16th Hall of Fame

Tools    





Women will be your undoing, Pépé
YES! This is my official response to everyone who hates Naked! xD
I tried finding something similar as well for Naked to go with it, BUT, I googled (like I did for Withnail & I) "Naked, f@ck you" . . .

and guess what?

Let's just say I did not get a SINGLE image from the actual movie, I'll tell you what.

the funny thing was, over 80% DID have their middle fingers up in air toward the camera, though.
__________________
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 have not heard from MovieMad, so I am disqualifying him. Call Me By Your Name is out!

Here's what's left then

@HashtagBrownies 4 left

@edarsenal 2 left

@cricket just needs to review his own nomination

@Okay 5 left

@neiba 3 left



They Shoot Horses, Don't They?


A very depressing movie, fitting since it's set during the depression. I think this is a movie that was way ahead of it's time, as today it's so popular to watch so much misery and suffering in the world. Spectators at the dance hall, and spectators watching the movie, go from seeing who will win the contest, to who will survive the contest. I don't think it's a brilliant film as it's sometimes monotonous and slow, but I do think it is unique and very memorable.




The thing isolated becomes incomprehensible
Naked


The was my second time watching this movie after first seeing it a couple years ago via a recommendation from Swan. I still think it's a great movie.

SPOILERS
Although a bit ambiguous, I do not think that Johnny raped that girl in the beginning. All I have to go by is what I see in the rest of the movie, and what I see is him getting rough during casual sex. That's certainly not a good thing when the other person is not a willing participant, but it's a far cry from being a scumbag rapist. The other guy is a rapist and a monster, but I don't even think Johnny is a bad guy at all. He's clearly dealing with some deep inner demons, and so he often lashes out with a sharp sarcastic tongue. I think he is looking to be loved, by anyone, and I think that because he's actually quite social and talks to everyone he comes across. It's just that he often screws it up with his mouth, and he does that out of self-loathing. David Thewlis is brilliant and carries the movie on his back. It's not just him, as I think most of the performances are strong and the film has the proper bleak look and musical score. If any performance is a little under par, it's that of the last roommate, but she doesn't play a big role. That other actor played a strange part to me. I feel like that character wasn't even needed. Maybe he was there to show the contrast to Johnny, show us what a real loser looks like? Regardless, I didn't mind him as I thought he was compelling and funny. I found it interesting that Neiba also loved Frances Ha because those characters are similar to Johnny, if they went through some horrible times. Anyway, Johnny is a mesmerizing yet sympathetic character in my mind. He's not alone; all of the characters are hurting in some way. It makes for a downbeat movie but I think a terrific one.

I could kiss you right now! xD Thanks dude!!!

And interesting you mentioned the similarity between Frances Ha characters and Johnny. I haven't thought about it, but you're right. I have a soft spot for this kind of characters, maybe because I can relate so much with them!



movies can be okay...
Frances Ha (2012) by Noah Baumbach

Oh man, if I could only count how many times I've expressed while watching Baumbach's masterpiece, how relatable I feel to Frances. There’s no hiding it, I straight up loved this movie even more on this re-watch of mine than ever. It became quirkier, funnier, and way more heartfelt...all thanks to Greta Gerwig’s fantastic portrayal and energy, not to mention, her aid in the writing department as well. She's easily the M.V.P of the entire production.

I also noticed out there, a fair share of critiques that I'd like to voice my thoughts on as well. I personally don't subscribe to this equation which a lot of people tend to make: Greta's character is "annoying" = bad movie. To me, her flawed behaviour is what elevates her character to a more relatable level. I also don't understand the reasons why some label the film as pretentious. Is it because it's a modern black & white feature? If so, then at least it feels way more retro than any of the other flicks, that falsely use such thing as a gimmick, and more importantly, it looks gorgeous regardless. Or maybe it's because it presents characters that can be perceived as pretentious? Either way, I can't relate

I'm incredibly glad to have the opportunity of re-experiencing such a pleasurable roller coaster ride, and as it reached its last stops, I was begging for it not to actually end. How could I not, when Frances' world reeks of coolness. Just that ending alone, where we finally discover where the movie's title comes from...such a cool send-off !
__________________
"A film has to be a dialogue, not a monologue — a dialogue to provoke in the viewer his own thoughts, his own feelings. And if a film is a dialogue, then it’s a good film; if it’s not a dialogue, it’s a bad film."
- Michael "Gloomy Old Fart" Haneke



movies can be okay...
Also, I'm in love with that snapshot of the movie
Also, I watched Waterloo Bridge earlier today, meaning I'll probably post my thoughts on it tonight.



The thing isolated becomes incomprehensible
They Shoot Horses, Don't They? (1969)

One of those movies I've heard about dozens of times but had no ideia what was it about.

I had to wait a few hours till I finally processed everything because it's a surprisingly dense movie, considering the simplicity of the whole premise.
I loved the critique on society and media, there are some really adrenaline fueled scenes even though it's quite a slow film, the pacing is extremely well managed, the acting is great, especially by Fonda and I loved the cinematography!

Oh, and what an amazing finale!!! It's awesome as they didn't spoil it even with all those flashforwards... You never knew what was going to happen till the very end!

