Reply to Topic
Sweet Smell of Success...I like Lancaster and really liked seeing him as this slimy kind of character. Can't say the same for Curtis, who I haven't seen in much but he's not...I don't know. He's really good in this, I can see the talent but he just rubs me wrong...
Personal Recommendation Hall of Fame VI
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Annihilation
A meteor strikes the earth and a strange shimmer sprouts forth, ever expanding, slowly. Any group sent inside to investigate fails to return. Parallel to this, a scientist, Lena (Portman) has not seen her husband in over a year, after vanishing during a military expedition.
When he shows up one night with no memory or explanation and an illness, they are both spirited away by government agents.
Eventually a group of 4 women, including Lena, are sent inside to investigate. To see what has happened to the previous groups and to get the bottom of the mysterious shimmer.
I’m being purposely vague here with the plot, because it needs to be seen as it unravels. And sadly, the movie also unravels a bit. We’re presented with mutated animals and plants throughout the film with little time to consider the ramifications, much like the discoveries they make along the way. Little time is given to any kind of actual insight, whereas Stalker, a movie this takes inspiration from, is much more introspective, if a little complex. (Unfair comparison, I know, but it invites it). Annihilation is too in love with it’s visuals without asking why they’re so important. We’re given little dialogue that explains very little of what’s happening and why.
As such, this is an example of a film’s reach exceeding its grasp.
Not a bad film, just a near miss for me.
A meteor strikes the earth and a strange shimmer sprouts forth, ever expanding, slowly. Any group sent inside to investigate fails to return. Parallel to this, a scientist, Lena (Portman) has not seen her husband in over a year, after vanishing during a military expedition.
When he shows up one night with no memory or explanation and an illness, they are both spirited away by government agents.
Eventually a group of 4 women, including Lena, are sent inside to investigate. To see what has happened to the previous groups and to get the bottom of the mysterious shimmer.
I’m being purposely vague here with the plot, because it needs to be seen as it unravels. And sadly, the movie also unravels a bit. We’re presented with mutated animals and plants throughout the film with little time to consider the ramifications, much like the discoveries they make along the way. Little time is given to any kind of actual insight, whereas Stalker, a movie this takes inspiration from, is much more introspective, if a little complex. (Unfair comparison, I know, but it invites it). Annihilation is too in love with it’s visuals without asking why they’re so important. We’re given little dialogue that explains very little of what’s happening and why.
As such, this is an example of a film’s reach exceeding its grasp.
Not a bad film, just a near miss for me.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Annihilation is for sure making the 2010s movie countdown, but I ain't voting for it
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Agreed. I know it has its fans.
https://www.movieforums.com/communit...39#post1949839
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Not trying to pimp my review of Annihilation but if you care to take a gander at my short review feel free to do so
https://www.movieforums.com/communit...39#post1949839
https://www.movieforums.com/communit...39#post1949839
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
I first saw Sweet Smell of Success when it was nominated for a Hall of Fame a little while back, and it absolutely blew me away - one of my best ever Hall of Fame discoveries. I'd never even heard of it before then.
I really liked Annihilation when I caught that as well - good enough for me to track it down on Blu-Ray and get it. It's probably an 8/10 film for me, but [i]Stalker[i] is probably a 10/10 - they are very similar, but the author of Annihilation (published in 2014), Jeff VanderMeer, insists that his novel is in no way related to for influenced by Tarkovsky's film.
I really liked Annihilation when I caught that as well - good enough for me to track it down on Blu-Ray and get it. It's probably an 8/10 film for me, but [i]Stalker[i] is probably a 10/10 - they are very similar, but the author of Annihilation (published in 2014), Jeff VanderMeer, insists that his novel is in no way related to for influenced by Tarkovsky's film.
__________________
Remember - everything has an ending except hope, and sausages - they have two.
We miss you Takoma
We miss you Takoma
Latest Review : Le Circle Rouge (1970)
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Has anyone read The Southern Reach trilogy? I wonder how the novels compare to the film version of Annihilation. I loved the film's visuals, and didn't mind that things weren't outright explained to the audience (as I didn't feel like they needed to be), but I imagine Authority and Acceptance expand on that quite a bit, or possibly even ruin it?
