Okay's Thoughts on Okay Films

→ in
Tools    





Punch-Drunk Love (2002) by Paul Thomas Anderson
So glad you enjoyed this brilliant film...there a lot of folks out there who won't give it a chance because of Adam Sandler, but I think with a strong director guiding him, Sandler proved to be an actor of substance here.



Cries and Whispers (1972) by Ingmar Bergman

In “Cries and Whispers”, we are introduced to three sisters and their maid, one sister is suffering from terminal illness, so the others have to take care of her, but their process of doing so is not conventional and far beyond what you might expect. Bergman studies each of the four characters very carefully and meticulously, their interactions with each other are filled with lovelessness and coldness, and this is a theme that one will become familiar with when it comes to this director, the fundamental coldness in humans and their inability to communicate, understand or love each other is so present in his filmography, especially and specifically in this feature.

To say that the film is devastating would be an understatement, and this is expected when the majority of the characters are emotionless, stoic and extremely selfish, a viewer's expected reaction is to ask why are these people like this, but the answers are far more complicated than the questions, so they can't all be found through the materiel we're given. Bergman does eventually show some needed intimacy out of these characters via the ending, which is nothing but an open window to let the viewer breathe, after being suffocated by the characters' bleakness for so long.

If there’s one thing I'm not too fond of, it's the character of Karin (played by Ingrid Thulin), whenever the film heavily focused on her, I was simply left...bored, and this is odd because on paper, she is the most interesting character out of the bunch. This is then made up by the last 15 minutes of the film, which left me feeling a roller-coaster of emotions. Everything else is nothing short of entrancing, the dialogue overall is just as intriguing as in any Bergman film, the cinematography is particularly superb, and the acting is absolutely top-notch. This is most definitely one of the director’s best work, but it seems that this is the case with each of his movies.
Good review. Fair points, all.

We actually did a podcast about this film in 2014, if you're interested.



movies can be okay...
So glad you enjoyed this brilliant film...there a lot of folks out there who won't give it a chance because of Adam Sandler, but I think with a strong director guiding him, Sandler proved to be an actor of substance here.
Agreed. Sandler's performance actually elevated the quality of the film, and it's a shame that I can't say the same about any of his other parts throughout his career. I also think that the majority tends to forget about the director's importance in guiding his actors, there's no denying that PTA is very meticulous and calculative when it comes to his craft, so he's not gonna settle down for anything but a stellar performance from the hired actors.
__________________
"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...
Good review. Fair points, all.

We actually did a podcast about this film in 2014, if you're interested.
Thanks for the link, I'll have a listen as soon as I can.

EDIT: I just finished listening and I gotta say, the podcast was very enjoyable. I liked hearing you guys' thoughts and interpretations, especially the part about the significance of the whispers during the "redouts". Interesting stuff.



movies can be okay...
The Passion of Anna (1969) by Ingmar Bergman

"En Passion" or "The Passion of Anna", commands us to treat our inner demons and stop putting on a false façade before we hit a crushing dead end. It does so by having us take a look at the lives of two distraught and lost beings, Andreas and Anna, drowning in the world they're living in, especially after the erupt conclusion of each of their past relationship.

Violence, both physical and psychological, is a huge theme throughout the movie, and there is an evident contrast and comparison between the two throughout it. First, we not only have Anna and Andreas scarred from the psychological violence of both of their previous relationship, but after they've become a couple due to their awful similarities, they fall once again in the same pit they were previously trapped in, and suffer an even greater tormenting violence internally. Meanwhile, a savage is going around the island committing horrific cruelties to animals, this leads to a man in the community being wrongly accused of these crimes, and suffering from constant threats and humiliating beatings. The comparison between the two is metaphorically manifested perfectly during the last scene of the film, where Bergman cuts to a dangling teddy bear, while Andreas is letting Anna have it inside of the car. This confirms that no matter the kind of violence we apply on our surroundings , the result is just as tragic.

The film while being a usual Bergman, filled with intense close-ups, mesmerising dialogue, and amazing performances, is still very different, and has a lot of new experiments one would be surprised by. It has also made me realise more than ever, how much of an influence Bergman is to cinema, and more specifically to my favourite directors. Without him, some of my dearest movies probably wouldn't even exist. It's a Bergman...you don't need anyone's recommendation for you to see it, so see it!