A really nice nom!!!




movies can be okay...
Waterloo Bridge (1931) by James Whale

I think it's very easy to criticise this film for its "predictability", or "phony set design", or whatever other petty thing, while completely disregarding the fact, that this is a 1931 pre-code film! Of course it's easy to correctly predict the plot, out of one's 2018 window, because these films are what paved the road for their following copycats. In my eyes, this version of Waterloo Bridge, was funnier than most comedies coming out these days, more engaging than most romances coming out these days, and have aged better than most films that came after and before it.

I enjoyed the characters, I enjoyed the performances, and I mostly enjoyed the back & forth dialogue. Overall, it's a very enjoyable film, and as it started to close its curtains, I jokingly predicted the literal ending, then busted out laughing as it actually happened How's that for predictability! It was an M. Night Shyamalan level twist, and I loved it!



movies can be okay...
After reading you guys' thoughts on a few noms, I have to ask: Does a central character being not likeable, make the movie they're in have a lesser chance in your eyes?

Personally, I just roll with what the movie presents. I don't have to like or relate to any of the characters, they just have to add to the story they're in, in an interesting manner. Whether the central focus is a rapist, a paedophile, some sort of criminal...you name it, I can still easily be engaged by that film's story, regardless if this central character makes a turnaround or not. Actually, I tend to search for movies with ****ed up protagonists, since they're far more interesting. Plus, my favourite kind of films are character studies, so that's that.



After reading you guys' thoughts on a few noms, I have to ask: Does a central character being not likeable, make the movie they're in have a lesser chance in your eyes?
Maybe likable isn't the right word but interesting. I suppose some of my reviews can quite easily be read to be complaining about characters not being likable but it's not precisely what I try to say. I mean I kinda liked Perfume and Grenouille isn't likable by any means.

Obviously a character I like is (in almost every case) inherently interesting (I wouldn't like him or her otherwise) so statistically speaking I suppose the answer to your question would still be yes.



Waterloo Bridge (1931) by James Whale


I think it's very easy to criticise this film for its "predictability", or "phony set design", or whatever other petty thing, while completely disregarding the fact, that this is a 1931 pre-code film! Of course it's easy to correctly predict the plot, out of one's 2018 window, because these films are what paved the road for their following copycats.
I liked what you said there. A couple comments on how I feel about that.

Predictability
People often criticize films for being predictable (I've done that too). A lot of times predictability in movies is comforting, and getting the story one expects can be a big plus and enjoyable. Butit depends on the type of movie...Predictability in a romantic comedy is almost a given and not a bad thing. But predictability in a thriller can seem boring to the audience as they are not challenged.

Phony Set Design
A great set is a plus! But if a film is more of a character study then a simply set can work as it puts the focus on the actors in the movie and not on any epic visual. It depends on the movies 'intent' or style. A lot of 1930s movies are based on plays and plays don't relay on realistic looking sets. I think it's hard for people who are only use to watching modern films to watch a movie that is 80 years old and accept a simple set as good enough to tell the story.



@Okay Good questions!

Does a central character being not likeable, make the movie they're in have a lesser chance in your eyes?
No, not usually.
...but if I have an angry reaction to a character that is suppose to be the 'hero' or protagonist of the film, they yes it can color how I view the film. In this HoF I've talked about liking/hating characters...

In Perfume The Story of a Murder, the lead wasn't a great guy but I still felt for him as he was lonely, apart from the world...and the film gave the character a soul. I was rooting for him to win, even though what he did was horrible. Part of the reason I liked his story was that it was fascinating & intriguing...AND the film didn't show his murders as being graphic, so they didn't feel real. If they had been shown brutally graphic and real I might have hated the film. As it was, it was one of my favorites in this HoF.



Women will be your undoing, Pépé
I think I'm guilty as well on remarking on likability along with interest in the character. I have had problems with movies when I hated the main character, for what ever particular reason, making the film, regardless of it's merits, a difficult watch.
I can think of a couple of films where that has happened. This Last Waltz comes to mind where the main character bugged me and ruined a pretty good flick for me. Buffalo 66 is another. Great film. Hated Gallo's character.
While a film like Naked, where there was that "something" that kept me with him, regardless of his leaching ways.

So, yeah, if I hate the main character or have no interest in them, chances are, I'm not going to be able to enjoy the film.



2022 Mofo Fantasy Football Champ
There's a lot of movies where the main character isn't that likeable that I enjoy. Manchester by the Sea is the first that springs to my mind. Even something like Goodfellas too.

I just plain didn't care much for the lead in Naked, and k would say that it did indeed play a big part in my rating for the film.



movies can be okay...
Many of my favorite characters are aholes.
First of all, I need the source of your new avatar.



movies can be okay...
@Okay Good questions!

No, not usually.
...but if I have an angry reaction to a character that is suppose to be the 'hero' or protagonist of the film, they yes it can color how I view the film. In this HoF I've talked about liking/hating characters...

In Perfume The Story of a Murder, the lead wasn't a great guy but I still felt for him as he was lonely, apart from the world...and the film gave the character a soul. I was rooting for him to win, even though what he did was horrible. Part of the reason I liked his story was that it was fascinating & intriguing...AND the film didn't show his murders as being graphic, so they didn't feel real. If they had been shown brutally graphic and real I might have hated the film. As it was, it was one of my favorites in this HoF.
What about Johnny in Naked? You said that you had already written the movie off after the first 30 seconds, because of his actions. Wouldn't you say that's unfair to the movie? Moreover, even though Johnny is the main character, Mike Leigh doesn't present him as the "protagonist", nor the "hero". I'd like to go more in depth about his character, but I'll leave that until I revisit the movie.