I wish I liked to read so I could find out myself.
I wish I liked to read so I could find out myself.
__________________
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
American History X
It's a pretty good performance by Edward Norton here. Obviously his character seems a bit slimy so it's really hard to have any emotional connection with him with everything that is going on. I think a better angle could have been taken in that regard. The story isn't all too appealing to me but that's not to say it isn't decently done, just not really one that is suited for my tastes. I did quite enjoy the performance from the guy who did laundry duties with Derek Vineyard. He was pretty funny. Overall it's just an ok movie for me. I wouldn't say I won't see it again but could be quite sometime.
It's a pretty good performance by Edward Norton here. Obviously his character seems a bit slimy so it's really hard to have any emotional connection with him with everything that is going on. I think a better angle could have been taken in that regard. The story isn't all too appealing to me but that's not to say it isn't decently done, just not really one that is suited for my tastes. I did quite enjoy the performance from the guy who did laundry duties with Derek Vineyard. He was pretty funny. Overall it's just an ok movie for me. I wouldn't say I won't see it again but could be quite sometime.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Annihilation I really dig and the rewatch confirmed it last year.
Sweet Smell of Success is another cool movie too
Sweet Smell of Success is another cool movie too
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
American History X was among my favorites back in my mid-teen years, but after revisiting it earlier this year, I think it's more of a gateway film that I've moved on from.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
the exorcist
"i thought you were an expert."
"there are no experts."
my mom (and every other person who saw it in the 70s) had always built this up as the scariest movie ever made, which i figured wasn't true anymore but still made me hesitant to watch as a young cinephile, and then as i grew older and unafraid it nevertheless continued to fall by the wayside of Classics I Needed to See. indeed it is not the scariest horror film there is but it is probably one of the most powerful.
it's almost too blandly well-made in the first half, but friedkin is too great a filmmaker and is able to turn the cold, methodical style of a certain strain of Serious Hollywood Filmmaking into something truly sinister, periodically breaking the form with unsettling moments of rupture, much in the same way linda blair's vulgarity punctures the high-minded thematic concerns of the script. this is all particularly interesting for a movie about the failures of our traditional modes of understanding the world when it comes to comprehending true evil. perhaps an inherently reactionary film, but also the ideal basis for a horror movie, and friedkin is exactly the filmmaker i want to watch wrestle with these knotty ideas.
this film really clarifies the notion that the key to making an enduring classic is to make even the minor characters compelling with richly-drawn detail. you could easily see the film spending more time with any of these people and not be disappointed. even with all the supernatural horror, the film maintains a strict psychological focus on its central characters, with each performance deeply internal and perfectly-suited to the tone of the film. jason miller is probably the best out of all of them, and it helps that "priest undergoing a crisis of faith" is one of the most compelling archetypes in cinema when done correctly. the fact that the movie opens with max von sydow and then doesn't come back to him for another hour and 20 minutes is such an incredible called shot, i love it. plus his iconic re-entrance scene just goes so hard. everyone else tries to rationalize and comprehend the evil while he knows it can only be confronted on an elemental level, so its fitting that his entrance should feel almost mythic.
i think people tend to be overly-dismissive of jump scares when even some of the best horror films employ them at times, but this one truly doesn't have a single one. it's a horror film in the truest sense of the word in that what unsettles you isn't necessarily shock or fear or suspense, but the unfathomable capital-h Horror of what you are witnessing. somehow i had never had the ending spoiled for me so i was able to be genuinely surprised, but afterwards it really does feel like the only way it could've resolved.
"i thought you were an expert."