⭐⭐⭐1/2



movies can be okay...
I need to go on a Bergman binge. I've only seen Persona and The Seventh Seal, both of which I enjoyed. Your reviews are making me want to explore more.
There's so much to say about each of his films, that I simply can't even fit all of my confused thoughts in just a short review. Not only that, but there's definitely more to be said that I missed or didn't realise, so I'd love to read your thoughts on his films, and know what other people see in them, especially the ones I've seen thus far.



There's so much to say about each of his films, that I simply can't even fit all of my confused thoughts in just a short review. Not only that, but there's definitely more to be said that I missed or didn't realise, so I'd love to read your thoughts on his films, and know what other people see in them, especially the ones I've seen thus far.
I did a short review of Persona here:

https://www.movieforums.com/communit...31#post1636331

I think Bergman's films require multiple viewings, so will probably watch it again at some point.



the samoan lawyer's Avatar
Unregistered User
The Passion of Anna (1969) by Ingmar Bergman

"En Passion" or "The Passion of Anna", commands us to treat our inner demons and stop putting on a false façade before we hit a crushing dead end. It does so by having us take a look at the lives of two distraught and lost beings, Andreas and Anna, drowning in the world they're living in, especially after the erupt conclusion of each of their past relationship.

Violence, both physical and psychological, is a huge theme throughout the movie, and there is an evident contrast and comparison between the two throughout it. First, we not only have Anna and Andreas scarred from the psychological violence of both of their previous relationship, but after they've become a couple due to their awful similarities, they fall once again in the same pit they were previously trapped in, and suffer an even greater tormenting violence internally. Meanwhile, a savage is going around the island committing horrific cruelties to animals, this leads to a man in the community being wrongly accused of these crimes, and suffering from constant threats and humiliating beatings. The comparison between the two is metaphorically manifested perfectly during the last scene of the film, where Bergman cuts to a dangling teddy bear while Andreas is letting Anna have it inside of the car, this confirms that no matter the kind of violence we apply on our surroundings , the result is just as tragic.

The film while being a usual Bergman, filled with intense close-ups, mesmerising dialogue, and amazing performances, is still very different, and has a lot of new experiments one would be surprised by. It has also made me realise more than ever, how much of an influence Bergman is to cinema, and more specifically to my favourite directors, without him, some of my dearest movies probably wouldn't even exist. It's a Bergman...you don't anyone's recommendation for you to see it, so see it!



Glad you enjoyed it. What Bergman are you watching next?
__________________
Too weird to live, and too rare to die.



movies can be okay...
Glad you enjoyed it. What Bergman are you watching next?
I have "Shame" set and ready, so most likely that.



movies can be okay...
Decalogue X. (1989) by Krzysztof Kieślowski

About a month ago, I finished watching the entirety of "The Decalogue", a series of ten loosely connected films, inspired by the Ten Commandments. It was evident then that I will be returning to each of its episodes very soon, and this morning in particular was the best way to kick off my watching spree, starting off with the appropriate episode, the grand finale:"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's goods".

The episode is majestically different from its brothers and sisters, especially tonally. Where all of the preceding nine chapters are bleak or depressing, this one is the light in the darkness so to say. The film does tackle a few heavy themes, such as greed, but it's done in a comedic way that doesn't take away from the overall message. This decision is cleverly executed by Kieślowski, who masterfully ends his series with a breathe of fresh air. The story is set to be a fun and humorous adventure of two brothers being caught in the fun of possessing millions of złotys, in the form of stamps. Not only is their chemistry together very enjoyable to witness, but just the anticipation of what they will do next, is also a great amount of joy. There's no doubt that this will probably become one of favourite episodes to frequently go back to, it's short in quantity, but still very rich in quality.

🌟🌟🌟🌟



movies can be okay...
For the episodes that were later extended into longer movies, did you watch the episode or the film?
The episode, but this time I will watch the films.



