre.

Seen All the King's Men and didn't like it simply because I don't generally like those types of movies. I'll give my best effort and try to immerse myself in it.

Speaking of those types of movies-Macbeth-ugh-well but it's directed by Polanski so I'm interested.

Don't know anything about Aftersun but it's already on my watchlist, love it when that happens. Must have read something positive here.

At first glance, The Bank Job looks like a run of the mill action film. That's ok because I like run of the mill action films and Jason Statham. Also, director Roger Donaldson has made several good films.

Not familiar with God's Little Acre, Beau Travail, or L'humanite. I see the director of the latter is Bruno Dumont who directed Twentynine Palms. If it's anything like that we could have some juicy controversy. It could be tame for all I know, but be careful who you watch it with!

Very interested in seeing how Macbeth does in this Hall because it's visually on a different level than almost everything else in this Hall. On the other hand it is two hours of authentic Shakespearian dialogue

Macbeth

(1971, Polanski)

In 11th century Scotland, Macbeth and his friend Banquo hear of a prophecy that leads to the murder of their king. After which, Macbeth and his ascension to throne does not come without serious consequences and the loss of his state of mind.

This time period for Polanski is certainly a turbulent one. Add this with his type of films he was producing at the time and birthed is this washed out (Scotland dreary?) canvas involving murder and madness of its king. The visuals (with that 70's tint) definitely kept my attention while struggling to digest the honest dialogue from Shakespeare. I respect it but it made this a difficult watch despite doing almost everything else in top form. Will definitely be digesting some of those visuals for a while with that unsettling score.

I'm going to try to hit one of these tomorrow