"there are no experts."
my mom (and every other person who saw it in the 70s) had always built this up as the scariest movie ever made, which i figured wasn't true anymore but still made me hesitant to watch as a young cinephile, and then as i grew older and unafraid it nevertheless continued to fall by the wayside of Classics I Needed to See. indeed it is not the scariest horror film there is but it is probably one of the most powerful.
it's almost too blandly well-made in the first half, but friedkin is too great a filmmaker and is able to turn the cold, methodical style of a certain strain of Serious Hollywood Filmmaking into something truly sinister, periodically breaking the form with unsettling moments of rupture, much in the same way linda blair's vulgarity punctures the high-minded thematic concerns of the script. this is all particularly interesting for a movie about the failures of our traditional modes of understanding the world when it comes to comprehending true evil. perhaps an inherently reactionary film, but also the ideal basis for a horror movie, and friedkin is exactly the filmmaker i want to watch wrestle with these knotty ideas.
this film really clarifies the notion that the key to making an enduring classic is to make even the minor characters compelling with richly-drawn detail. you could easily see the film spending more time with any of these people and not be disappointed. even with all the supernatural horror, the film maintains a strict psychological focus on its central characters, with each performance deeply internal and perfectly-suited to the tone of the film. jason miller is probably the best out of all of them, and it helps that "priest undergoing a crisis of faith" is one of the most compelling archetypes in cinema when done correctly. the fact that the movie opens with max von sydow and then doesn't come back to him for another hour and 20 minutes is such an incredible called shot, i love it. plus his iconic re-entrance scene just goes so hard. everyone else tries to rationalize and comprehend the evil while he knows it can only be confronted on an elemental level, so its fitting that his entrance should feel almost mythic.
i think people tend to be overly-dismissive of jump scares when even some of the best horror films employ them at times, but this one truly doesn't have a single one. it's a horror film in the truest sense of the word in that what unsettles you isn't necessarily shock or fear or suspense, but the unfathomable capital-h Horror of what you are witnessing. somehow i had never had the ending spoiled for me so i was able to be genuinely surprised, but afterwards it really does feel like the only way it could've resolved.
__________________
letterboxd
criticker
Most Biblical movies were long If I Recall.
seen A Clockwork Orange. In all honesty, the movie was weird and silly
criticker
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
And we are 1 month and 1 day from the deadline.
Let's get this shit finished and we'll do it again.
Let's get this shit finished and we'll do it again.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
The Edge of Seventeen
I always like a good coming of age story, specifically the ones set up in a high school setting and this one is no different. The obvious highlight here is the great performance by Hailee Steinfeld. I also enjoyed the supporting role of Woody Harrelson as her teacher. The humor in the movie really works for me and the screenplay is very well done. This is something that I will certainly go back to.
I always like a good coming of age story, specifically the ones set up in a high school setting and this one is no different. The obvious highlight here is the great performance by Hailee Steinfeld. I also enjoyed the supporting role of Woody Harrelson as her teacher. The humor in the movie really works for me and the screenplay is very well done. This is something that I will certainly go back to.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
I seen The Exorcist but so long ago that all I can remember was it was really effective and seemed like a well made film. Though demons/evil spirits doesn't usually give me the creeps, so I can't say it frightened me.
Not seen The Edge of Seventeen, but now I got that damn song stuck in my head
Not seen The Edge of Seventeen, but now I got that damn song stuck in my head
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Caged (1950)
So this made the 1950's list for MOFO and this was fairly mediocre...it's one of those films where I'm really curious how it managed to stick out enough to garner votes. The elephant in the room when watching Caged is how unrealistic the prison seems in today's perspective. An entirely white group of female prisoners spend what is I suppose a year or two under the harsh control of a guard.
This is one of those films that doesn't know if it wants to be a noir or a message movie so it achieves neither. The basic theme of the story is about "dead time" the idea that a woman can't be released if she doesn't have a job. A 19 year old short timer is offered a job as a shoplifter if she joins the gang. She decides this work is beneath her and might have her end up right where she started.
A lot of things happen in this film it jumps from plot point to plot point with very little tying the stories together...and the worst part is most of the plot feels very contrived. Basically every female character exists for a single scene and then they move on. 20 minutes after watching the film I forgot what happened to several of the characters from the first act.
I don't want to crap on the film too much, Hope Emerson got an Oscar nomination for her work as the villain of the story. She's very good in this as a giant ugly woman who hates the women in her custody. But she's also corrupt and neglectful and really in todays lens what you would expect from 90% of the people working that job.
X
Favorite Movies
X