I won't dance. Don't ask me...
Decalogue X. (1989) by Krzysztof Kieślowski

I agree. This is the funniest part of Decaloque and I would say my fav one. Differences between two brothers and their approach to heritage make the movie more light, than the rest episodes.
I like acting both main actors Zamachowski and Stuhr.



movies can be okay...
Badlands (1973) by Terrence Malick

Terrence Malick's first feature film is a profound depiction of the banality of evil, along with a dissection of the general public's disgusting consumption of violent acts, while also glorifying whoever's accountable for them. These heavy statements are implied by following two detached and alienated empty shells of people who commit a number of horrifically mindless murders. A 25 year old boy with dreams of becoming some sort of a criminal, willing to fight until death for his girl. This girl is a 15 year old who's awestruck by the beauty and care of this same disturbed kid.

All of the horror and absurdity are juxtaposed with stunning landscape scenery, courtesy of the beautiful cinematography, which the viewer is fascinated by, just as much as the public is fascinated by the hollow figure of Kit. The way people and the media turn people like him into some form of a celebrity, is still sadly relevant nowadays. Meanwhile, we have Holly, Kit's "girl", tumbling along wherever he goes, with a scary emotionless expression on her face. Seeing her lack of empathy to all of Kit's victims was the most disturbing part of the movie for me.

Overall, Malick's directorial début was a total success. Even though I'm not into this film as much as other people probably are, which is due to my annoyance at a few poorly executed scenes, acting or practical wise, I still enjoyed what it had to say, and would regard it as an essential film to be seen.

⭐⭐⭐1/2



movies can be okay...
Animal Kingdom (2010) by David Michôd

According to critics, this is "an Australian answer to Goodfellas", but I have to highly disagree with such a statement, and I haven't even seen "Goodfellas" yet There really isn't a whole lot to say about this movie, other than the fact that it didn't bring anything new to the table. Sure it was technically competent, and every aspect to it was above average, although the acting does get ridiculously hilarious at times. I seriously busted out laughing whenever a character attempted to cry. Fortunately, we have Jacki Weaver around to make up for all of the lacklustre, since she was the only note-worthy actor among the bunch.

What I actually think the biggest issue about the film is, it's the poor writing. Not only is the dialogue sprinkled with cheese, but the characters themselves are the closest things to shallow rehashes of their respective cardboard in contemporary ABC cop shows. To be fair, I was kept interested and entertained all throughout, so if that was the goal of the film-makers, then they sure have succeeded. Too bad that's not all I'm looking for in a film.

⭐⭐1/2



I loved Animal Kingdom. Although I also don't see how it's comparable to Goodfellas. It might not bring anything new to the table but I was gripped throughout. From memory Jackie Weaver was excellent, as were Edegrton, Mendelsohn and the kid who played Josh.



movies can be okay...
I loved Animal Kingdom. Although I also don't see how it's comparable to Goodfellas. It might not bring anything new to the table but I was gripped throughout. From memory Jackie Weaver was excellent, as were Edegrton, Mendelsohn and the kid who played Josh.
Edergton sure was good as well, but I didn't mention him since he's not given much to do, nor does he play as much of an important role as everyone else. The other two you mentioned were hit or miss for me. I'm glad you didn't say Stapleton, since I thought he was the worst.



the samoan lawyer's Avatar
Unregistered User
Animal Kingdom (2010) by David Michôd

According to critics, this is "an Australian answer to Goodfellas", but I have to highly disagree with such a statement, and I haven't even seen "Goodfellas" yet There really isn't a whole lot to say about this movie, other than the fact that it didn't bring anything new to the table. Sure it was technically competent, and every aspect to it was above average, although the acting does get ridiculously hilarious at times. I seriously busted out laughing whenever a character attempted to cry, fortunately, we have Jacki Weaver around to make up for all of the lacklustre, since she was the only note-worthy actor among the bunch.

What I actually think the biggest issue about the film is, it's the poor writing. Not only is the dialogue sprinkled with a little bit of cottage cheese, but the characters themselves are the closest things to shallow rehashes of their respective cardboard in every ABC cop show. To be fair, I was kept interested and entertained all throughout, so if that was the goal of the film-makers, then they sure have succeeded, too bad that's not all I'm looking for in a film.



Its been a few years but I used to love Animal Kingdom. I thought Ben Mendelsohn was the best part in it.



movies can be okay...
Its been a few years but I used to love Animal Kingdom. I thought Ben Mendelsohn was the best part in it.
He was alright. I hated him as a character so he definitely achieved his goal.
But really, I just didn't see anything impressive in the film. Not with the story, or the execution. Beats me why so many people love it